Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cryselle
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 09:39:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Cryselle on 13/01/2009 09:39:15
Originally by: Mickey Simon It's not hard to counter falcons if you have a gang together and think a little before you engage.
Is that right?
Sometimes, just for pure fun I jump into a low sec gate camp with my damnation - and having my maxed skilld falcon alt permanently jammed the 3-5 ships there - anti falcon strategy is to bring another falcon and hope that he is close enough to my falcon.
ECM is out of whack - if you don't see it, I really don't get it. |
Vabjekf
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 09:47:00 -
[32]
remove alts, one account per person. eve is suddenly a wonderful game. |
Rennion
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 09:48:00 -
[33]
It wouldn't be so bad if ECCM actually worked. Anyone listing it as a counter has not actually flown on the recieving end of ECM.
BS fits with two ECCM one of which overheated still get jammed by falcons.
Compare to an arazu where one sebo and some decent piloting ability will do the job. |
Mickey Simon
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 09:52:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Cryselle Is that right?
Yeah, it is right. You don't have to use a falcon to counter a falcon either. Bit of common sense and thinking outside of the "OMG BRING DPS AND TANK" box is all you really need.
Originally by: Cedric Diggory I can't think of a single pilot I know who actively chooses to fly a falcon
Hi, pleased to meet you.
I've been on both sides of the engagements, and to be honest I feel that while the falcon is perhaps slightly overpowered with regards to the ECM (but it's underpowered in every other area, so it's a compromise I don't mind too much) if you're not clueless or the sort of person who cannot adapt their fitting then you shouldn't have any issues countering falcons - the same as you shouldn't have any issues countering the other various forms of ewar. |
daisy dook
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 09:57:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Rennion It wouldn't be so bad if ECCM actually worked. Anyone listing it as a counter has not actually flown on the recieving end of ECM.
BS fits with two ECCM one of which overheated still get jammed by falcons.
Compare to an arazu where one sebo and some decent piloting ability will do the job.
Just how many ships was the Falcon trying to jam? I think a falcon with 8 slots (5 mids and 3 lows) and 2 rigs devoted to jamming is not over powered if it can take out one ship that has devoted just 2 slots to counter measures.
If Falcons are everywhere then it is because enough people are not fitting ECCM.
As for the OP, if you engage a perpared foe then you have to expect their preparations and be in a position to disengage (after all the Falcon isn't keeping you there). |
HankMurphy
Minmatar Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 10:00:00 -
[36]
i died because of a falcon tonight (damn youz amarr)
to be fair, i may have died if it wasn't there, but my ego says otherwise.
it is pretty antifun. if it just broke my lock it would be one thing, but to sit there through the rest of the fight permajammed....
i don't want to be 'that guy' so i'll say they aren't exactly overpowered and they fill a good role. i would just like to see eccm work a bit better (you should be pretty safe from jamming if you sacrifice a mid, maybe 25% less likely if you sacrifice a low) and i would like to see the falcon not get such obsene range (or at least drastically reduce his effectiveness past 20-30km)
to answer op directly, yeah they are pretty much anti fun. but almost everything done by CCP in the past few years has done nothing but crap all over solo/small gang stuff. |
Reatu Krentor
Minmatar Duragon Pioneer Group GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 10:03:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
20 secons cycle time is too long. ECM definitely needs rebalanced to perhaps a 5 second jam cycle?
a 5s cycle means you'll have 3-4 jam attempts for a 20s period, increasing the likelyhood of getting jammed drastically, including lock time, lag and player reaction time you would prolly end up with the same perma-jam as now. |
Katarlia Simov
Minmatar Cowboys From Hell
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 10:21:00 -
[38]
Falcons are indeed anti-fun.
Combat in eve is 90% spent finding something to kill, and the more people you take with you the less chance that a target will stick around. Even fighting against unfavourable odds, people will use falcons.
A few nights back some corpies and I went for a lil 0.0 fun, and went to bust up a lil camp. We had a couple of vagas, deimos, phobos. The combat ships we were looking at fighting were a rokh, a deimos and one or two t1 cruisers. We felt it'd be a good fight. Then someone spots they have two falcons. No way in hell we could engage.
|
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 10:37:00 -
[39]
Quote: if you're not clueless or the sort of person who cannot adapt their fitting then you shouldn't have any issues countering falcons - the same as you shouldn't have any issues countering the other various forms of ewar.
As a dedicated falcon pilot, you are absolutely correct. If however you were a falcon alt, the odds are you'd either be a) hanging around a pos to refit appropriately depending on the incoming gang intel or b) sitting in station waiting to refit depending on the incoming gang intel.
It's not their abilities that create the problem, but the amount of use they see. ECCM isn't exactly great, but it does reduce your chance to be jammed considerably on paper (though it doesn't feel like it when you're on the field, it genuinely does!)
|
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 10:40:00 -
[40]
Quote: a 5s cycle means you'll have 3-4 jam attempts for a 20s period, increasing the likelyhood of getting jammed drastically, including lock time, lag and player reaction time you would prolly end up with the same perma-jam as now.
It also increases the chances of a failed cycle, and against smaller faster locking ships that's very much a double edged sword. Larger ships to my mind should have their sensor strength re-evaluated; as I see it, a fully bonused Falcon (level 4 skills) entirely T2 fitted for pure ECM should be sitting at around 50% to jam on a battleship when using the appropriate racial. Combined with a faster cycle time (5 seconds would be ideal in my mind, though the magic number might be 8 or 9 seconds the more I think about it) and I feel that balance might be restored.
|
|
Uhr Zylex
Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:01:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Kirtan Loor In all these cases the outcome would be more or less the same if the "other" ship was any other ship. You are trying to engage what seems to be 1 maybe 2 people.
Just no.
Let's say I'm in my AwesomePwnShip(tm). Two small ships engage me in a belt. I start hacking away at one of the enemies.
Scenario 1: A falcon arrives. I can now enjoy a slow death waiting for my capboosters to run out. Scenario 2: Pretty much any other ship arrives. I still have a chance of killing one or more enemies before I likely succumb.
Which one sounds more fun to you?
|
Azuse
Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:03:00 -
[42]
Eccm does work, it's just an equation you don't see.
What i never understood about the patch though, was why they changed falcons the way they did. Since there will be people here who weren't in eve then it used to be the rook with the highest jam, blackbird at the bottom and falcon in the middle, the falcon only getting half the increase over the bb as opposed to the rook.
In other words you wanted uber jam you flew a rook, you wanted cloak survivability you flew a falcon, accepting the fact you would jam less. It gave you a reason to fly both ships, in much the same way there are good reason to fly both the pilgrim and curse, huggin and rapier.
Why change the falcon to jam like a rook and cloak? It's like giving the pilgrim the range of the curse, or the rapier the fire-power of the huggin but more over. Someone somewhere kew they were removing the disadvantages of the cloaker but it went through anyway. Funny thing is whenever someone suggested giving the pilgrim the range of the curse over the past, is it 15?, months they got a definitive no.
Imbalance is the only balance in eve |
Rennion
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:04:00 -
[43]
Originally by: daisy dook
Originally by: Rennion It wouldn't be so bad if ECCM actually worked. Anyone listing it as a counter has not actually flown on the recieving end of ECM.
BS fits with two ECCM one of which overheated still get jammed by falcons.
Compare to an arazu where one sebo and some decent piloting ability will do the job.
Just how many ships was the Falcon trying to jam? I think a falcon with 8 slots (5 mids and 3 lows) and 2 rigs devoted to jamming is not over powered if it can take out one ship that has devoted just 2 slots to counter measures.
If Falcons are everywhere then it is because enough people are not fitting ECCM.
As for the OP, if you engage a perpared foe then you have to expect their preparations and be in a position to disengage (after all the Falcon isn't keeping you there).
Seriously go and look at the numbers, ECCM is pointless on anything other than recons and battleships. Even on those two ship classes it is usefull on you need 2 which means sac'ing 2 mid slots which are uber important for recons and very important for battleships. Then take into account that if your unlucky you still get jammed. So if you bring one falcon to a fight the other gang needs to have all it's battleships and recons sacrifice two slots to a ****ty underpowered module leaving it with no tackle (lol inty's insta jammed on demand)
This makes ECM overpowered compared to all other ewar. The counter module is terrible in it's effectivness and provides no tertiary beniefit.
I can counter an arazu with a sebo and some decent piloting and the sebo is usefull even if an arazu does not turn up. Same goes for tracking disrupters and neuts.
ECM is lame :( |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:06:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Antraxor Problem is everyone who wants to solo PvP plays them.
Falcon needs to be less viable, and other solo ships more viable. T3 customization may change this...
]
Actually, you have it exactly the wrong way around. The Falcon (and Rook and Scorp and Blackbird) need to be substantially boosted. The ships need to be boosted.
ECM, on the other hand, needs to be completely reworked. |
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:10:00 -
[45]
Edited by: lebrata on 13/01/2009 11:11:01
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Meh. I've been saying this forever, and always get flamed for it. But I've given up complaining. Right now I'm busy training up my THIRD Falcon alt. You can never have too many Falcons.
Hopefully CCP will nerf them into the F#CKING GROUND, but until then, it's Falcon city.
I thought you had 50 falcon alts and won eve with them last week?......twice. |
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:14:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Pytria Le'Danness What I dislike about ECM (not Falcons, they are just the extreme symptom right now) is that this form of EWar condemns you to inactivity. If you get nossed, damped, target painted or disrupted you can still try to act against it: fly closer to get into targetting range again, maneuver to get your transversal down, use cap boosters - you still can do something.
With ECM there is nothing you can do that will increase your chance to act again, and the only thing you can do is to warp out or wait and hope that you do not die before the ECM boat misses a jam cycle.
Pretty boring in my eyes.
during the glory days of damps, I was damped to a few km and constantly bumped around ... it was soo much more fun ... |
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:15:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Cryselle Edited by: Cryselle on 13/01/2009 09:39:15
Originally by: Mickey Simon It's not hard to counter falcons if you have a gang together and think a little before you engage.
Is that right?
Sometimes, just for pure fun I jump into a low sec gate camp with my damnation - and having my maxed skilld falcon alt permanently jammed the 3-5 ships there - anti falcon strategy is to bring another falcon and hope that he is close enough to my falcon.
So your posting with a alt, about a alt, who flies a falcon with your main?.
And you cannot "perma jam" 3-5 ships unless they are frigs, stop exaggerating. |
daisy dook
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:16:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Rennion
Originally by: daisy dook
Originally by: Rennion It wouldn't be so bad if ECCM actually worked. Anyone listing it as a counter has not actually flown on the recieving end of ECM.
BS fits with two ECCM one of which overheated still get jammed by falcons.
Compare to an arazu where one sebo and some decent piloting ability will do the job.
Just how many ships was the Falcon trying to jam? I think a falcon with 8 slots (5 mids and 3 lows) and 2 rigs devoted to jamming is not over powered if it can take out one ship that has devoted just 2 slots to counter measures.
If Falcons are everywhere then it is because enough people are not fitting ECCM.
As for the OP, if you engage a perpared foe then you have to expect their preparations and be in a position to disengage (after all the Falcon isn't keeping you there).
Seriously go and look at the numbers, ECCM is pointless on anything other than recons and battleships. Even on those two ship classes it is usefull on you need 2 which means sac'ing 2 mid slots which are uber important for recons and very important for battleships. Then take into account that if your unlucky you still get jammed. So if you bring one falcon to a fight the other gang needs to have all it's battleships and recons sacrifice two slots to a ****ty underpowered module leaving it with no tackle (lol inty's insta jammed on demand)
This makes ECM overpowered compared to all other ewar. The counter module is terrible in it's effectivness and provides no tertiary beniefit.
I can counter an arazu with a sebo and some decent piloting and the sebo is usefull even if an arazu does not turn up. Same goes for tracking disrupters and neuts.
ECM is lame :(
Well if ECCM is not worth fitting then you are not encountering enough Falcons ergo Falcons and ECM are not a problem.
You fit ECCM, you get unlucky and get jammed. This is most likely not bad luck but the Falcon pilot devoting multiple jammers to you; which frees up the rest of your gang to do its thing hence the ECCM has acheived its purpose.
ECM is the most powerful ewar in isolation; however once you take into account the the weakness of the Caldari ship line, its uselessness on non-specialised ships and the fact that specialised ECM ships can't do anything other than ECM then I believe that ECM is infact balanced. |
Rennion
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:19:00 -
[49]
Originally by: daisy dook Well if ECCM is not worth fitting then you are not encountering enough Falcons ergo Falcons and ECM are not a problem.
Go and look at the numbers. ECCM is not worth fitting because it is based on a %.
When that % is low like it is on anything that isn't a BS or a recon then it is pointless because you sacrifice a slot for a module that has miniscule impact on your chance to get jammed.
Even battleships and recons, with the highest sensor strengths going need two to have any reasonable impact.
That is why ECCM is pointless, on top of the fact that it has no benifet outside of fighting falcons. As I said compare to all other ewar in the game where one module and some piloting skill does the job.
Piloting skill has no impact on ECM at all, you are at the mercy of a dice roll that renders you useless for 20 seconds. |
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:20:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
20 secons cycle time is too long. ECM definitely needs rebalanced to perhaps a 5 second jam cycle?
LOL NUB CAKES.
With a 20 second cycle time if the falcon misse4s a jam on a BS the BS can lock in 10ish secs and with good skills get off at least 2 if not 3 volleys before the next cycle. With a 5 second cycle time the falcon has 2 chances to jam him before he has finished locking it and altogether 4 chances over all.
Another fine example of a nerf hound without a clue blaming random stuff for his total suckage at eve....
|
|
Confessor
ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:26:00 -
[51]
your a friggin crybaby, and you need to friggin quit eve. POOOORR ME, I fought a falcon that couldnt do dps, couldnt web or scram me, couldnt put drones on me, and I LOST WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH please nerf the falcon, cause im a friggin cry baby, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH |
Uhr Zylex
Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:27:00 -
[52]
Originally by: lebrata
LOL NUB CAKES.
With a 20 second cycle time if the falcon misse4s a jam on a BS the BS can lock in 10ish secs and with good skills get off at least 2 if not 3 volleys before the next cycle.
Yeah LOLOL, cause falcons are never 190km away amirite? It is a well known fact that all falcons stay close to their targets. |
Uhr Zylex
Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:29:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Confessor your a friggin crybaby, and you need to friggin quit eve. POOOORR ME, I fought a falcon that couldnt do dps, couldnt web or scram me, couldnt put drones on me, and I LOST WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH please nerf the falcon, cause im a friggin cry baby, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
The OP is actually quite clear and not a "crybaby". Perhaps you should try adding to the discussion instead of writing like a 12 year old. Then again, what do you know about PVP? As far as I know SCA pvps in hulks. |
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:30:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Uhr Zylex
Originally by: lebrata
LOL NUB CAKES.
With a 20 second cycle time if the falcon misse4s a jam on a BS the BS can lock in 10ish secs and with good skills get off at least 2 if not 3 volleys before the next cycle.
Yeah LOLOL, cause falcons are never 190km away amirite? It is a well known fact that all falcons stay close to their targets.
Yea and since CCP removed rail guns and all those other systems from eve that hit out that far things have gone from bad to worse.......hey wai....
Thank for another fine example of fail gang fittings/setups at work, your a wonderful example of a sand box clown wanting everything nerfed that operates outside his preferred fitting range........ |
Psiri
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:31:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Uhr Zylex
Yeah LOLOL, cause falcons are never 190km away amirite? It is a well known fact that all falcons stay close to their targets.
Didn't you hear? The Falcon is the new Gankathron! |
Reatu Krentor
Minmatar Duragon Pioneer Group GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:40:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
Quote: a 5s cycle means you'll have 3-4 jam attempts for a 20s period, increasing the likelyhood of getting jammed drastically, including lock time, lag and player reaction time you would prolly end up with the same perma-jam as now.
It also increases the chances of a failed cycle, and against smaller faster locking ships that's very much a double edged sword. Larger ships to my mind should have their sensor strength re-evaluated; as I see it, a fully bonused Falcon (level 4 skills) entirely T2 fitted for pure ECM should be sitting at around 50% to jam on a battleship when using the appropriate racial. Combined with a faster cycle time (5 seconds would be ideal in my mind, though the magic number might be 8 or 9 seconds the more I think about it) and I feel that balance might be restored.
that's where the lag/player reaction time comes in for smaller ships, by the time the player receives the note a cycle failed and spammed the frackin' "target this ship" to oblivion, by the time he actually gets the lock he'll be jammed again. 1s lock on time minimum, likely higher, + reaction time + lag leaves zilch time between cycles if they were 5s. A 50% jam chance means 1 every 2 cycles will be a jam on average. And that value is against a bs, which has a total locking time greater then 5s against a falcon(closer to 15s), iow the falcon will have several more cycles to attempt to reacquire jam(raspberry) before the bs has even managed to lock it, which will likely get a hit. For any smaller ships it's just downhill from there. No, shorter cycles won't "fix" ecm. An overhaul of the effect might. The method is fine(chancebased stuff).
-- stuff -- |
daisy dook
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:46:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Rennion
Originally by: daisy dook Well if ECCM is not worth fitting then you are not encountering enough Falcons ergo Falcons and ECM are not a problem.
Go and look at the numbers. ECCM is not worth fitting because it is based on a %.
When that % is low like it is on anything that isn't a BS or a recon then it is pointless because you sacrifice a slot for a module that has miniscule impact on your chance to get jammed.
Even battleships and recons, with the highest sensor strengths going need two to have any reasonable impact.
That is why ECCM is pointless, on top of the fact that it has no benifet outside of fighting falcons. As I said compare to all other ewar in the game where one module and some piloting skill does the job.
Piloting skill has no impact on ECM at all, you are at the mercy of a dice roll that renders you useless for 20 seconds.
Well if ECCM is not worth fitting then you are not encountering enough Falcons ergo Falcons and ECM are not a problem.
Lets take a hypothetical cruiser with sensor strength of 12 vrs a jammer of strength 12 we have have the mythical perma-jam.
Now add ECCM which has an 80% sensor strength bonus to the hypothetical crusier; it now has a sensor strength of 21.6 against the same jam strength we now have a 44.5% chance of not being jammed. So by a single ECCM module (not overheated) we have gone from a 0% chance to a 44.5% chance to not being jammed.
I think that a 44.5% improvement in large enough to say that even on cruiser sized ships ECCM is effective.
|
Dasalt Istgut
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 11:46:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Antraxor Problem is everyone who wants to solo PvP plays them.
Falcon needs to be less viable, and other solo ships more viable. T3 customization may change this...
Problem is you think falcons are the reason solo PVP isn't viable. They're not. Solo PVP doesn't work in Eve. Sure you might get lucky and pop some ratters solo, or solo bubble camp (where you can see in local that they don't have allies with them when you kill them), etc. But if you're in local, can't figure out who their allies are, engage a target without realizing he has corpmates or alliance mates or blues in local and get whooped then that's not a problem with falcons.
You'd have a much better argument about falcons specifically if you were talking small gang against small gang - but you'd still be wrong. Last time I engaged multiple falcons in a fight we caught them off guard and I was in an ECCM fitted scorp w/ 5 gravimetrics, kept them jammed until my gang got them targetted and popped. Wasn't a big deal at all.
|
Dasalt Istgut
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 12:01:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Rennion
Originally by: daisy dook Well if ECCM is not worth fitting then you are not encountering enough Falcons ergo Falcons and ECM are not a problem.
Go and look at the numbers. ECCM is not worth fitting because it is based on a %.
When that % is low like it is on anything that isn't a BS or a recon then it is pointless because you sacrifice a slot for a module that has miniscule impact on your chance to get jammed.
Even battleships and recons, with the highest sensor strengths going need two to have any reasonable impact.
That is why ECCM is pointless, on top of the fact that it has no benifet outside of fighting falcons. As I said compare to all other ewar in the game where one module and some piloting skill does the job.
Piloting skill has no impact on ECM at all, you are at the mercy of a dice roll that renders you useless for 20 seconds.
ECCM isn't pointless. You're just bad at math. The standard roaming falcon fit is 2 grav, 1 gallente, 1 amarr, 1 minmatar, 1 sensor booster, 1 MWD (sometimes dropping the MWD for another racial). Let's make the assumption that your gang is mixed and the falcon can typically jam out 4 of your ships almost permanently. By each of you fitting ECCM you've now reduced the amount of ships he can jam in half. If you're all the same race or only composed of 2 races its even worse - you'd now reduce his chances to jamming to 0 or 1 at best.
When dealing with falcons you deal with them like you deal with a sniper. If outnumbered try to get them to aggress away from gates, makes it more difficult for the falcon to get distance since it needs bookmarks. Try to get them bubbled in coming through the gate - if the falcon wants to leave and warp back then he'll have to slowboat out of the bubble, warp and return - by then you should have killed half his gang at least. Otherwise he fights at 0, so you just kill him.
If you jump a prepped gate camp and you don't have any fast movers, long range jammers or anti-ECM snipe-setup ships with you then you lose. I won't feel sorry for you in that scenario because I'd have equally spanked you if I bubbled and had 3 sniper battleships at 150km.
|
Suitonia
Gallente interimo
|
Posted - 2009.01.13 12:29:00 -
[60]
ECCM is fine and a perfectly reasonable counter for medium gangs, no-one is denying that. It's just not for Solo or smaller gangs (5 members or less) where you need the midslots for tackle. 190km Snipers just arn't feasible in such sized gangs. I don't think the Falcon is the underlying problem here, although it certainly has brought the light on ECM due to it being the biggest sub-capital force multiplyer in the game while at the same time one of the hardest to kill with ECM/Cloak/Sniper range combo.
I think ECM is a horrid game mechanic for solo/small gang PvP.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |