EVE Search - Falcon fix idea - never suggested before!

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Falcon fix idea - never suggested before!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.24 08:45:00 - [1] My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range Think about it. A major problem with Falcons is that they are so powerful and easily operate in 140km ranges. Every Falcon pilot (who's not a newb) fits at least 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier, usually 3x. There's simply no point to fit anything else there. But now, with -20% range modifier, Falcon pilots would have to seriously consider if they prefer to be more powerful at shorter ranges, or less powerful at longer ranges. It is same idea as with guns - short range weapons are more powerful, long range ones are less powerful
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 08:56:00 - [2] Hmm, interesting idea, you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps Bss too, just have -20% range per damage mod?
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.01.24 09:00:00 - [3] Originally by: Ephemeron My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range Think about it. A major problem with Falcons is that they are so powerful and easily operate in 140km ranges. Every Falcon pilot (who's not a newb) fits at least 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier, usually 3x. There's simply no point to fit anything else there. But now, with -20% range modifier, Falcon pilots would have to seriously consider if they prefer to be more powerful at shorter ranges, or less powerful at longer ranges. It is same idea as with guns - short range weapons are more powerful, long range ones are less powerful This would weaken the Falcons ability to survive a battle way to much, remember, he has NO tank. Apart from that, its a good idea, but Falcons NEEDS to get a defensive ability therefor to compensate. Either Dronebay, or the optimalbonus changed to resistbonus or more speed.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.24 09:06:00 - [4] It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.01.24 09:59:00 - [5] seems like a decent idea. ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2009.01.24 10:14:00 - [6] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17 Hmm, interesting idea, you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? I like the damage mod suggestion :) OP's idea is fail ... there was a better one already that suggested to switch falcon optimal bonuses to falloff bonuses ...
Warrio Southern Cross Incorporated	Posted - 2009.01.24 10:20:00 - [7] Indeed.
Arous Drephius Perkone	Posted - 2009.01.24 10:53:00 - [8] Falcons don't need fixing. Whiners do.
Stefan F Enrave Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:24:00 - [9] Edited by: Stefan F on 24/01/2009 11:25:16 Sure... If you give it: - Scripts instead of different modules for each race - 7 slowslots to somekind of tanking it - 25m3 dronebay to have at least some DPS Then, i'm perfectly fine with the idea of the range nerfing attribute.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:26:00 - [10] Look, the answer is simple, although not easy (1) Give Caldari recons a secondary e-war so that they have some reason to operate at medium range (2) Increase their combat ability and survivability to match the other recons so that they can operate at medium range; some speed, agility, extra low slots, a drone bay. Whatever. (3) Change the ECM range bonus to a bonus for whatever secondary e-war ability we're giving them. (4) (Optional) Change ECM altogether so that it works in a completely different way to what we have now, since even if Falcons were forced to operate at 500 meters, had 75 EHP, and CCP sent ninjas round to punch the pilot in the nuts, people would still whine that ECM was "overpowered". Hey presto: Caldari recons are much like other racial recons, with the additional bonus that they might even be somewhat viable solo ships.
Krystal Demishy	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:46:00 - [11] Originally by: fuxinos This would weaken the Falcons ability to survive a battle way to much, remember, he has NO tank. This is the most stupid thing you can say, and i hate when people say it! Other recons are made of paper too, but are far far away from the falcon efficiency! You said other extremely stupid things in your post, i don't want to waste my time with you anymore, becouse maybe you are just a f*ing troll.
Cibo Seidensha Amarr Biotronics Inc. Alternative Realities	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:47:00 - [12] Its funny to always hear "the falcon has no tank". It has a ton of midslots, thats where you could put your shield tank. You could fit a reasonable shield buffer tank here. Its not the ships fault, that everyone stuffs as many ECMs in here, as possible. It has no tank because it needs no tank. If it would need a tank, people would put a tank on it, then it would have one (kind of on par with the other recons). Its ECM power would go down, but thats the point. No other recon can fit 7 Ewar modules and still operate. To do this with the falcon and then complain about "no tank" is a horrible backward argument.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:49:00 - [13] Originally by: Cibo Seidensha No other recon can fit 7 Ewar modules and still operate. . Curse can easily fit 2 tracking disruptors and 5 Neut/NOS.
Sarkiss Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:51:00 - [14] I don't see why it should get a 2nd combat bonus, the other recon's bonus are barely used anyway. Pilgrim/Curse rarely use Tracking Disruptors, Minmatar recons don't use Painters from what I've seen, not that Ive seen many due to the web nerf which destroys them and gallente recons have been ****ed for ages. It's about time falcons get fitted like every other recon. I actually like this idea the OP suggested, forces them to choose, range or jamming power. So instead of fitting what is it, 5 ECM and MWD? You fit 3ECM and some shield extenders, like the other recons have to. Give it 25m3 dronebay/bandwidth too but keeps its highs the same and don't give it any sort of 2nd bonus.
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.01.24 11:55:00 - [15] Originally by: Ephemeron It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once Do you realy call 50-80Km safe for an 80mil-instapop-ship?
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:01:00 - [16] Originally by: fuxinos Originally by: Ephemeron It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once Do you realy call 50-80Km safe for an 80mil-instapop-ship? He means safe for the gang that might otherwise get jammed
The Tzar Malicious Intentions The Church.	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:29:00 - [17] Nice idea but if you're bringing the falcon in the same range as the other recons you also need to balance it in one or more of the following areas: Drone bay More mids for shield buffer More resists for shield buffer More Speed without having to gimp your EW strength (only recon that HAS to have full lowslot EW to be effective in its EW) Make ECM non-chance based if it engages at the same ranges as other recons. It definately is not fair if the falcon still might not jam whilst the Curse definately will TD at that range. The falcon IS NOT broken...., peoples ability to fit ECCM is. It bloody works, use it ffs.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:33:00 - [18] Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 12:34:15 Originally by: fuxinos Originally by: Ephemeron It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once Do you realy call 50-80Km safe for an 80mil-instapop-ship? It is not safe, although its nicely within the range slightly boosted of pulse BS........yet another buff to i-win pulse BS. Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems.
The Tzar Malicious Intentions The Church.	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:37:00 - [19] Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. __________________________________________ 'Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear intelligent until they speak' __________________________________________
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:42:00 - [20] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17 Hmm, interesting idea, you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? the 'problem' with high dps battleships is that there aren't enough with the crazy tanks people can field ever since the introduction of rigs. Your cap ship deserves CPR's!
Darwin Duck A Quest Millitia	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:43:00 - [21] So you want to take away the only really good PvP ship Caldari have? Sure make us pure PVE, that will be fun.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:52:00 - [22] Originally by: Krystal Demishy This is the most stupid thing you can say, and i hate when people say it! Other recons are made of paper too.... And yet, they're not tying up their lowslots to do their thing, where the Falcon is.
Cohkka Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:54:00 - [23] Originally by: Stefan F Edited by: Stefan F on 24/01/2009 11:25:16 Sure... If you give it: - Scripts instead of different modules for each race - 7 slowslots to somekind of tanking it - 25m3 dronebay to have at least some DPS Then, i'm perfectly fine with the idea of the range nerfing attribute. Or you could tank it... just like any other recon has to. Sacrifice some med slots for surviveability or stuff a 1600mm in your lows + hardeners. Falcon is by far the most efficient/usefull and the safest Recon to be in. A nerf such as reducing range won't hurt...
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2009.01.24 12:56:00 - [24] Originally by: Ephemeron My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range Think about it. A major problem with Falcons is that they are so powerful and easily operate in 140km ranges. Every Falcon pilot (who's not a newb) fits at least 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier, usually 3x. There's simply no point to fit anything else there. But now, with -20% range modifier, Falcon pilots would have to seriously consider if they prefer to be more powerful at shorter ranges, or less powerful at longer ranges. It is same idea as with guns - short range weapons are more powerful, long range ones are less powerful And you just ****ed all the other EWAR ships at the same time. Yeah great idea. NOT. 1: Falcon would still be better then a rook. Same stats, but with a cloak. 2: Use rigs and gangship instead to bypass the penalty on the modules. 3: Widow would be "lol 40km optimal" and die in a fire. 4: Scorpion would have loltastic jam stats or have some decent jam stats and never see fleetfight again... TBH, I have seen better ideas then this.
Vokradacka	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:07:00 - [25] give "restrictions" to jam modules: - +25% str to all - max 1 fitted to "normal" ships - max 2 fitted to BB/kitsune - max 3 fitted to falcon/rook/scorpion - +little more dmg to falcon/rook(150dps falcon, 250dps rook at lvl 5 skills) this ill bring caldari recons closer to battlefield
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:12:00 - [26] Originally by: Vokradacka give "restrictions" to jam modules: - +25% str to all - max 1 fitted to "normal" ships - max 2 fitted to BB/kitsune - max 3 fitted to falcon/rook/scorpion - +little more dmg to falcon/rook(150dps falcon, 250dps rook at lvl 5 skills) this ill bring caldari recons closer to battlefield How about just removing every ship and module that does not sit within your prefered gank/tank setup range?. Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Solo is all about skill not ship fits Originally by: Amira Shadowsong The anti inty fit is absolutely crap against cruisers and AFs.
Vera Vengeance	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:13:00 - [27] Originally by: Darwin Duck So you want to take away the only really good PvP ship Caldari have? Sure make us pure PVE, that will be fun. That just makes me lol... Do you solo with it? Do you fit a scrambler? Do you fit a webber? Do you ectualy do damage? Omg! only thing ppl do with it is fitting a full rack of ecm's! Besides, learn to fit caldari ships for pvp m8. They're awesome at it.
lebrata Hedion University	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:16:00 - [28] Originally by: Vera Vengeance That just makes me lol... Do you solo with it? Do you fit a scrambler? Do you fit a webber? Do you ectualy do damage? Omg! only thing ppl do with it is fitting a full rack of ecm's! So its useless at anything but jamming and even that is chance based and can and does fail at rather unfortunate times....and now you wanna make it useless at that as well?.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:20:00 - [29] Originally by: Cohkka Or you could tank it... just like any other recon has to. Sacrifice some med slots for surviveability or stuff a 1600mm in your lows + hardeners. Falcon is by far the most efficient/usefull and the safest Recon to be in. A nerf such as reducing range won't hurt... It seems clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. Falcon without at least 2 and preferably 3 signal distortion amps = not worth much. Your cap ship deserves CPR's!
Vera Vengeance	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:20:00 - [30] So its useless at anything but jamming and even that is chance based and can and does fail at rather unfortunate moments............and now you wanna make it useless at that as well?. Did i said anything about nerfing it in my post? But yeah, tbh, they do steal away the fun off small gang / solo pvp. That's for sure.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:26:00 - [31] Edited by: Murina on 24/01/2009 13:26:20 Originally by: Vera Vengeance But yeah, tbh, they do steal away the fun off small gang / solo pvp. That's for sure. Carebears playing too rough for ya pal?. So your "i-win vs X type of ship" style of ganking is now a little harder cos ppl are working in teams or using 2 accounts to beat your "math" ganking?. X type of ship/fit VS X type of ship fit = WIN is not pvp and if ppl have adapted to combat it then i suggest you do the same instead of crying about it. Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Solo is all about skill not ship fits Originally by: Amira Shadowsong The anti inty fit is absolutely crap against cruisers and AFs.
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:49:00 - [32] Never been suggested before?: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=974286&page=1#12 I suggested that the falcon lose its range bonus so that it can remain valid in its role as an ambush force recon and the Rook could take over the fleet role. Because right now both are essentially the same ship. By the way, we're not talking 140km range, the falcon and rook can easily get over 200km optimal range with mediocre skills. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Krystal Demishy	Posted - 2009.01.24 13:55:00 - [33] Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. LOL noob.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:06:00 - [34] Originally by: Krystal Demishy Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. LOL noob. Thank you for your valuable insight.
Darwin Duck A Quest Millitia	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:08:00 - [35] Originally by: Vera Vengeance Originally by: Darwin Duck So you want to take away the only really good PvP ship Caldari have? Sure make us pure PVE, that will be fun. That just makes me lol... Do you solo with it? Do you fit a scrambler? Do you fit a webber? Do you ectualy do damage? Omg! only thing ppl do with it is fitting a full rack of ecm's! Besides, learn to fit caldari ships for pvp m8. They're awesome at it. Yes, it's a specific role, but atleast it makes us useful in PvP combat, god knows we arn't good for much else in PvP.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:21:00 - [36] Originally by: Krystal Demishy Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. LOL i am a noob. fixed
Shigsy Neo Spartans	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:30:00 - [37] Am i the only one who thinks 8k armor isn't paper thin...?
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:35:00 - [38] Originally by: Shigsy Am i the only one who thinks 8k armor isn't paper thin...? 8k? Are you fitting 2 1600mm plates to it or summat cos that would gimp to heck its jamming str.......
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.01.24 14:45:00 - [39] Originally by: Shigsy Am i the only one who thinks 8k armor isn't paper thin...? Think about the consequences of fitting a 1600 plate and or armour rigs a little longer and realise that nerfing your agility that severe isn't doing you any good. Your cap ship deserves CPR's!
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2009.01.24 15:54:00 - [40] Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. Quoted because both of these people are idiots. Beyond 50-60 KM ALL ewar is chance based. But of all the ewar only ECM completely removes a ships offensive abilities in a big fight, and ECM is the ONLY type of ewar that can be used at 200km or more. Putting falcons in drone range is just stupid, so they really don't need a dronebay of their own. That being said, I think a 100km range is a good place to be keeping falcons. Outside the range of most ships, but at the same time within the range of most ships fit to hit far away. As it stands there's but a small, small handful of ships that can hit at falcon ranges, and half of them are caldari =\. I can't help but think of nanos at a time like this. People complained, not because they were too powerful in combat but because their speed made them nearly unkillable. Same goes for the falcon. Short of lag/serious pilot error, you're no real reason to lose a falcon to anything less then 4-5 ships dedicated to taking you out. As for the lack of a buffer. Fit a 1600mm plate. does it make you less effective? Welcome to the world of every other freaking recon in the game. Falcons are force multipliers that are virtually unkillable. Most ships can't even LOCK at falcon range without a couple sensor boosters, let alone having to fit ECCM to keep a lock, and even if you DO keep a lock, there's nothing stopping him from just warping off and cloaking, unless you have a hictor/dictor that can get out to 200km before the falcon pilot notices...
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 16:01:00 - [41] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. Beyond 50-60 KM ALL ewar is chance based. Quoted because you are a are idiot. ECM is the only ewar system that is STILL chance based under 50-60km. ECM is useless when fitted on nonbonused ships, while the others work great on any ship. ECM bonused ships only have ONE bonused ewar system, while all the others have TWO.
P'uck	Posted - 2009.01.24 16:05:00 - [42] Originally by: lecrotta ECM bonused ships only have ONE bonused ewar system, while all the others have TWO. With the slight differnce that the one system is double bonused You know, that's actually a good thing, in some cases.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.24 16:24:00 - [43] Originally by: P'uck Originally by: lecrotta ECM bonused ships only have ONE bonused ewar system, while all the others have TWO. With the slight differnce that the one system is double bonused You know, that's actually a good thing, in some cases. Yeah it's nice. As long as you only want to do one thing ever.
Gilad Ayn Gallente The Tuskers	Posted - 2009.01.24 16:30:00 - [44] Originally by: The Tzar Nice idea but if you're bringing the falcon in the same range as the other recons you also need to balance it in one or more of the following areas: Drone bay More mids for shield buffer More resists for shield buffer More Speed without having to gimp your EW strength (only recon that HAS to have full lowslot EW to be effective in its EW) Really? More mids (plural) for a ship that already has 7 mids? A drone bay? What's a Falcon going to do with one? Let's 'balance' all other ships by adding a free midslot so every other ship can put in ECCM too, while we're at it. And the point about being effective in your EW.. well, it's hardly contested that which is considered effective for a Falcon is head and shoulders above other recons.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.01.24 16:37:00 - [45] Originally by: Gilad Ayn And the point about being effective in your EW.. well, it's hardly contested that which is considered effective for a Falcon is head and shoulders above other recons. Not if you wanna solo its not. ALL the other recons are highly effective solo ships while the falcon is worthless unless it has back up of at least one more ship if not more. Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Solo is all about skill not ship fits Originally by: Amira Shadowsong The anti inty fit is absolutely crap against cruisers and AFs.
P'uck	Posted - 2009.01.24 18:55:00 - [46] Originally by: Malcanis Yeah it's nice. As long as you only want to do one thing ever. Hey, I tell you what, my rapier gets the strength bonus for its webs, and you can have my TP bonus, I am THAT nice
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:03:00 - [47] Edited by: Esmenet on 24/01/2009 19:04:14 Originally by: Shigsy Am i the only one who thinks 8k armor isn't paper thin...? A normal falcon will have around 6500 EHP with all skills maxed. Less if you use EM damage.
lebrata Hedion University	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:04:00 - [48] Edited by: lebrata on 24/01/2009 19:04:45 Originally by: P'uck Originally by: Malcanis Yeah it's nice. As long as you only want to do one thing ever. Hey, I tell you what, my rapier gets the strength bonus for its webs, and you can have my TP bonus, I am THAT nice Fine by me, but its ccp you need to convince if you wanna swap your tp bonus for a extra web bonus..
Vabjekf	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:21:00 - [49] Give the typhoon a damage bonus vs falcons and a lock time bonus against recon ships.
P'uck	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:22:00 - [50] We, the people, have spoken! MAKE IT SO.
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:30:00 - [51] I want my Rapier to have webs and tps a range of 150km and chance-based, based on say the mass of each ship, so smaller ships will almost always come to a dead stop for 10 seconds, but battleships only come to a dead stop 50% of the time. After all, everyone needs some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post.
lebrata Hedion University	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:35:00 - [52] Originally by: Spaztick I want my Rapier to have webs and tps a range of 150km and chance-based, based on say the mass of each ship, so smaller ships will almost always come to a dead stop for 10 seconds, but battleships only come to a dead stop 50% of the time. Using that stuff is bad for you ya know........ Anyway officer webs can be fitted on a rapier and reach out to over 150km with the right CS bonuses.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:51:00 - [53] Originally by: Sokratesz Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17 Hmm, interesting idea, you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? the 'problem' with high dps battleships is that there aren't enough with the crazy tanks people can field ever since the introduction of rigs. I can offer a solution for this problem too: -20% capacitor capacity per armor repair module -20% capcacitor recharge rate per armor hardener module -20% capacitor capacity per shield boost module -20% cap recharge per shield hardener module
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:53:00 - [54] Originally by: Esmenet Edited by: Esmenet on 24/01/2009 19:04:14 Originally by: Shigsy Am i the only one who thinks 8k armor isn't paper thin...? A normal falcon will have around 6500 EHP with all skills maxed. Less if you use EM damage. A tanked falcon (imo a 'normal' falcon should have one LSE) has around 12k EHP, the other recons are in the 35k EHP area without completely gimping themmselves.
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.01.24 19:53:00 - [55] Because every rapier pilot can slap on enough fitting mods to get 1 officer web on their ship for a worse web than T2, and only if they have a mindlinked command ship with them and decide to overheat. Actually I did some testing in EFT, with a mindlinked Eos a falcon can get racials to 270 km optimal and multispecs to 180km, and if you overheat them the racials can get 16 jam strength.
lebrata Hedion University	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:03:00 - [56] Edited by: lebrata on 24/01/2009 20:03:18 Originally by: Spaztick Because every rapier pilot can slap on enough fitting mods to get 1 officer web on their ship for a worse web than T2, and only if they have a mindlinked command ship with them and decide to overheat. Actually I did some testing in EFT, with a mindlinked Eos a falcon can get racials to 270 km optimal and multispecs to 180km, and if you overheat them the racials can get 16 jam strength. And the web will work perfectly within its boosted range while the ECM units will still be chanced based at all ranges close or long.
Abriana Overlord Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:04:00 - [57] I think the falcon is probably the best balanced recon out there. It really is only viable in small scale combat or in support of a fleet unlike all other recons which can and do go out for the solo killage (yes even the pilgrim still pwns albeit no where near as much) I think for once a ship (falcon) is fine, and if a silly change like this goes ahead I will just change the rigs I use to counter it (I evolve) No secret I am maxxed out skill falcon pilot and even with max ecm strength i still miss jams that is the whole point of why chance was added to the equation way back when Eph, I know you to be an experienced falcon pilot and rarely on your roamings are you 150-200km of your targets mostly you engage close to midrange in with falcon you are dual charring so in reality this change would have zero impact on your game.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:05:00 - [58] Originally by: lecrotta Quoted because you are a are idiot. ECM is the only ewar system that is STILL chance based under 50-60km. ECM is useless when fitted on nonbonused ships, while the others work great on any ship. ECM bonused ships only have ONE bonused ewar system, while all the others have TWO. OK let's point out all the flaws in your argument: The fact that ECM is still chance based under 50km means nothing, for 2 reasons. The first is that I'm not arguing that ECM range should be dropped that low. IMO it should be dropped to about 100km, well outside the optimal range of any other type of ewar. The second is that even if it is still chance based, you're getting a chance to break someone's lock 100%, rather then getting a 100% chance to break someone's lock by a percentage. When TDs reduce the optimal of guns and missiles to 0m, or when a sensor damp makes someone's targetting range 0m, then we can talk about it being unfair that ECM is chance based. Whatever you've been smoking that makes you think other races ewar is useful on non-bonused ships, give me 2. Damps got nerfed to hell for that very reason, though TBH I can't vouch for TDs and TPs, but I've yet to see people fitting them on non-bonused ships in anything other then a comedy setup. As for the 2 bonused recons, you're getting twice the bonuses on ECM. Stop complaining. Here, I made you a little chart: (Under 50km) ECM = 100% removed damage on a % chance. Damps/TDs = % damage removed 100% of the time. (So far so good) (Above 50KM, below 150) ECM = 100% removed damage on a % chance. Damps/TDs = % damage removed on a % chance. (A tad biased towards ECM, but hey, it's a long range ship, so w/e) (Above 150km) ECM = 100% removed damage on a % chance. All other ewar = Useless. ... Bring ECM down to 100km. Falcon pilots can still keep their range, while at the same time making it possible to kill a falcon with long range ships. TBH though this whole argument is pointless. I'm sure we can all agree that when this many people complain, CCP does something about it. It's just a matter of time, and HOW they decide to nerf falcons. How they nerf them will either be based on feedback from the players, or they'll go with something completely different altogether, ignoring what the masses request. If they go with the latter, then nothing you say here matters, and if they go with the former, why not try to argue for a reasonable nerf so that falcons don't become completely useless?
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:07:00 - [59] Originally by: lebrata Edited by: lebrata on 24/01/2009 20:03:18 Originally by: Spaztick Because every rapier pilot can slap on enough fitting mods to get 1 officer web on their ship for a worse web than T2, and only if they have a mindlinked command ship with them and decide to overheat. Actually I did some testing in EFT, with a mindlinked Eos a falcon can get racials to 270 km optimal and multispecs to 180km, and if you overheat them the racials can get 16 jam strength. And the web will work perfectly within its boosted range while the ECM units will still be chanced based at all ranges close or long. I just said I wanted my webs to be chance-based on the rapier but have further range. After all, everyone needs some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:11:00 - [60] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? that would be rubbish :(
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:14:00 - [61] Originally by: ry ry Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? that would be rubbish :( Nah, that would be a perfect solution, look at how falcons have an unfair advantage if you do not want to fit eccm. Now dps ships have the same advantage if I dont want to tank my ship, so damage mods need to be rebalanced.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:18:00 - [62] Edited by: ry ry on 24/01/2009 20:19:50 Edited by: ry ry on 24/01/2009 20:18:48 Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: The Tzar Originally by: lecrotta Falcons and ecm ships need range as they are chance based unlike other systems. Quoted for absolute truth. Beyond 50-60 KM ALL ewar is chance based. Quoted because you are a are idiot. ECM is the only ewar system that is STILL chance based under 50-60km. ECM is useless when fitted on nonbonused ships, while the others work great on any ship. ECM bonused ships only have ONE bonused ewar system, while all the others have TWO. the other Ewar won't effect all ships though. a missile boat and droneships lol at TDs for example. ECM effects every ship, and as mentioned above, takes it out of the fight. three falcons can basically choose between removing all of a small/med gang's tacklers, or shutting off their DPS. yes you can all fit ECCM but you'll be fitting a module to every ship in your gang to counteract one ship - that was the whole reason speed was nerfed: that you needed a huginn in-gang to combat it. if both gangs have a few falcons it all comes down to who gets the jam in first. ECM is currently overpowered - it needs to be fixed. enjoy your falcon whilst it lasts, but given how long it took to fix speed it won't be for a while.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:20:00 - [63] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: ry ry Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 08:56:17you think that could be a solution for the prevalence of high-dps BSs too, just have -20% range per damage mod? that would be rubbish :( Nah, that would be a perfect solution, look at how falcons have an unfair advantage if you do not want to fit eccm. Now dps ships have the same advantage if I dont want to tank my ship, so damage mods need to be rebalanced. falcon pilot?
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:28:00 - [64] Originally by: ry ry falcon pilot? Pilot and victim, thats why I see things clearly.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:31:00 - [65] Originally by: Cambarus When TDs reduce the optimal of guns and missiles to 0m, or when a sensor damp makes someone's targetting range 0m, then we can talk about it being unfair that ECM is chance based. Here is your problem, you think that damps and TD's need to reduce the systems they effect to 0 to be effective and they do not. A ship damped down past the range of a ship it needs to lock cannot lock that ship, and a ship that has has its turrets disrupted so much that it cannot hit has been effected more than enough. Other ewar systems do not need to totally destroy and reduce to 0 the lock or hit/tracking range of the target ship to make it ineffective they only need to effect it to a position below the range they require. Originally by: Cambarus Damps got nerfed to hell for that very reason Damps are still very effective on non bonused ships when used correctly, so are TD's. Originally by: Cambarus Bring ECM down to 100km. Falcon pilots can still keep their range, while at the same time making it possible to kill a falcon with long range ships. Long range ships can hit falcons at 200+km just as easy. Originally by: Cambarus TBH though this whole argument is pointless. I'm sure we can all agree that when this many people complain, CCP does something about it. A few ppl with alts spamming the forums with stupid thread after stupid thread is not overwhelming support for a nerf, in fact if you look at most of the threads they have more ppl saying ECM is ok than the few alt spammers saying it needs nerfing.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:34:00 - [66] Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 20:35:16 Originally by: ry ry the other Ewar won't effect all ships though. a missile boat and droneships lol at TDs for example. ECM effects every ship, and as mentioned above, takes it out of the fight. ECM does not effect FOF missiles or drones either.......kthxbye
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:35:00 - [67] Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus TBH though this whole argument is pointless. I'm sure we can all agree that when this many people complain, CCP does something about it. A few ppl with alts spamming the forums with stupid thread after stupid thread is not overwhelming support for a nerf, in fact if you look at most of the threads they have more ppl saying ECM is ok than the few alt spammers saying it needs nerfing. Furthermore, I could imagine the silence from CCP towards the 'issue' could mean they have actually knowledge of how many of the whiners are in fact the same person
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:07:00 - [68] Edited by: ry ry on 24/01/2009 21:10:18 Originally by: lecrotta ECM does not effect FOF missiles or drones either....... FOF missiles are useless in any fight with more than a couple of targets, and i'm fairly sure there is more involved with flying a droneship than clicking "launch drones" and alt-tabbing out to your killboard. smartbombs aren't effect by ecm either, but there aren't many fleets of smartbombing frigates roaming around murdering unsuspecting falcons. Quote: kthxbye the battlecry of internet cretins everywhere.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:11:00 - [69] Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 21:13:31 Originally by: ry ry FOF missiles are useless in any fight with more than a couple of targets So?, they are still unaffected by ecm. Originally by: ry ry smartbombs aren't effect by ecm either, but there aren't many fleets of smartbombing frigates roaming around murdering unsuspecting falcons. A unaffected ship or system is not the same as a fit/ship that can kill falcons. Originally by: ry ry and i'm fairly sure there is more involved with flying a droneship than clicking "launch drones". There is a lot more to combat than fitting close range gank/tank and crying to ccp cos falcons operate outside that effective range.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:13:00 - [70] Originally by: Omara Otawan Mostly have the falcon as prober and force multiplier in solo or very small gang ops, very handy to just jam the bait and warp off if a blob tries to gank you 10vs1. falcons are pretty much de-rigure for any self respecting roaming gang, same as minnie recons used to be pre-nano nerf. Originally by: Omara Otawan Edit: in case you didnt notice, the post you quoted was pure irony geared at a completely silly proposition in this thread. aye i get it, but surely even a falcon pilot can see that ecm is marginally overpowered in it's current incarnation.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:24:00 - [71] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 21:24:39 Originally by: ry ry falcons are pretty much de-rigure for any self respecting roaming gang, same as minnie recons used to be pre-nano nerf. What does de-rigure mean? Not a native english speaker and couldnt find it in dictionary. If it means something like 'a good idea to bring one' I'd agree. And you still should have a rapier in a decent gang, nano-nerf or not. Originally by: Omara Otawan aye i get it, but surely even a falcon pilot can see that ecm is marginally overpowered in it's current incarnation. I'm not sure its a good idea to even write this, but imo ECM is pretty balanced right now. The only thing I've seen suggested worth being supported so far is having racials limited to only work against one race, with no strength against other races. There was a thread about jamming chance vs. multiple ships last week, which pretty much summed up why multispecs are 100% worthless in 95% of situations.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:26:00 - [72] Originally by: lecrotta So?, they are still unaffected by ecm. Quote: A unaffected ship or system is not the same as a fit/ship that can kill falcons. that's the thing though, isn't it. the stuff not effected by ecm is useless at killing ecm boats. look how prolific dual-box solo roaming with a falcon alt has become. Quote: There is a lot more to combat than fitting close range gank/tank and crying to ccp cos falcons operate outside that effective range. so basically you're saying that every ship should fit an eccm module? don't get me wrong - it's not like i get ****ed over by roaming falcon gangs on a daily basis and cry bitter tears about being jammed, we have our own falcon pilots who are giving as good as they get, but they do need to be reconsidered.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:29:00 - [73] Edited by: ry ry on 24/01/2009 21:33:17 Originally by: Omara Otawan What does de-rigure mean? Not a native english speaker and couldnt find it in dictionary. If it means something like 'a good idea to bring one' I'd agree. And you still should have a rapier in a decent gang, nano-nerf or not. it's french, but horribly misspelt. de rigueur basically means "a convention dictated by current fashion". it's more than a good idea though: if two medium sized gangs of equal size, skill and ships meet but one has three falcons the other has three rapiers, which will win? (hint. it's the falcon gang!) in a nutshell that's my problem with ECM.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:31:00 - [74] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 21:32:11 Edited by: Omara Otawan on 24/01/2009 21:31:16 Originally by: ry ry look how prolific dual-box solo roaming with a falcon alt has become. Well, I dont see why I should be ashamed for bringing an alt in an ewar ship as support when going on solo roams. Remember, this is not my choice but I'm forced to do so since every lame-ass noob nowadays will bait you into a 10vs1 gangbang rather than fighting your solo frigate in his BS. It'd be easier to control just one ship instead of 2 for sure. Blobs are the issue, ecm is the counter imo. Also you can always leave the falcon cloaked if you're in for a fair fight...
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:37:00 - [75] Originally by: ry ry so basically you're saying that every ship should fit an eccm module? No but if depending on the gang type your in you can have anti-ewar ships, if its a BS gang a couple of them fitted for long range will be very useful, and if the gang you have is made up of smaller ships then your gang is mobile enough to make the flacon/ecm ship less than effective.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:46:00 - [76] Originally by: lecrotta depending on the gang type your in you can have anti-ewar ships, if its a BS gang a couple of them fitted for long range will be very useful, and if the gang you have is made up of smaller ships then your gang is mobile enough to make the flacon/ecm ship less than effective. turtle remote eccm-ing sniping battleships shooting at a ship they can't hit or tackle out at 200km?
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:52:00 - [77] Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 21:52:32 Originally by: ry ry Originally by: lecrotta depending on the gang type your in you can have anti-ewar ships, if its a BS gang a couple of them fitted for long range will be very useful, and if the gang you have is made up of smaller ships then your gang is mobile enough to make the flacon/ecm ship less than effective. turtle remote eccm-ing sniping battleships shooting at a ship they can't hit or tackle out at 200km? You must fly minimatar pal cos all the other races sniper ships can hit a falcon at 200km very easily, driving off or even killing a falcon if it chose to stay or was not properly aligned.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:53:00 - [78] Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 24/01/2009 21:53:51 Originally by: ry ry turtle remote eccm-ing sniping battleships shooting at a ship they can't hit or tackle out at 200km? Rokh can hit at those distances easy, deliver reasonable dps, all while still mounting a reasonable tank and having room for a local and one remote eccm. What people often miss about remote eccm is the nice range you get on them, plus the extra bonus compared to local modules. They are worth having around, and way easier to handle than remote armor/shield reppers.
Yoko Lee Caldari	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:58:00 - [79] Edited by: Yoko Lee on 24/01/2009 21:58:05 dont nerf falcon but nerf ecm, honestly ccp....you want real fight or just 2/3 ecm boat vs 2/3 bs? pvp suck actullay thanks ccp time to stop the game maybe?
bff Jill	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:15:00 - [80] Ive got a great idea. Make it so jammers make you unable to target anyone EXCEPT the jamming ship. Since its whats causing the interference, you can just target it by tracing back up through the jam. careful use of range and tactics will make ewar ships still very powerful, but you cant just go around jamming everyone. This will have a side effect of moving the average combat ranges of larger ships out further, because more ships will be fitted for longer range fights. The resulting effective nerf to blasters and torps is of no consequence, nobody should be using missiles in pvp and gallente ships are ugly.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:23:00 - [81] Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Here is your problem, you think that damps and TD's need to reduce the systems they effect to 0 to be effective and they do not. A ship damped down past the range of a ship it needs to lock cannot lock that ship, and a ship that has has its turrets disrupted so much that it cannot hit has been effected more than enough. Other ewar systems do not need to totally destroy and reduce to 0 the lock or hit/tracking range of the target ship to make it ineffective they only need to effect it to a position below the range they require. So you're saying that ECM is SUPPOSED to be better then all other forms of ewar. TDs: Useless on missile ships, short range weapons will still hit just fine, and long range targets can still shoot things, just not as far away. Drones can still be commanded no problem. Damps: They have an optimal of about 30km. That means you can stop at most one person from shooting you, if you're very careful and manage your distances. Oh and you're within drone range. Wooooooo. ECM: Completely shuts down any ship you get a jam on. They cannot use their guns or their missiles, and drones, though still active cannot be controlled and told who to shoot. (not that you're in drone range anyway) Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Damps got nerfed to hell for that very reason Damps are still very effective on non bonused ships when used correctly, so are TD's. Again, I don't see damps being used on non-bonused ships. Not since they got nerfed. They USED to be good mods, and everyone fit them. Not anymore. Besides, saying that any ship, from any race can field a certain type of ewar and be useful, whereas only the falcon (and other variants) can properly field ECM is more of an anti-falcon argument. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Bring ECM down to 100km. Falcon pilots can still keep their range, while at the same time making it possible to kill a falcon with long range ships. Long range ships can hit falcons at 200+km just as easy. Standard fleet fit battleship can hit out at about 150km. Some can, but at that range you'd need a LOT of them to be able to kill a falcon before it can warp off. Hell if the falcon pilot is aligned he's damn near unkillable. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus TBH though this whole argument is pointless. I'm sure we can all agree that when this many people complain, CCP does something about it. A few ppl with alts spamming the forums with stupid thread after stupid thread is not overwhelming support for a nerf, in fact if you look at most of the threads they have more ppl saying ECM is ok than the few alt spammers saying it needs nerfing. LOL I distinctly remember that EXACT same accusation being made of the anti-nano crowd...
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:43:00 - [82] Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 22:44:14 Originally by: Cambarus Again, I don't see damps being used on non-bonused ships. Not since they got nerfed. Actually damps were used to great effect even after they were nerfed by a few very highly skilled corps, BE for one used them on their ravens until missiles were nerfed along with nano. Originally by: Cambarus Standard fleet fit battleship can hit out at about 150km. Maybe if its flown by a noob with poor skills. but all races apart from mini havew a sniper that can hit at 200km easy. Originally by: Cambarus Hell if the falcon pilot is aligned he's damn near unkillable. Any ship/gang that operates at snipe range has that ability so what you gonna do nerf sniping fits?. Originally by: Cambarus I distinctly remember that EXACT same accusation being made of the anti-nano crowd... I distinctly remember ccp commenting that nano was a broken mechanic, i have never seen ccp say the same about ecm, in fact i remember somebody mentioning that a ccp member said it was working fine but i may have been misinformed.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:50:00 - [83] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Here is your problem, you think that damps and TD's need to reduce the systems they effect to 0 to be effective and they do not. A ship damped down past the range of a ship it needs to lock cannot lock that ship, and a ship that has has its turrets disrupted so much that it cannot hit has been effected more than enough. Other ewar systems do not need to totally destroy and reduce to 0 the lock or hit/tracking range of the target ship to make it ineffective they only need to effect it to a position below the range they require. So you're saying that ECM is SUPPOSED to be better then all other forms of ewar. TDs: Useless on missile ships, short range weapons will still hit just fine, and long range targets can still shoot things, just not as far away. Drones can still be commanded no problem. Damps: They have an optimal of about 30km. That means you can stop at most one person from shooting you, if you're very careful and manage your distances. Oh and you're within drone range. Wooooooo. ECM: Completely shuts down any ship you get a jam on. They cannot use their guns or their missiles, and drones, though still active cannot be controlled and told who to shoot. So someone being damped can still control their drones to attack the damper, but they cant when ECM'd?
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2009.01.25 00:00:00 - [84] Originally by: lecrotta Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 22:55:13 Originally by: Cambarus ECM is better in gang combat IF the ECM ship is at range, on the other hand ALL the other recons and their systems are better at solo and close range combat. You're missing the point. It's not that ECM is more powerful at range that's the problem, it HOW far away it works. If you were to reduce the range of ECM to 100km, the falcon would still have that advantage. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Actually damps were used to great effect even after they were nerfed by a few very highly skilled corps, BE for one used them on their ravens until missiles were nerfed along with nano. With nearly any module or ship you can find SOMEONE who uses it well. Have a look at what Rajere and his corp does with blackops BSs. Doesn't mean that they shouldn't get changed. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Standard fleet fit battleship can hit out at about 150km. Maybe if its flown by a noob with poor skills. but all races apart from mini havew a sniper that can hit at 200km easy. I won't edit out my quote this time because you seem to have missed it. First off, short of having maxed skills you're not getting more then 300ish DPS from a BS past 200km. Second, I said the standard fleet fit. In an average fleet, you fit to be able to hit at 150km. You CAN fit to hit farther, but beyond that point you lose a lot of DPS. (Which btw reminds me, to whichever idiot asked for a range reduction for each damage mod, there IS ONE, it's called ammo, as well as different weapon types. As damage goes up, range goes down, FFS) The point is that even sitting still a falcon can warp off easily before killed by a sniper, assuming the ship can even hit at 200km, which is a problem. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus Any ship/gang that operates at snipe range has that ability so what you gonna do nerf sniping fits?. Battleships are big, and take long enough to align that in a decent sized fight a priority target will go down before he aligns. Were it a scorp at 200km I'd not have a problem, but it's a freaking cruiser hull we're talking about. Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Cambarus ... I distinctly remember ccp commenting that nano was a broken mechanic, i have never seen ccp say the same about ecm, in fact i remember somebody mentioning that a ccp member said it was working fine but i may have been misinformed. Uh huh... they said it was broken, and then shortly after they nerfed it. Until they decided it was gamebreaking it was working as intended. And what about every other ship to get nerfed before it? Nano BSs, sensor damps, NOSs etc. People whine, CCP changes things.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.25 00:16:00 - [85] Edited by: lecrotta on 25/01/2009 00:21:19 Originally by: Cambarus Battleships are big, and take long enough to align that in a decent sized fight a priority target will go down before he aligns. Were it a scorp at 200km I'd not have a problem, but it's a freaking cruiser hull we're talking about. A sniper BS takes around 10 seconds to align, if you deduct lock time that gives very little time for a hostile gang to kill it, a flacon is not much faster and even if it uncloaks after it has aligned it gets a locking delay to make up for it. Originally by: Cambarus With nearly any module or ship you can find SOMEONE who uses it well. Exactly, and on every forum you will find whiners crying about the fact that they feel it is overpowered (and by it i mean anything that beats them not just ecm) cos it beats their close range tank/gank setup.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.25 00:18:00 - [86] Edited by: ry ry on 25/01/2009 00:25:44 its a very similar scenario to the nano thing, but subtally different. with the nano thing the problem wasn't interceptors going fast, it was being able to get ludicrous speeds out of a bloody commandships and stuff that was game-breaking only a handful of ships are any use at ecm and falcons should be good at it, ecm absolutely has a place in pvp, but ecm shouldn't be quite as powerful in general. i don't honestly know the best way to fix it without making it useless again.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.25 00:49:00 - [87] or what about a Sensor Feedback Loop - highslot module that has a low chance (10-15%?) of breaking a jam on you and jamming the ship that originally jammed you for a short period (couple of seconds or somehting) so they don't score an immediate re-jam. i'm drunk and tired, and i don't necessarilly think another module specifically to defend against ECM in it's current state is the solution.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.25 01:47:00 - [88] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:50:46 Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:48:47 Originally by: ry ry its a very similar scenario to the nano thing, but subtley different. with the nano thing the problem wasn't ships that are supposed to be quick going fast, it was being able to get ludicrous speeds out of a bloody commandships and stuff that was game-breaking Erm, you just explained why it is totally and completely different to nano. nano = worked for every ship, even on BSs ecm = only works on ships that are getting a special bonus If we apply your logic, ecm is working just like it should, and its TDs, RSDs and neuts that are game-breaking because they work on every ship... And I can assure you, if those are used correctly the effect is very binary, and it works 100% of the time not just if you're lucky. Fun fact: fit a full rack of TDs to your falcon and you take out more turret ships than you ever could with ecm.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:01:00 - [89] The people who still think Falcons are perfectly balanced need to get a reality check. Amarr recons: tracking disruptors nerfed by 50% by CCP's scripting feature. Nos nerfed into near uselessness Gallente recons: remote sensor damps nerfed 50% by CCP's scripting feature. Minmatar recons: webs nerfed significantly, where 2x new web is less than 1x old web, target painters were always weak Caldari recons: Falcon boosted to have same ECM bonus as the Rook, making the cov ops recon more powerful than non-cov ops version, unlike all other race recons. There's no question in my mind that Falcons have to fixed. Alternatively, we can restore balance by undoing all the bad decisions made by CCP in recent years - undo the Falcon boost, undo the 50% script nerf, undo the Nos nerf, undo the web nerf. Then your powerful Falcons will have equally powerful counterparts. On other hand, if you don't want recons to be that powerful, you must agree to nerf Falcon aswell
Trader20	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:03:00 - [90] CCP will never nerf the falcon because they like the extra money that ppls falcons alts give Also falcon is fine it's u who sucks at pvp so just stfu please.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:09:00 - [91] Originally by: Ephemeron The people who still think Falcons are perfectly balanced need to get a reality check. Tbh, I think you need a reality check if you think they arent balanced. Remember CCP actually boosted the falcon not so long ago? Good luck waiting for a nerf, not gonna happen anytime soon...
Psiri	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:20:00 - [92] Edited by: Psiri on 25/01/2009 02:20:39 This is effectively just a nerf to their jamming strength and a marginal one of their range. Why would one fit several of these, just to then have to sacrifice mids for a tank to prevent getting insta-popped? May just aswell reduce the range and jamming strenth bonus instead (a simple solution which I'd be fine with). I'd rather just change ECM altogether, make it non-chance based and give it diminishing effect for every additional target you try to jam (caused by further stress on the ship's CPU). For each successful jam (your jamming strength overriding the target's sensor strength, naturally values would have to be adjusted for this) your jamming strength on that target would also diminish. I'd like to see ECM boats having to be careful with what they jam and to rid them of the whole chance based ordeal. In order to jam a BS a Falcon should have to divert all its resources at that task, being able to keep it jammed for 30-40 seconds. After that he can swap to a medium sized target for around 60-80 seconds. Alternatively he would be able to jam two cruiser sized targets but due to the diminishing jammer strength when jamming multiple targets, along with the diminishing effects of multiple cycles he shouldn't be able to keep them jammed for more than a single cycle.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.25 03:23:00 - [93] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Ephemeron The people who still think Falcons are perfectly balanced need to get a reality check. Tbh, I think you need a reality check if you think they arent balanced. Remember CCP actually boosted the falcon not so long ago? Good luck waiting for a nerf, not gonna happen anytime soon... Do you deny the truth of anything I said in the previous post? If yes, please point out specific case. Maybe you question my experience as PvP pilot? My experience with Falcons? There are public killboards that can put those questions to rest. I have a Falcon alt myself - maxed out skills, more than 1 year experience. My falcon alt char is also experience in operation of Amarr and Minmatar recons, so I have something to compare against first hand, as well and the 100s of times I encounter them in hostile gangs. It doesn't get any more real than what I experience. And I am not a fan of nerfing things - proof available in numerous posts I made warning CCP against dangers of abusing nerf power. If I say that Falcons need to be nerfed, it is with outmost caution and as last resort. Even then I'm open to possibility of balancing things out by unnerfing other recons - which is a bit extreme but at least it's not nerfing
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.25 04:37:00 - [94] Edited by: Joss Sparq on 25/01/2009 04:40:10 Originally by: Ephemeron It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once ... with no tank and no real DPS either, yeah right whatever Okay, so: People have been whining noticeably about the Falcon (for me) since a short time after the script "balance" to RSDs when the public began to realize that ECM was now the "best" electronic warfare and that hulls flavored with such a bonus were now the best to fly and have only been whining slightly more intensely since the Falcon got a very meagre increase over the old jammer strength bonus it had and it was dragged up and more into line with the Rook as a result of which. In other words, just because they suddenly couldn't see the "Rook" coming made it all that much worse when it did. Okay, I don't really like the script idea insofar as how it was implemented and the effects it then had on the Arazu and Lachesis (not forgetting Tracking Disruptors either) and I don't entirely like how the Falcon has become the Rook with a cloak (or that the Rook lost a high slot afterwards) but quite frankly I think people need to get over it (ECM) and move on. "Adapt or die" is often a cliche term in EVE but that doesn't stop it from being just as relevant here - no matter how much people don't want to adapt. When I saw ECM becoming the new "best" electronic warfare I was concerned that the constant petty crying on the forum was going to result in yet another nerf to electroic warfare - which I think is an important part of the game which is too often misunderstood or ignored in favor of the "more DPS please" approach. However, after all this time I'm becoming more confident that though CCP does keep an eye on these boards they're much more capable at seperating the real imbalances from the bull crap than we usually give them credit for. ECM isn't a mandatory fitting on most ships like RSDs once were and for that I am willing to thank them. Yes, I am a Falcon (and Rook) pilot, even a "main" and have been since before ECM and the Falcon were so "cool" (FOTM) that everyone started rolling Alts. Am I biased? Absolutely. Do I want to see another aspect of electronic warfare shat upon because there are some vocal people who've had months and months to adapt but refuse to do so or dare I even say can't for whatever reason (excuse) they'll give? No, I absolutely do not. Those people can continue to ride home in a pod.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.25 05:31:00 - [95] I notice a lot of people saying "no tank" as an excuse to keep the falcon overpowered. To those people I say: you have 7 medium slots and t2 ship resistance bonus. You CAN fit a tank - you can tank it just as well as most other cruisers. The fact that you fit ECM in all the med slots just shows how unnecessary tanking modules are - because you don't even need to tank it with all that ECM and range. And that's a problem, the thought of fitting some tanking or speed mods should at least cross people's mind. Not like now - where it's a no brainer to fill all meds with ECM. No other cruiser, no other recon ship - has it as easy as Falcons. If other people learned to survive, Falcon pilots can learn it also. Sure, most noobs will die horrible death and complain on the forums how their falcon is crap now. But the experienced people will still be successful. As a Falcon pilot, I know it won't be that difficult for me to operate in 60 km optimal range
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2009.01.25 07:10:00 - [96] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Ephemeron The people who still think Falcons are perfectly balanced need to get a reality check. Tbh, I think you need a reality check if you think they arent balanced. Remember CCP actually boosted the falcon not so long ago? Good luck waiting for a nerf, not gonna happen anytime soon... Do you deny the truth of anything I said in the previous post? If yes, please point out specific case. Maybe you question my experience as PvP pilot? My experience with Falcons? There are public killboards that can put those questions to rest. I have a Falcon alt myself - maxed out skills, more than 1 year experience. My falcon alt char is also experience in operation of Amarr and Minmatar recons, so I have something to compare against first hand, as well and the 100s of times I encounter them in hostile gangs. It doesn't get any more real than what I experience. And I am not a fan of nerfing things - proof available in numerous posts I made warning CCP against dangers of abusing nerf power. If I say that Falcons need to be nerfed, it is with outmost caution and as last resort. Even then I'm open to possibility of balancing things out by unnerfing other recons - which is a bit extreme but at least it's not nerfing You missed the ECM nerfs that already happened in the past from your "true" statement ... --- SIG --- CSM: your support is needed !
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.25 08:45:00 - [97] Originally by: Ephemeron I notice a lot of people saying "no tank" as an excuse to keep the falcon overpowered. To those people I say: you have 7 medium slots and t2 ship resistance bonus. You CAN fit a tank - you can tank it just as well as most other cruisers. The fact that you fit ECM in all the med slots just shows how unnecessary tanking modules are - because you don't even need to tank it with all that ECM and range. And that's a problem, the thought of fitting some tanking or speed mods should at least cross people's mind. Not like now - where it's a no brainer to fill all meds with ECM. No other cruiser, no other recon ship - has it as easy as Falcons. If other people learned to survive, Falcon pilots can learn it also. Sure, most noobs will die horrible death and complain on the forums how their falcon is crap now. But the experienced people will still be successful. As a Falcon pilot, I know it won't be that difficult for me to operate in 60 km optimal range Really? So when a scorch Zealot only has to travel 20Km - that is half a jamming cycle's worth of MWDIng - to melt your "T2 resists" within a few seconds, you'll have "no difficulty"? When you're within the drone control range of the average T1 BC or BS, you'll have "no difficulty"? Oh, wait, it gets better. Gates will spread incoming gangs over a 35-50Km sphere, so if you want full coverage, you'll have to be within 20Km of the gate (people always forget this factor when they ignorantly yap on about "220Km jamming range!!!11"). And you reckon that a high-value ship that moves, tanks and DPSs approximately as well as a Badger Mk.II will have "no difficulty" when it is potentially within warp scram range of the nearest enemy at the start of the fight? I think what you have "no difficulty" with is talking obvious rubbish. With ECM ships as presently constituted, reducing their optimal to 60Km would be a death sentence.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.25 09:51:00 - [98] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:50:46 Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:48:47 Originally by: ry ry its a very similar scenario to the nano thing, but subtley different. with the nano thing the problem wasn't ships that are supposed to be quick going fast, it was being able to get ludicrous speeds out of a bloody commandships and stuff that was game-breaking Erm, you just explained why it is totally and completely different to nano. certain ships overpowered by fitting as many of a single module type as possible? check. there being no realistic reply to this tactic without specifically setting up your gang to combat it? check. everybody starts using said tactic because it's so much better than the alternatives? check. pilots using that tactic claim it is perfectly balanced, and no ship should be able to hit them anyway because they've sacrificed their tank to do it? check so on and so forth. Originally by: Omara Otawan Fun fact: fit a full rack of TDs to your falcon and you take out more turret ships than you ever could with ecm. hows that then?
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2009.01.25 09:54:00 - [99] Originally by: ry ry Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:50:46 Edited by: Omara Otawan on 25/01/2009 01:48:47 Originally by: ry ry its a very similar scenario to the nano thing, but subtley different. with the nano thing the problem wasn't ships that are supposed to be quick going fast, it was being able to get ludicrous speeds out of a bloody commandships and stuff that was game-breaking Erm, you just explained why it is totally and completely different to nano. certain ships overpowered by fitting as many of a single module type as possible? check. there being no realistic reply to this tactic without specifically setting up your gang to combat it? check. everybody starts using said tactic because it's so much better than the alternatives? check. pilots using that tactic claim it is perfectly balanced, and no ship should be able to hit them anyway because they've sacrificed their tank to do it? check so on and so forth. Originally by: Omara Otawan Fun fact: fit a full rack of TDs to your falcon and you take out more turret ships than you ever could with ecm. hows that then? Because you can use just one EW module to 100% definitely take out any gunship.
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.25 09:56:00 - [100] Edited by: ry ry on 25/01/2009 09:57:49 Originally by: Omara Otawan .. wait, i get it now. a quick in-game check reveals that character is most likely a falcon alt in an industrial corp. of course you think ECM is fine ;)
ry ry	Posted - 2009.01.25 09:57:00 - [101] Edited by: ry ry on 25/01/2009 09:58:07 Originally by: Malcanis Because you can use just one EW module to 100% definitely take out any gunship. which one - by reducing it's ability to track moving targets, or reducing it's optimal range?
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.25 10:56:00 - [102] Originally by: Ephemeron It would still be operating within 50-80 KM ranges, which is pretty damn safe And nobody forces you to fight at closer range. If you prefer safety of 140km attack, by all means, just don't expect to perma-jamm 3 ships at once I see what you did there... You just want a change that doesnt affect your dual boxing falcon/nightmare experience but still nerfs any1 who uses a falcon against you :P Nevar!
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:00:00 - [103] Originally by: Ephemeron I notice a lot of people saying "no tank" as an excuse to keep the falcon overpowered. I notice a lot of people saying the Falcon is overpowered as an excuse for their own inadequacies. Originally by: Ephemeron To those people I say: you have 7 medium slots and t2 ship resistance bonus. You CAN fit a tank - you can tank it just as well as most other cruisers. The fact that you fit ECM in all the med slots just shows how unnecessary tanking modules are - because you don't even need to tank it with all that ECM and range. And that's a problem, the thought of fitting some tanking or speed mods should at least cross people's mind. Not like now - where it's a no brainer to fill all meds with ECM. To you I say: Having people deliberately ignore the (very focused) bonuses on their ships is (to be direct) bloody stupid. I really shouldn't have to illustrate this point further to anyone, but suffice to say I doubt the Railgun Zealot will become popular any time soon ... Originally by: Ephemeron No other cruiser, no other recon ship - has it as easy as Falcons. If other people learned to survive, Falcon pilots can learn it also. Sure, most noobs will die horrible death and complain on the forums how their falcon is crap now. But the experienced people will still be successful. So by your argument, the people who fly a Falcon should have to adapt to the people who can't adapt to people flying the Falcon. Ah, no comment Originally by: Ephemeron As a Falcon pilot, I know it won't be that difficult for me to operate in 60 km optimal range Then please go and do it right now. I'm sure it'll make one of your fellows very happy when they catch you.
Roger Arko Geddonites	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:12:00 - [104] Originally by: Ephemeron My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range IMHO, better to make ECCM more effective against ECM.
P'uck	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:14:00 - [105] Edited by: P''uck on 25/01/2009 11:15:07 Jeebus, even if one has a falcon fetish, they should be able to see that it might be a tad too strong. ECM might be fine, covops cloak functionality might be fine, range might be fine. Combine it all and it gets iffy. You know, I'm not even **ed about the few fights I got jammed and could do nothing but watch/warp. I'm not even **ed about the fights we lost because of the other side bringing more rasperry jam to the field than we did. I simply don't care, such is the game, and since ludicrous speed has been taken away, jamming is one of the few things that desperately tries to let eve be more than an RR'ing blob- & slugfest. But hey, I can take a look at the other force recons and their usefulness as well as the survivability... and if you dont see a slight imbalance there, I think no amount of reasoning will be able to get some sense into you. There should be some incentive to train anything but the falcon. And this incentive should NOT be "train for the weakest stuff so you get boosted when the great wheel of nerfing fortune gets spinned again".
Comae Berenices Gallente The Trillion ISK Project	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:23:00 - [106] Originally by: fuxinos Originally by: Ephemeron My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range Think about it. A major problem with Falcons is that they are so powerful and easily operate in 140km ranges. Every Falcon pilot (who's not a newb) fits at least 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier, usually 3x. There's simply no point to fit anything else there. But now, with -20% range modifier, Falcon pilots would have to seriously consider if they prefer to be more powerful at shorter ranges, or less powerful at longer ranges. It is same idea as with guns - short range weapons are more powerful, long range ones are less powerful This would weaken the Falcons ability to survive a battle way to much, remember, he has NO tank. Apart from that, its a good idea, but Falcons NEEDS to get a defensive ability therefor to compensate. Either Dronebay, or the optimalbonus changed to resistbonus or more speed. And with recon actually has a tank?
Comae Berenices Gallente The Trillion ISK Project	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:26:00 - [107] The problem compared to other recon ships is that falcon can take out 7 ships out of the fight. Usually it's 5. Now other recons have to use like 3 of their medium slots to do their effect with same power to single ship. That's the problem. For example Arazu will need 3-4 damps to do the same thing than falcon can do with single ECM mod. Pilgrim needs 3-4 td's and Rapier needs that 3 webbers now to do anything. Weaken ECM or buff other recons. That's the only way.
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:45:00 - [108] Originally by: Roger Arko IMHO, better to make ECCM more effective against ECM. I don't disagree that some minor improvements to balance could be made and ECCM is potentially one of them. I'm actually surprised that there isn't an ECCM bonus on the Oneiros instead of Sensor Linking, for example. However the constant prattle from some quarters to take a "wrecking-ball to a nail" approach won't solve anything, just cause more problems. Not that they really care, as long as they get what they want. Originally by: Comae Berenices Weaken ECM or buff other recons. That's the only way. Actually, I'd like to see them get to ignore the restrictions applied by Scripts - so that they're returned to pre-Script capabilities. After all, they're supposed to excel at electronic warfare.
Roger Arko Geddonites	Posted - 2009.01.25 11:49:00 - [109] Originally by: lecrotta Edited by: lecrotta on 24/01/2009 20:35:16 Originally by: ry ry the other Ewar won't effect all ships though. a missile boat and droneships lol at TDs for example. ECM effects every ship, and as mentioned above, takes it out of the fight. ECM does not effect FOF missiles or drones either.......kthxbye Beg your pardon but you are mistaken. ECM do affect drones and FOFs. There is big difference between focus fire on primary target and sitting jammed waiting for your drones to random aggro at least something... FOFs is a joke in pvp. Have you ever managed to kill something using FOFs? I highly doubt.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.25 13:01:00 - [110] Originally by: Ephemeron Do you deny the truth of anything I said in the previous post? You got the details kinda right as in the other systems were nerfed but your conclusion that those merfs justify a ECM nerf is based on emo and stupidity not realty. Especially considering ECM has already had a nerf as well. The other ewar systems were nerfed cos they were way too effective on non bonused ships, and ECM sucks real bad when fitted on non bonused ships.
Muad' Dib Gallente Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.01.25 13:23:00 - [111] Edited by: Muad'' Dib on 25/01/2009 13:25:53 Originally by: Ephemeron My idea is simple: Add a negative "side effect" to Signal Distortion Amplifier II -20% optimal range Think about it. A major problem with Falcons is that they are so powerful and easily operate in 140km ranges. Every Falcon pilot (who's not a newb) fits at least 2x Signal Distortion Amplifier, usually 3x. There's simply no point to fit anything else there. But now, with -20% range modifier, Falcon pilots would have to seriously consider if they prefer to be more powerful at shorter ranges, or less powerful at longer ranges. It is same idea as with guns - short range weapons are more powerful, long range ones are less powerful So non-pirates can easily operate Falcons at 100km without sentries raping them, while pirates have Falcons that can sit out of sentry range, but have to sacrifice 2 mids to stay there, and all lows. Nice one dude, truly brilliant for balance. Falcons need to get nerfed, but not at the expense of killing low-sec pirates. --- I smack just for myself. * Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout
shortattenionsp	Posted - 2009.01.25 14:26:00 - [112] The argument the falcon has "no tank" is fairly perverse. The only reason it seemingly has "no tank" is because everyone crams it so full of ECM and nothing else - it is still a T2 cruiser with resists and tonnes of mid slots. The reason people don't fit any tank is because it can operate out of harms way and doesn't really need it. The falcon can be tanked like any other recon, the fact is ecm is so good no one bothers to tank it thats all.
lebrata Hedion University	Posted - 2009.01.25 14:37:00 - [113] Edited by: lebrata on 25/01/2009 14:45:41 Originally by: shortattenionsp The falcon can be tanked like any other recon, the fact is ecm is so good no one bothers to tank it thats all. So just totally ignore that the falcon is a shield tanker (mid slot tank fyi) and the arazu ect are armour tankers (low slot tank fyi)?. And that for ECM to be even close to effective it also needs amps in the low slots...
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2009.01.25 15:16:00 - [114] True that the falcon can fit a tank. But it`s also the only recon that is not able to do anything solo. It`s a pure support ship. If you meet one it wont do much to you. There is also nothing stopping people from filling all their midslots with ewar on the other recons. Curse can use TD at 100km optimal. With rigs. Rapier can use web close to 100km in gang with gangskills and mods. We have had a rapier doing webbing at 200km+ in our corp once... And all the changes people are talking about is with the falcon in mind, then you should suggest a fix on the falcon, not **** over every other ecm ship in the game in the process...
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.25 15:21:00 - [115] Originally by: ry ry Edited by: ry ry on 25/01/2009 09:57:49 Originally by: Omara Otawan .. wait, i get it now. a quick in-game check reveals that character is most likely a falcon alt in an industrial corp. of course you think ECM is fine ;) Fail. This character cant fly a falcon, and is not even active. A quick check on battleclinic would tell you he never was in any form of pvp. In fact, it happens to be my falcon pilots alt. I dont say 'falcon alt' because he flies a wide variety of ships, not only falcons. So what was your point again? Ah I get it, there is not point...
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.25 15:55:00 - [116] I think the point was to somehow try and invalidate your opinion by way of insinuating that due to your supporting the opposing view you must have a vested interest in doing so and are therefore negatively biased and unfairly so. You know, because if you're a Falcon pilot you're not supposed to have a right of reply in any of this business
Cohkka Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2009.01.25 18:50:00 - [117] Originally by: lebrata Edited by: lebrata on 25/01/2009 14:45:41 Originally by: shortattenionsp The falcon can be tanked like any other recon, the fact is ecm is so good no one bothers to tank it thats all. So just totally ignore that the falcon is a shield tanker (mid slot tank fyi) and the arazu ect are armour tankers (low slot tank fyi)?. And that for ECM to be even close to effective it also needs amps in the low slots... Arazu is paperthin as well, most people fit it with 2 LSEs and some nanos in lows to be able to bail out quick. I don't know about Minmatar recons but with the nerf to webs it's become less usefull than the Arazu... because that one is somehwat effective at disableing MWDs (with faction scramblers). And you can't tank it with plates either because it needs the speed. Not to mentione that their second EW sucks major balls. Not to mentione they need to operate within 50km. Actually Amarr are the only recons to be able to effectively solo. And we know TDs will eventually get a nerf soon (byebye last utility mod :/ ). These facts alone let me wonder whenever you play the game at all. I'm not defending the whole nerf Falcons/ECM thing either, I just find the justifications kinda funny, because every other recon has to put up with the smae problems. I want it to be changed because chance based usefullnes with such a strong medule is humbug. It needs to be effective in larger battles and less usefull in small ones. There already have been suggestions like reducing the max target locking count to a minimum of 1 and give it a 100% chance in its optimal range. Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5...
Corwain Gallente Dark Skullz Empire Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.01.25 19:23:00 - [118] Edited by: Corwain on 25/01/2009 19:24:29 You know people whining about the whine-nerf cycle are the peak of irony. Look, some things are too powerful, they get nerfed, the cycle repeats. This has ALWAYS been the cycle in EVERY continuous development game. Only reason that people get so touchy about it here is that the skill system restricts what ships people can fly, which means that those that can fly everything, and those that can fly the overpowered ships can _easily_ kill everyone that can't. I'm not talking about the falcon in specific here, I'm talking about every nerf in general. I said all that to say this. I trained Amarr recons, it was nerfed. I trained Gallente recons. They were nerfed. I trained Minmatar recons. THEY were nerfed. I haven't trained Caldari recons yet, but I think that those that have are gonna have their innocence dashed sooner or later so it might as well be sooner. Just bend over and prepare to be bum-****d, stop kicking and screaming. It is so much more dignified and less painful for everyone that way. Nerfs are inevitable.

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

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