| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Deq
   |
Posted - 2009.01.26 00:47:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Akiba Penrose
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I'd like to hear a really solid argument for why the above types of fights are *fun* and a *good thing* for Eve PVP. Where everyone brings loads of Falcons and everyone is jammed and everyone goes home with nothing more than wasted ammo and a few popped drones to show for it.
Yes, I'v yet to hear any argument that would somewhat explain why it a good thing having Falcons/ECM as it currently is.
Hammerhead said that they use forum feedback as a tool for game balance, maybe it would be more constructive if they participated a little.
Originally by: Malcanis
Candidly, I'm disappointed in you. I'd have thought that you of all people would know that whining for nerfs is at best lame and at worst, counter-productive. You know damb well that EvE NEEDS effective EW. You know damb well that at the moment, ECM is the only counter to spidertanking. You know damb well that ECM was an effective counter to nanoships, and a prime reason why nano didn't need nerfing as savagely as it was.
This. |
Spoon1
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 02:46:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Stuff
Hey Bellum, I have to agree with your for the most part. I am a falcon pilot and yes I enjoy jamming people like crazy. However I still believe them to be slightly overpowered and using your dual ECCM argument as a basis, it stands.
I recently had a discussion with corp/militia members about ECM and ECCM.
I explained even if most of a fleet fitted ECCM, selective targets will still be jammed most of the time. They disagreed. Hence I am here to prove just how easy things are jammed.
Forgive me if im wrong but the formula;
ecmstrength/sensorstrength = % chance of jam
So my falcon has a racial jam strength of 13.77.
A Rokh has a sensor strength of 24.
13.77/24=0.57 or 57% chance of jamming
If I overheat the module it has a strength of 14.67
14.67/24=0.61 or 61% chance of jamming
If you fit an ECCM to the Rokh;
13.77/47=0.29 or 29% chance of jamming
14.67/47=0.31 or 31% chance of jamming
If the Rokh fits two ECCM it has a sensor strength of 86.3. (Lets face it, what ****head is going to fit two ECCM on a Rokh)
14.67/86.3=0.169 or 16.9% chance of jamming.
Even if the counters are fitted, I still have a nearly 17% chance of jamming him, which lets face it, will mean I will jamm him.
I fit a probe launcher on mine so I dont have quite as high a modifier as some out there also. So factor that into my calculations.
You fit x2 ECCM, there is still amost a 20% chance you will be jammed during fights.
And just to show how bad marauders are, a Paladin with two ECCM fitted;
13.77/43=0.32 or 32% chance of jam
|
Joss Sparq
Caldari
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 04:31:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Spoon1
And just to show how bad marauders are, a Paladin with two ECCM fitted;
13.77/43=0.32 or 32% chance of jam
Marauders are intended to be "bad".
|
Tefkros
The Dead Pod Society
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 06:35:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Tefkros on 26/01/2009 06:35:30
Originally by: Stitcher
Falcons = NO damage output. None. Nada.
The stupidity of this statement and the fact people keep using it as an argument still amazes me.
Here, let me illustrate:
3 BS, 600dps each vs 6 BS, 600dps each
1800dps vs 3600dps
1:2 damage ratio
3 BS, 1 Falcon vs 6 BS, 600dps each. 3 BS jammed (lets not be idiots and claim that all 6 BS get jammed)
1800dps vs 1800dps
1:1 damage ratio
It seems that a single Falcon brought itŠs gangŠs damage on par with the hostile gang, even though it has achieved this by negating the enemy damage output.
If there are 2 Falcons or if the Falcon gets a jam on another BS, then you have AT LEAST an effective 600dps advantage over the jammed gang. Yes, the Falcon that "does no DPS" is the reason for this advantage.
This of course is acceptable since Falcons, like all recons are force multipliers.
Just stop using the "they donŠt do any dps" as an argument. Go have your nerf fights after you put some thinking on what you are about to say, copying what everyone said isnŠt making the discussion constructive.
|
Malverious Prime
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 06:53:00 -
[35]
I do find it strange that ECM (being the most powerful form of EW) has probably the greatest range(?)... with certain ship bonuses applied...
I'd imagine Falcons would be slightly less powerful if they had to get in relatively close to use their uber EW.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 08:01:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 26/01/2009 08:06:14
Originally by: Malverious Prime
I do find it strange that ECM (being the most powerful form of EW) has probably the greatest range(?)... with certain ship bonuses applied...
I'd imagine Falcons would be slightly less powerful if they had to get in relatively close to use their uber EW.
I can imagine tracking disruptors being a lot less powerful if they wouldnt be able to reduce turret range beyond the point where the ship using them cant be hit anymore.
Example: Curse can use TDs up to 100km+, there is no turret ship in eve that can hit that far with only 2 TDs applied, and there is maybe one ship that can still hit if one TD is applied. And the effect works reliable, not chance based.
|
Deq
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 09:02:00 -
[37]
Nerf forums. |
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 14:39:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Omara Otawan
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 26/01/2009 08:06:14
Originally by: Malverious Prime
I do find it strange that ECM (being the most powerful form of EW) has probably the greatest range(?)... with certain ship bonuses applied...
I'd imagine Falcons would be slightly less powerful if they had to get in relatively close to use their uber EW.
I can imagine tracking disruptors being a lot less powerful if they wouldnt be able to reduce turret range beyond the point where the ship using them cant be hit anymore.
Example: Curse can use TDs up to 100km+, there is no turret ship in eve that can hit that far with only 2 TDs applied, and there is maybe one ship that can still hit if one TD is applied. And the effect works reliable, not chance based.
Or the Pilote donŠt use a Cruse and use a Falcon instead, sitting at 200km and jamming 2+ Ships not only shutting down Turret DPS but also Missle DPS(beside FOFs) the ability to apply Drones to a specific Target, RR or Tackling.
Hard decision what to use, realy...  |
Joss Sparq
Caldari
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 16:25:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Tefkros
This of course is acceptable since Falcons, like all recons are force multipliers.
Just stop using the "they donŠt do any dps" as an argument.
A fair point actually ... I figure this puts them in the same class as say the Logistics - since they really are "support" classes which reduce the incoing damage in practice. It is funny that you don't see people screaming about (for example) dual Basilisks though - unless they're "neutrals" of course, lol. Though I suspect that if Falcons/Rooks and/or ECM are indeed nerfed at some point then we can expect them (Logistics) to be one of the next subjects to get similar ... treatment.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 16:48:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Akiba Penrose
I'v yet to hear any argument that would somewhat explain why it a good thing having Falcons/ECM as it currently is.
Originally by: Deq
Originally by: Malcanis
Candidly, I'm disappointed in you. I'd have thought that you of all people would know that whining for nerfs is at best lame and at worst, counter-productive. You know damb well that EvE NEEDS effective EW. You know damb well that at the moment, ECM is the only counter to spidertanking. You know damb well that ECM was an effective counter to nanoships, and a prime reason why nano didn't need nerfing as savagely as it was.
This.
ECM is the most effective counter to anything.
It is its effectiveness combined with invulnerability that is the problem.
Originally by: Joss Sparq
I figure this puts them in the same class as say the Logistics - since they really are "support" classes which reduce the incoing damage in practice. It is funny that you don't see people screaming about (for example) dual Basilisks though - unless they're "neutrals" of course, lol. Though I suspect that if Falcons/Rooks and/or ECM are indeed nerfed at some point then we can expect them (Logistics) to be one of the next subjects to get similar ... treatment.
A couple of heavy neuts or a curse and those logistics are in serious trouble. If you had logistics that worked from 240km your argument would be valid.
|
Radcjk
Caldari
Failed Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 00:16:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Shigsy
i have maxed out falcon alt
This. I have a falcon. Its my main. If nobs would stop dual accounting falcon alts and callnig it 'solo pvp' (rofls), a significant number of these god damn things would go away. The falcon isn't as ****ed up so much as a massively metagaming community. |
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 00:47:00 -
[42]
Poasting in yet another whine thread
|
Lt Angus
Caldari
End Game.
The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 00:26:00 -
[43]
The real question is why only 2 eccm, 
Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers |
gpfault
Haunted House
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 05:19:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Lt Angus
The real question is why only 2 eccm,
Indeed, fit three or more ECCMs so we can kill you easier. |
Chargon
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 05:41:00 -
[45]
I have only one thing to say. T1 ships and FOF. |
Avion Saberis
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 06:34:00 -
[46]
okay i'ved taken a bit of info here, and it seems that everyone has a like and dislike to the falcon. My opinion is if ya can't lock on them, either use FoF missiles or Smartbombs. Though Smartbombs are only really good if your ship is fast enough for them. There are alot some ways to counter a Falcon, that is fully equipped to screw your targeting over. just cause ya can't lock on to them doesn't mean ya can't beat the **** out of them. i'm an Ewar spec guy, but i've thought of many ways for ppl to try and take me out even when i'm keeping them screwed. So take it from me, this ain't that big of a deal. just rethink your stragety and you'll be fine. |
Major Celine
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 08:46:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Soporo
Didnt CCP in their infinite wisdom BOOST Falcons since their first inception? Added range I believe.
Who's the genius that did that and what tf were his reasons is what I want to know.
Well, this is correct, but in the same move they reduced the strength of the modules:
http://myeve.eve-online.com/updates/patchnotes.asp?patchlogID=99
But I think the problem is not the module, it's the fact that people just hate tank + gank + X. They just want to ignore ewar completely by making it useless. ECM just works as intended and that's not acceptable obviously. It must s*kk. They can ignore dampners, NOS, tracking disruption and now ECM is the evil boy (even though it hasn't changed for so long).
And now we have, surprise surprise, the
(c)
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 10:36:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Joss Sparq
Edited by: Joss Sparq on 26/01/2009 04:47:22
Originally by: Spoon1
And just to show how bad marauders are, a Paladin with two ECCM fitted;
13.77/43=0.32 or 32% chance of jam
Marauders are intended to be "bad" and as a result they should be easy to jam.
Originally by: Omara Otawan
They also boosted ecm jammer strength from 15%/lvl to 20%/lvl recently if I'm not mistaken.
Yes, that was pretty much the Falcon "boost" some of you may have heard about. The 5% increase didn't precipitate all the crap on the forums about the Falcon by itself (we can thank Scripts for helping that) but I do find it comical that (as I've said similarly elsewhere) people were only upset because now they couldn't see the Rook coming.
IIRC falcon had the same jamming strength as blackbird pre boost, only it had greater range and a cloak.
--- SIG ---
CSM: your support is needed ! |
Mitch Taylor
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 11:15:00 -
[49]
What your really saying here is, I dont know how to counter this.
If you dont know how to counter long range jammers with crappy hp you need to stop playing with carriers/ewar and the like and go back to t1 frig fights.
Mitch |
bronyra
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 11:21:00 -
[50]
Ecm can take the fun out of eve. Especially when the best counter to say a falcon is a falcon.
Instead of allowing different strategies for small gangs it just encourages blobbing as everyone realises that they will lose if they dont have their
own falcons or a lot more people either way it leads to less fights.
I believe the reducing in nano effectiveness was in part so that people had to commit to a fight, a falcon never really has too.
Ewar is a good thing to have in the game as it adds more tactics and variety to fights but given the choice there is very few reasons to take something
other than more ecm.
I like the idea of keeping ecm duration at 20 seconds but it only jamming a ship for say 10 seconds when successful.
It would mean better cooperation between ewar ships was needed.
For example: target range damping combined with long range webbing so the ships cant fly into lock range.
tracking disrupters removing turret dps while damps or caldari ecm removes missile.
ecm combined with scan resolution damping to keep people out of a fight.
Hopefully it would provide more diverse fights, as it is now its almost always better to take another falcon over any other type of ewar.
|
Vampasha
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 13:08:00 -
[51]
Originally by: BuckStrider
Edited by: BuckStrider on 25/01/2009 15:14:49
Posting in yet another fail 'nerf ecm' whine thread.
And really?...You use carriers for gatecamps?...What system is this again?
Nerf ewar boats. Carrier has long lock time. Who on earth should you have to remote boost eccm or sensor lock time. He who has the most carriers at a gate camp should win, yes? |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 14:54:00 -
[52]
I never thought the jamm strength was a problem, since having 60 or 230 strength on a carrier doesnt seem to make too much of a difference anyways. Lowering the jamm strength of a falcon would carry the goofy chancebased results over.
The real problem to counter falcons is that theyre able to do their work from 230km away.
If their optimal+fallof range would be reduced to 80km like the other recons, it would be balanced and counterable again.
And no, sniping eccm ships are not the solution here. |
Linnth
Amarr
Darkill Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 15:11:00 -
[53]
Proposed Nerf: Create a new system without any jump gates, call it San Francisco. Move all Falcon pilots to that system and let them jam each other all day long. |
Zaq Phelps
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 15:50:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
I never thought the jamm strength was a problem, since having 60 or 230 strength on a carrier doesnt seem to make too much of a difference anyways. Lowering the jamm strength of a falcon would carry the goofy chancebased results over.
The real problem to counter falcons is that theyre able to do their work from 230km away.
If their optimal+fallof range would be reduced to 80km like the other recons, it would be balanced and counterable again.
And no, sniping eccm ships are not the solution here.
Like the other recons? Ok... I'll roll with that. I want guns (or missiles, even though they really kind of suck now)... like the other recons. I also want drones... like the other recons. Hmmm... I'll also take bonuses to two different types of ewar... like the other recons. Oh and don't forget, I'll also take ECM being 100% reliable at the same ranges of the other recons. I'll be glad to give up range, and even the ability to lock down 3 targets (reliably, 4-5 targets is just good luck and not likely in fights lasting over 60 seconds). Hmmm... I'm thinking 50m3 drone bay + missiles + ecm/damps reliably doing its job at <80 km on 1-2 targets w/ an armor or shield buffer. If you want the falcon to operate like other recons, then let it operate like other recons. Or, you could just change the ECCM to a sensor booster script and buff its effectiveness. Personally I like the solopwn falcon much better. It's your idea remember? You said "like the other recons."
Also, for falcons to jam carriers, they either have to be really lucky or put a whole rack of the proper racials on it, or multis. 12.5/230 = 5.4% chance to jam per jammer, or one out of every 20 cycles. This means for four falcons to reliably jam a carrier (including relock time) they need to apply 10 racial jammers (read 2 prefitted for that situation falcons dedicated to one carrier).
Zaq |
Major Celine
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 16:19:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Major Celine on 28/01/2009 16:25:08
Edited by: Major Celine on 28/01/2009 16:23:53
Edited by: Major Celine on 28/01/2009 16:22:35
Edited by: Major Celine on 28/01/2009 16:19:37
Originally by: Linnth
Proposed Nerf: Create a new system without any jump gates, call it San Francisco. Move all Falcon pilots to that system and let them jam each other all day long.
You repeat yourself many times in many threads. Lets you look competent.
Omg more of your sentence.
And more. Are you serious?
... |
Vampasha
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 16:34:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Vampasha on 28/01/2009 16:35:42
Originally by: Zaq Phelps
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
I never thought the jamm strength was a problem, since having 60 or 230 strength on a carrier doesnt seem to make too much of a difference anyways. Lowering the jamm strength of a falcon would carry the goofy chancebased results over.
The real problem to counter falcons is that theyre able to do their work from 230km away.
If their optimal+fallof range would be reduced to 80km like the other recons, it would be balanced and counterable again.
And no, sniping eccm ships are not the solution here.
Like the other recons? Ok... I'll roll with that. I want guns (or missiles, even though they really kind of suck now)... like the other recons. I also want drones... like the other recons. Hmmm... I'll also take bonuses to two different types of ewar... like the other recons. Oh and don't forget, I'll also take ECM being 100% reliable at the same ranges of the other recons. I'll be glad to give up range, and even the ability to lock down 3 targets (reliably, 4-5 targets is just good luck and not likely in fights lasting over 60 seconds). Hmmm... I'm thinking 50m3 drone bay + missiles + ecm/damps reliably doing its job at <80 km on 1-2 targets w/ an armor or shield buffer. If you want the falcon to operate like other recons, then let it operate like other recons. Or, you could just change the ECCM to a sensor booster script and buff its effectiveness. Personally I like the solopwn falcon much better. It's your idea remember? You said "like the other recons."
Also, for falcons to jam carriers, they either have to be really lucky or put a whole rack of the proper racials on it, or multis. 12.5/230 = 5.4% chance to jam per jammer, or one out of every 20 cycles. This means for four falcons to reliably jam a carrier (including relock time) they need to apply 10 racial jammers (read 2 prefitted for that situation falcons dedicated to one carrier).
Zaq
The falcons didn't seem to have much trouble. The falcons not only perma jammed the carrier, they had enough left over to jam the rest of the gatecamp incluing 2 falcons. |
Omarvelous
Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 20:01:00 -
[57]
If they stacking nerf RR - then I can tolerate an ECM nerf.
I can't stand rr blobs, and it was a primary reason why I tried ECM, and made sure my usually outnumbered corp did as well.
I'd recruit a Caldari HAC pilot if I were you - my uses dual ECCM Cerb's with great effect against Falcons. Sometimes we even pop them - but driving them off is just as good, and then being able to dump >300 dps on your primary from beyond sentry guns is nice too. |
Shigsy
Neo Spartans
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 21:09:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Radcjk
Originally by: Shigsy
i have maxed out falcon alt
This. I have a falcon. Its my main. If nobs would stop dual accounting falcon alts and callnig it 'solo pvp' (rofls), a significant number of these god damn things would go away. The falcon isn't as ****ed up so much as a massively metagaming community.
I dont use mine 
Just something to train on my hauler alt |
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.29 00:39:00 -
[59]
Lets compare to <insert any other MMO>: Having healers, CC and support is BORING!! everyone should be warriors and duke it out, seeing your target (or actually yourself) being healed or held down is CRAP, it sucks and just makes things annoying. Lets all use straight forward max damage classes!
Sound about right? |
Lucia Wilber
Minmatar
The Steel Vipers
|
Posted - 2009.01.29 06:16:00 -
[60]
I don't have much experience with ECM, but just as a thought...
Does anyone else think that a relatively good solution to this issue, rather than having ECM jam target locks, would perhaps be to make it so that being target jammed just prevents you from using a turret or launcher, but still allows you to maintain a target lock?
Seems like a fair compromise to me... |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |