EVE Search - Solving the Falcon "problem" Solution inside

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Solving the Falcon "problem" Solution inside

» 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)
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:23:00 - [91] Originally by: lecrotta Erm no there is no pick cos their is no nerf coming, as falcons are fine and close range gank/tank online is not fun or particularly interesting. That's what we said about nanoHACs. Look where we are.
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:26:00 - [92] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta Erm no there is no pick cos their is no nerf coming, as falcons are fine and close range gank/tank online is not fun or particularly interesting. That's what we said about nanoHACs. Look where we are. PPl say the same about carriers and cloakers and just about anything that just coincidentally kicks their silly skilless ass, but like most of the whines they get ignored especially if nothing is wrong with them like ECM.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:27:00 - [93] Originally by: lecrotta PPl say the same about carriers and cloakers and just about anything that just coincidentally kicks their silly skilless ass, but like most of the whines they get ignored especially if nothing is wrong with them like ECM. Then would you be willing to bet on it, my friend?
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:30:00 - [94] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta PPl say the same about carriers and cloakers and just about anything that just coincidentally kicks their silly skilless ass, but like most of the whines they get ignored especially if nothing is wrong with them like ECM. Then would you be willing to bet on it, my friend? 100000000000000000000 BILLION. Now all you need do is remember what game we are playing and how often ppl get loled at for expecting bets to be honored.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:33:00 - [95] Originally by: lecrotta 100000000000000000000 BILLION. Now all you need do is remember what game we are playing and how often ppl get loled at for expecting bets to be honored. Sadly, I do not have 100000000000000000000 BILLION. How about 100M? And I will honour this bet. I am a man of my word.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:35:00 - [96] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 26/01/2009 23:38:52 Edited by: Omara Otawan on 26/01/2009 23:36:27 Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta PPl say the same about carriers and cloakers and just about anything that just coincidentally kicks their silly skilless ass, but like most of the whines they get ignored especially if nothing is wrong with them like ECM. Then would you be willing to bet on it, my friend? I'd not bet on it tbh, the falcon just got boosted recently, I'd expect it at least 1-1.5 years until a dev bothers to even look at it again. The recent surge in whine threads wont change that, as for CCP it is a matter of maybe 2 SQL calls to find out 75% of posters are the same persons alts... And apart from that, there is a difference to the nano 'issue', CCP stated nano was broken because the physics engine couldnt handle it properly, that was the reason it got changed, not whines.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:36:00 - [97] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta PPl say the same about carriers and cloakers and just about anything that just coincidentally kicks their silly skilless ass, but like most of the whines they get ignored especially if nothing is wrong with them like ECM. Then would you be willing to bet on it, my friend? I'd not bet on it tbh, the falcon just got boosted recently, I'd expect it at least 1-1.5 years until a dev bothers to even look at it again. I was going to suggest a year, yeah. It takes so much ****ing time for CCP to get anything done, I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I went with anything shorter.
Zxenis Caldari M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:37:00 - [98] if you cloak, enter warp, or deactivate the module, does your jamming goes away immediately? if not then it should. If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 - 1527)
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:39:00 - [99] Originally by: Zxenis if you cloak, enter warp, or deactivate the module, does your jamming goes away immediately? if not then it should. IIRC, the ECM will finish its cycle first.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:40:00 - [100] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 26/01/2009 23:40:45 Originally by: Zxenis if you cloak, enter warp, or deactivate the module, does your jamming goes away immediately? if not then it should. No, jamming cycle will complete first. For deactivating the module this is 100% correct as it is the same for every single mod in eve, however for the warping and cloaking it should be changed imo. *Especially for cloaking.*

Tzar'rim	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:41:00 - [101] Originally by: Zxenis if you cloak, enter warp, or deactivate the module, does your jamming goes away immediately? if not then it should. It doesn't. You can uncloak, jam a target and cloak again. The jam will completely run it's full cycle.
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:50:00 - [102] Originally by: Tzar'rim Originally by: Zxenis if you cloak, enter warp, or deactivate the module, does your jamming goes away immediately? if not then it should. It doesn't. You can uncloak, jam a target and cloak again. The jam will completely run it's full cycle. I agree that this is a problem, but it is not a problem restricted to ECM. I think the simpler solution would be to prevent the user from cloaking and/or warping as long as any EW module in his ship is at cooldown. That would apply to ECMs, Tracking Disruptors, Sensor Dampeners, Webs, Painters, Warp Disruptors and Warp Scramblers. Any ship that has activated one of those should be prevented from cloaking and from warping until the current cycle is finished.
Acumental	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:51:00 - [103] I'm really new to EVE, but would a missle boat like the Drake be able to take the falcon out using Heavy FoF's? Or are these missles intended for some other use?
lecrotta lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:57:00 - [104] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta 100000000000000000000 BILLION. Now all you need do is remember what game we are playing and how often ppl get loled at for expecting bets to be honored. Sadly, I do not have 100000000000000000000 BILLION. How about 100M? And I will honour this bet. I am a man of my word. No point betting with me pal id never pay up if i lost.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:58:00 - [105] Originally by: Acumental I'm really new to EVE, but would a missle boat like the Drake be able to take the falcon out using Heavy FoF's? Or are these missles intended for some other use? No. Not unless the Falcon pilot is ******ed.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:59:00 - [106] Originally by: lecrotta Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: lecrotta 100000000000000000000 BILLION. Now all you need do is remember what game we are playing and how often ppl get loled at for expecting bets to be honored. Sadly, I do not have 100000000000000000000 BILLION. How about 100M? And I will honour this bet. I am a man of my word. No point betting with me pal id never pay up if i lost. Fair enough. Is anyone else willing to step up?
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:59:00 - [107] You can't pick which target FoFs go to; it hits the closest target available IIRC.
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:09:00 - [108] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Fair enough. Is anyone else willing to step up? Anyone who bets on the whims of the devs in this game is a fool. Anything can happen. What can be debatable is IF it should happen or not. Debating if it WILL happen or not is utterly pointless. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:26:00 - [109] Originally by: Omara Otawan I'd not bet on it tbh, the falcon just got boosted recently, I'd expect it at least 1-1.5 years until a dev bothers to even look at it again. The recent surge in whine threads wont change that, as for CCP it is a matter of maybe 2 SQL calls to find out 75% of posters are the same persons alts... And apart from that, there is a difference to the nano 'issue', CCP stated nano was broken because the physics engine couldnt handle it properly, that was the reason it got changed, not whines. I disagree entirely. You can't honestly believe that when this many people whine about something CCP's just going to completely ignore them do you? As I've stated before, the EXACT same accusation was made of nano-whiners, that it was just a handful of people with alts. As for nanos having been nerfed only because they were gamebreaking in the technical sense, care to explain why the nerf went down the way it did? They didn't just slow everything down across the board. HACs and recons were slowed down by a greater percentage then the frigates (an inty can still go 10+km/s). It is most definitely not unreasonable to say that the nerf was done because the playerbase had been asking for it. Had it just been a physics thing (which is what CCP claimed) they would have simply put in a hard cap on how fast ships could go. Or they would have slowed all ships equally. They didn't. They nerfed nanoHACs specifically, reducing them to speeds far below what the server could handle (and as proof we have current inty speeds to compare. If the speeds were ruining the physics engine or w/e we'd have seen inty speeds dropped way down as well) People complained about nanoHACs, the nanoHacs got nerfed. They did not complain about ceptors hitting crazy speeds, ceptors remained for the most part untouched. People are complaining about falcons, and I'd bet that CCP will nerf them, within 2 major patches of apocrypha (depending on how much of a stink people are making about them after getting their tech III ships, and assuming tIII doesn't provide a kickass counter to falcons of their own) I doubt ECM will be nerfed though, for the same reasons ceptors were left alone.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:26:00 - [110] Originally by: Etho Demerzel Anyone who bets on the whims of the devs in this game is a fool. Anything can happen. What can be debatable is IF it should happen or not. Debating if it WILL happen or not is utterly pointless. Wether we like it or not, get enough whinning going, and it will get nerfed. If we all started whinning that artillery were OP, I'd be again willing to bet that it would get nerfed.

Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:37:00 - [111] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Wether we like it or not, get enough whinning going, and it will get nerfed. If we all started whinning that artillery were OP, I'd be again willing to bet that it would get nerfed. Maybe you are right, but sometimes it takes years to happen. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:38:00 - [112] Originally by: Etho Demerzel Maybe you are right, but it takes years to happen. Fixed. **** CCP are slow.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.01.27 00:40:00 - [113] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 27/01/2009 00:45:00 Originally by: Cambarus You can't honestly believe that when this many people whine about something CCP's just going to completely ignore them do you? As I've stated before, the EXACT same accusation was made of nano-whiners, that it was just a handful of people with alts. Yes, I honestly believe this. Read some of the whine threads a bit more carefully, you'll notice quite a few people 'messing up' while trying to alt-post and 'signing' their own ideas... Quote: As for nanos having been nerfed only because they were gamebreaking in the technical sense, care to explain why the nerf went down the way it did? They didn't just slow everything down across the board. HACs and recons were slowed down by a greater percentage then the frigates (an inty can still go 10+km/s). Uhm, you dont understand what they did I guess. Notice how the 'new' nano cruisers are even more invulnerable than before, while people did exactly complain about them being hard to kill? And at ceptors going 10km+, really Quote: It is most definitely not unreasonable to say that the nerf was done because the playerbase had been asking for it. Had it just been a physics thing (which is what CCP claimed) they would have simply put in a hard cap on how fast ships could go. See, this is where you are wrong. If they had responded to requests from players, it'd have been simply a hard cap as people wanted the untouchable ships gone. But look what they did, they found a way to reduce speed and boost fast ships. I rest my case.
Bosco Minmatar Altruism. Avarice.	Posted - 2009.01.27 04:06:00 - [114] I'd like to clarify some things from my orginal post that seem to have been torn apart bit by bit. I fly jammers. I like jammers. I see the need and the tactical advantage of jammers. However, there are some balancing issues. Other posters have complained that a "nerf" and other changes would make it carebear or that it wouldn't fit in the game universe. Let me again shed some light on other "nerfs" that make sense in the EVE universe. Stacking Nanos. Lets pretend there was never a stack nerf and you have a full low rack of 5 nanos, overdrives... etc. You have basicly reduced your ship to a flying toothpick. But hey its fast right? This simply wouldn't be viable if this game and ships were real. Why? flying at high velocitys with your shields repelling space debris, cosmic rays, centrigul force etc... your ship would fall apart even with the advantage of structural integrity fields to "bind" the structure together. It makes more sense that continued "abuse" of your ships structure via multiple nano modules can only give you so much benefit due to the fact that for your ship to even make a turn you need a minimum amount of structural integrity to keep the ship together. How does this example apply to ECMs!!!!! Simple, and i will state it again. Electronic counter measures used modulated frequencies and "noise" distortion to reak havoc on a ships targeting computer. It is processing and modulating to constantly to keep a ship jammed. So why does a ship become unjammed??? and they do right? It is because your ships computer has compensated for the jamming equipments frequency modulation etc and "matched" it toe to toe breaking through. Keep this in mind. Now, as it stands with enough skill, ship skills, upgrades and such you can keep a ship perma jammed easily. Namely the Falcon. My suggestion, again, is that repeated jamming is slowly or moderatly overcome by the ships computer, or aided by ECCM etc to expedite the process. Once the ship over comes a jam, the Jammer ship it self must wait a set period before applying the jam again, while its own ships computers re-scramble, and choose new frequencies algorithms and such. (no im not talking minutes....) After that, the jammer ship can now re-jam the same ship and the process starts over. Zomg! thats a horrible nerf! I cant keep somone perma jammed? ... not nessicarly.(SP) Now add to the mix more jammer ships. they have a fresh set of jam frequencies not used on the previous jammed ship. Then can start at step one and freely begin to jam a ship with all normal rules applying... this means that multiple jam ships would have to cycle targets etc which would envolve.... SKILL. So as you can hopefully see, the diminishing returns effect can nicely fit into the EVE universe, invite more thinking and skill, and still ensure jam ships are effective.


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

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