| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Andrea Skye
Caldari
The Carebear Stare
   |
Posted - 2009.02.07 21:56:00 -
[1]
Firstly im a falcon pilot myself, and I like flying them. But i cant help feeling cheap whenever i do. People in the area see me in local and know i fly a falcon so they are much more wary when they are thinking about engaging.
Falcons are to powerful atm i think. And most other people will agree im sure.
So last night i had this idea about changing ECM.
Its similiar to sig radius. Basically you get 3 different sizes. Small, medium, large. while still keep Racial jammers (so there still will be minnie/ammar/caldari/gallentee jammers, just different sizes of each)
Small will effect frigates/destroyers well, be ok against cruisers/bc's and weak against Battleships and up.
medium will be decent against all sizes, alot like multispectral jammers are now.
Large will effect battleships well, be ok aginst bc's cruisers and weak against frigs.
This way falcons will still keep their range, and still have the same jamming power against ships they choose. Just they will be counterable and people might be much more willing to engage when they know one is present.
Hell, you could do away with racials all together and just get the different "sizes" in.
Idea can be tweaked but what do you guys think?
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 21:58:00 -
[2]
Nerfing, falcon threads would be a start...
|
Rordan D'Kherr
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:03:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Andrea Skye
Firstly im a falcon pilot myself,
Sure.
Originally by: Andrea Skye
i think
Fail.
|
Inara Subaka
Caldari
the united
Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:06:00 -
[4]
Originally by: lebrata
Nerfing, falcon threads would be a start...
|
Adaera
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:08:00 -
[5]
I'll say what I say to the suggestions that jammers should be scripted:
Short answer: No.
Long answer: They're already split down multispecs and racials, breaking them down any further is just stupid and dilutes them to the point of uselessness. |
Artemis Rose
Sileo In Pacis
Mean Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:18:00 -
[6]
A drone bay and some more DPS would be nice 
***
Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space
Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2
WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats |
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:39:00 -
[7]
Falcon pilots would just use all mediums, therefor not solving much at all.
Best idea I've seen was to make a ship that's target-painted lockable even by a ship that's jammed.
|
Adaera
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:43:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Best idea I've seen was to make a ship that's target-painted lockable even by a ship that's jammed.
QFT
___________________
I for one welcome our new bee overlords |
Psiri
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 22:58:00 -
[9]
Make ECM non-chance based, if jamming strength is higher than target's sensor strength the target is jammed. Adjust the values of ECM and ECCM modules accordingly, leaving ECM slightly more powerful than what it is now.
- Make the strength of ECM diminish on the target after each successful jam.
- Add a penalty to the jamming strength for jamming each additional target above one.
The intention would be to have a Falcon being able to keep a single BS jammed for around a minute, or two cruisers for around the same ammount of time. Perma-jams should not be happening and ECCM on a battleship should make it resilient versus any single ship trying to jam it with mixed racials or multispecs (one successful jam cycle at most). ECM boats should still be able to pull their weight in gangs and be useful for rescue missions. Falcons should be easily fended off by multiple sniper ships, where instead a ship like the Scorpion would be more appropiate.
Goal is to also leave ECM potent enough to be useful on small ships like the griffin and blackbird (as long as they jam single targets they shouldn't be affected much) and to at the same time rid ECM boats from the unecessary currently chance based system.
|
bff Jill
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 23:04:00 -
[10]
The alliance tournament shows us that the best way to balance ECM is to limit it to 100km range maximum.
|
echohead
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 23:07:00 -
[11]
Any ship fit for sniping, any ship fit for speed, and alot of ships with drones all chase away falcons. When gangs come prepaired falcon pilots die fast or are constantly running away. Everyone thinks eve is nothing but gank and tank. But there are other modules out there that really hurt falcons and rooks.
Like I said in another thread; it's not like rooks are single handedly winning the alliance tourny.
|
bff Jill
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 23:08:00 -
[12]
Originally by: echohead
Any ship fit for sniping, any ship fit for speed, and alot of ships with drones all chase away falcons. When gangs come prepaired falcon pilots die fast or are constantly running away. Everyone thinks eve is nothing but gank and tank. But there are other modules out there that really hurt falcons and rooks.
Like I said in another thread; it's not like rooks are single handedly winning the alliance tourny.
thats because of the 100k range and no warpouts.
So make ECM 100k range and when you activate an ECM module you are warp scrambled for 10 seconds
|
echohead
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 23:36:00 -
[13]
BFF,
I have seen you post of a few threads regarding balance issues. You seem to just take one part of a post and comment on it. My post as a whole does point out how to deal with falcons in various ways. Perhaps more people need to start thinking about what to do with their own ships instead of commenting on everything being broken.
I forgot to mention earlier that the Arazu is another falcon killer. Huge range on it's ewar, it's ewar is not chance based. And it can move fast and do some dps. |
Selia Rain
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 23:45:00 -
[14]
Give a 50% nerf to all ECM modules for strength and range. Bear with me here. Then add scripts to boost one or the other. Viola, falcons that can be effective, or at range, but not both. <--falcon pilot, too |
daisy dook
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 00:00:00 -
[15]
Edited by: daisy dook on 08/02/2009 00:03:24
Originally by: Selia Rain
Give a 50% nerf to all ECM modules for strength and range. Bear with me here. Then add scripts to boost one or the other. Viola, falcons that can be effective, or at range, but not both. <--falcon pilot, too
Hmmm, that would make the Falcon a bad transport ship and kill all other ECM birds.
Just as well your a Falcon pilot and have really considered it.
----
edit - my idea for fixing Falcons/ecm in general - fitting ECCM; go on you know it makes sense esp with the ten ship gangs comprised of seven Flacon gangs that are so prevalent. |
Stribog
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 00:10:00 -
[16]
i can fly a falcon.. and most every gang fleet has a falcon too its like a chest match who ever plans the best wins so why would you take away from the falcon it would be like taking the knight from chest the game is just fine the way it is if you dont like it go back to wow an if you ask the falcon pilots they rather be in something else but they know there needed to do there job an i wish they did more dps an had a better tank an fly fast as the vagabond then they would be fun to fly all the time lol ...... |
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 03:02:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Stribog
i can fly a falcon.. and most every gang fleet has a falcon too its like a chest match who ever plans the best wins so why would you take away from the falcon it would be like taking the knight from chest the game is just fine the way it is if you dont like it go back to wow an if you ask the falcon pilots they rather be in something else but they know there needed to do there job an i wish they did more dps an had a better tank an fly fast as the vagabond then they would be fun to fly all the time lol ......
Wow |
Carmon Sparerow
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 05:58:00 -
[18]
wow is world of warcraft for anybody that dont know.... |
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 05:59:00 -
[19]
I think falcon should be added to the censor list. |
ShadowGod56
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 06:49:00 -
[20]
Originally by: lebrata
Nerfing, falcon threads would be a start...
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 07:32:00 -
[21]
Fix what? |
Bibi
Infestation.
Donkey Punch.
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 08:38:00 -
[22]
stupid post nothing to talk about lock it please
not eve a constructive nerf post...just words
btw if you can't deal with falcons in anyway just go play fantasy mmo really
|
Dors Venabily
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 08:54:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Adaera
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Best idea I've seen was to make a ship that's target-painted lockable even by a ship that's jammed.
QFT
/double quote hope they will do that
|
tarin adur
Gallente
Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 09:05:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Adaera
I'll say what I say to the suggestions that jammers should be scripted:
Short answer: No.
Long answer: They're already split down multispecs and racials, breaking them down any further is just stupid and dilutes them to the point of uselessness.
Almost like.........wait for it..........Damps! |
Arous Drephius
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 10:18:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Inara Subaka
Originally by: lebrata
Nerfing, falcon threads would be a start...
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 10:52:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Bibi
Falcon is one of very few things now days that benefit the small roaming gang 3-4 people.
Falcons **** all over small gangs. That is the biggest reason I hate them. You either need to have your own Falcon, or fit ECCM to all your ships... oh wait that doesn't work because 1) ECCM does **** all on anything but a BS and 2) somebody needs their mids to ****ing tackle, you know. So basically, bring your own Falcon, or GTFO. |
Joss Sparq
Caldari
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 11:15:00 -
[27]
Originally by: lebrata
Nerfing, falcon threads would be a start...
|
Beverly Sparks
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 11:34:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Beverly Sparks on 08/02/2009 11:35:44
Originally by: Bibi
Edited by: Bibi on 08/02/2009 08:57:58
not eve a constructive nerf post...just words
Falcon is one of very few things now days that benefit the small roaming gang 3-4 people.
Its just priceless when you talk about that people know that you fly a falcon and they wont come and fight well I got an idea go to a new area and pvp... as they dont dont know that you fly a falcon 
And stop blaming the falcon to be overpowered
The Falcon is one of the few things that allows a small gang of 3-4 totally own another gang of 3-4 who were stupid enough to engage the gang that had the falcon.
The problem with ECM is the on and off nature. There are ways to beat it, but then a team has to specifically build their fleet to deal with falcons. Don't you see something worng with that? What other ship causes the whole community to adapt their play style?
I would still like to see a totally alternate form of EWAR.
I still like the idea of an EWAR that increases the duration of all active modules, or would nerf the percentage gain by stat enhancing modules. Something like an underload. All the modules that can be overloaded can also be underloaded by this form of EWAR. I think the only things I would want to be immune to it is shield extenders, Armor plates and Rigs.
Make it autohit to about 70k, and then have a falloff of about 100km. Duration, maybe 30 seconds.
Balance as required. Optimally, I would not like to see one Recon affect more then about 2 people.
Then rework the Rook and Falcon Bonuses, to be more combat oriented.
Maybe make the base module be 15% a decrease. And then give the rook and Falcon a single bonus off of that, like +7.5% per level. Giving the Rook and Falcon a 52% debuff to every module on a particular ship. Then give them a 10% per level for Missile velocity, as their second cruiser bonus. Give the Falcon 3 missile launchers, and a turret?.
As their recon bonus, maybe give them a 5% target painter bonus. I know, I know, not really in line with things, since it is Minnie territory, but who else would benefit more from the increased signature sizes. And why do minnie and Gallente get scrambler/web bonuses. It makes sense that since missiles gain good advantage through painters, that the Caldari might actually use them as a secondary form of EWAR. Hell it was probably a Defecting Caldari Scientist that invented it for the Minmatar.
And for the rook add in a 5% increase in missile explosion velocity per level.
My 2 isk, for whatever it's worth. But personally, I think it would make things more fun as compared to just removing select individuals from the fight... or not.
These changes would actually make the Caldari Recons as good offensively to have in a fleet as they are defensively. Debuffing resistances, nerfing AB and MWD speeds, and increasing signature, would surely make up for any shortcomings in missile damage. Plus it is also effective at decreasing incoming damage since it would also nerf gank modules, weapon fire rate, etc etc. And best of all, it is not chance based.
It would also work to a certain extent as a dampener since all Sensor boost modules would also be affected.
I also like the target painter idea, stated earlier. It would give TP a better roll in the game and ECM could still break up RR gangs, which is the most common rational for why ECM is needed. Of course, my proposed EWAR would also deal a big blow to RR gangs.
Another idea, is to make ECM autohit, but only reduce the number of targets to 1 instead of 0. That way the person would have to choose between RR or damage.
There are a million solutions that I think would improve the present form of ECM, and make the Caldari recons more fun to fly, which is really why we are all playing, isn't it?
|
Kary Savage
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 12:36:00 -
[29]
Working as intended.
|
Beverly Sparks
|
Posted - 2009.02.08 13:13:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Kary Savage
Working as intended.
Female circumcision works as intended too, it doesn't make it right.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |