open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Falcon - Only ship you need!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8

Author Topic

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.09 22:59:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: LegendInMyOwnMind
Originally by: Malcanis

(1) Is the Arazu a good ship right now?


The Arazu has a place in small gangs yes. The problem is, its role, disruption, is completely overshadowed by the falcon. You will just always prefer a falcon.

Originally by: Malcanis

(2) If Falcons were completely removed from the game, would the Arazu be any better in any way whatsoever?



It would be used more often yes. No doubt about it.

Now I still believe the Arazu needs a buff regardless, but its really hard to say when the Falcon is so flatly superior that almost no one flys the Arazu.


As a previously dedicated Arazu pilot, I have to say you're wrong. Even if they removed ECM from the game *entirely* (Falcon/Rook/Kitsune/Griffin/Blackbird/Scorpion/ECM drones), you still wouldn't see many Arazu pilots. The ship simply isn't good at what it's supposed to do.

-Liang

Renarla
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:14:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Renarla on 09/03/2009 23:15:14
Falcon can remove 2-3 ships from a fight for 20+ seconds, ~200km range.
Pilgrim can reduce 1 ship to ~50% effectiveness, ~40km range. (Depends if the target has boosters and knows how to use them.)
Rapier can increase your gangs missile effectiveness against 1 or 2 targets, and/or slow down 1 or 2 ships trying to kite outside of web range, ~40km range.
Arazu can reduce 1 long range ship to 0% effectiveness, does jack **** to close range ships, ~50km range.


Which one would you pick for a gang? ugh

Trader20
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:17:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
Originally by: Mylinn Funi
Edited by: Mylinn Funi on 09/03/2009 21:05:13
Share your irritation. Overpowered jamming ability and ****e eccm is seriously messing up solo to mid size gang pvp.
Just think how amazing a 1000 falcon fleet would be.

1000 falcons overall dps is less then a T1 ibis

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:27:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Renarla
Edited by: Renarla on 09/03/2009 23:15:14
Falcon can remove 2-3 ships from a fight for 20+ seconds, ~200km range.
Pilgrim can reduce 1 ship to ~50% effectiveness, ~40km range. (Depends if the target has boosters and knows how to use them.)
Rapier can increase your gangs missile effectiveness against 1 or 2 targets, and/or slow down 1 or 2 ships trying to kite outside of web range, ~40km range.
Arazu can reduce 1 long range ship to 0% effectiveness, does jack **** to close range ships, ~50km range.


Which one would you pick for a gang? ugh


A couple of comments:
- The Falcon is the best recon. Nobody in their right mind denies this.
- The Pilgrim damn sure doesn't reduce a ship by 50%. It's 100% debilitating to any turret ship.
- The Falcon has no tank. All other recons have some tank/survivability.
- The Falcon has an Expected DPS of 0. All other recons do damage.
- The Falcon is the only recon that can't effectively solo *anything*.
- Not all fighting happens "defensively" on a gate. In any situation in which the Falcon has to make the jump, it's at a *huge* disadvantage to other recon types.

You also have the role of the Arazu wrong. It is designed to force things to close with you by eliminating range as an option. It can't even get close to affecting a true "long range ship". Damps are a failure right now.

-Liang

Takeshi Yamato
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:50:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 09/03/2009 23:51:15
Originally by: Liang Nuren

- The Pilgrim damn sure doesn't reduce a ship by 50%. It's 100% debilitating to any turret ship.
- The Falcon has no tank. All other recons have some tank/survivability.



The Pilgrim/Curse have a 72km optimal on TD's with max skills and 38 km on neuts. This puts them in a high danger zone. They fit a tank because they have to.

Falcons have the option to fit for a good buffer tank if the want, but barely anyone does so. It seems that most Falcons pilots think filling meds with ECM is better and fit accordingly though.

While 1-2 TD's can ruin a turret ship's day, Curse/Pilgrim need to actually worry about things like keeping cap up, dictating range and having a buffer tank, and for this reason a typical Pilgrim has 1-2 TD's fitted and a typical Curse 2-3. Of course one could fill the meds with TD's but this actually has real disadvantages unlike for a Falcon.

Furthermore, TD's are not 100% debilitating. It's still possible to use drones, webs, remote reps and stuff.

Gallente and Minmatar recons are in a similar situation as the Amarr ones but have the additional problem of damps and tp's being crap (too narrow purpose).


Originally by: Liang Nuren

- The Falcon has an Expected DPS of 0. All other recons do damage.
- The Falcon is the only recon that can't effectively solo *anything*.



That is true but then again doesn't warrant degree of superiority that the Falcon has over other recons for their intended role, which is e-war.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
- Not all fighting happens "defensively" on a gate. In any situation in which the Falcon has to make the jump, it's at a *huge* disadvantage to other recon types.


It's not disadvantaged by default. It's disadvantaged if the falcon pilot didn't fit a buffer tank.
It's also a victim of its own success: jamming ships are primary by default because they're such a big threat.

Wannabehero
Wayward Ventures
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:50:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Renarla
Edited by: Renarla on 09/03/2009 23:15:14
Falcon can remove 2-3 ships from a fight for 20+ seconds, ~200km range.
Pilgrim can reduce 1 ship to ~50% effectiveness, ~40km range. (Depends if the target has boosters and knows how to use them.)
Rapier can increase your gangs missile effectiveness against 1 or 2 targets, and/or slow down 1 or 2 ships trying to kite outside of web range, ~40km range.
Arazu can reduce 1 long range ship to 0% effectiveness, does jack **** to close range ships, ~50km range.


Which one would you pick for a gang? ugh


A couple of comments:
- The Falcon is the best recon. Nobody in their right mind denies this.
- The Pilgrim damn sure doesn't reduce a ship by 50%. It's 100% debilitating to any turret ship.
- The Falcon has no tank. All other recons have some tank/survivability.
- The Falcon has an Expected DPS of 0. All other recons do damage.
- The Falcon is the only recon that can't effectively solo *anything*.
- Not all fighting happens "defensively" on a gate. In any situation in which the Falcon has to make the jump, it's at a *huge* disadvantage to other recon types.

You also have the role of the Arazu wrong. It is designed to force things to close with you by eliminating range as an option. It can't even get close to affecting a true "long range ship". Damps are a failure right now.

-Liang


Seconded. Additionally, the Rapier increases more than missile effectivenes; turrets receive substantial benefit from target painting as well. Unfortunately, web strength and target painting effectiveness is rather lackluster right now, especially on ships designed around such EW.

Elyse Schwartz
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:51:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: But Sects
Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
Originally by: But Sects
ECCM


Everyone here knows that ECCMs are great, making you virtually immune to the effects of ECM as well as providing a bonus to your ship when up against ships which don't possess ECM. The one thing that has always confused me is if ECCM's suffer a stacking penalty why don't ECMs? In fact as far as I can tell the only things which don't suffer any sort of stacking penalty are high slot items, shield boosters, armor reppers, and ECMs.


Ok I'm going to assume your reasonably intelligent, and your using sarcasm here.

First off, no, ECCM does not make you 'virtually immune' to ECM, and it shouldn't. Nothing in eve makes you completely immune to something else. But it does help.

And why does it matter if ECCM doesn't help against non ecm opponents? If falcons are the HUGE problem that everyone on these forums seems to think, then wouldn't it make it worth it to fit ECCM anyway? Even if it doesn't help you do other things? People whine about ECM, when presented with a counter, ECCM, they claim it doesn't help with non-ecm situations. Read that a few times and see if it makes sense.

As for the stacking penalty, ECM is chance based. Its the only thing that is, and it throws everyone's puny brains for a loop. It would be dumb to apply stacking penalty to something that is already chance based.

You should never make assumptions, especially when it comes to the intellect of persons on a forum. You also should not use 'your' when you mean to use 'you are', but that's neither here nor their.

Actually, to the best of my knowledge, defender missiles will make you virtually immune to incoming missile fire. But then again as far as I can tell people generally don't use defender missiles because they take up a slot and arn't useful for anything except shooting down incoming missiles, which doesn't do anything if your opponents arn't shooting missiles at you. Although in this respect defenders are vastly superior to ECCMs in that they work every time, and you can switch them out for other missiles if your opponent isn't using missiles themselves. Personally, I think that ECCMs should be used to negate a successful ECM attempt, at least this way they would be almost as useful as defender missiles.

It would be dumb NOT to apply a stacking penalty to something that's already chance based. Of course, you provided no reasoning in your post, so I don't really feel it necessary to provide any in this one either.

daisy dook
Posted - 2009.03.09 23:55:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Elyse Schwartz

You should never make assumptions, especially when it comes to the intellect of persons on a forum. You also should not use 'your' when you mean to use 'you are', but that's neither here nor their.

Actually, to the best of my knowledge, defender missiles will make you virtually immune to incoming missile fire. But then again as far as I can tell people generally don't use defender missiles because they take up a slot and arn't useful for anything except shooting down incoming missiles, which doesn't do anything if your opponents arn't shooting missiles at you. Although in this respect defenders are vastly superior to ECCMs in that they work every time, and you can switch them out for other missiles if your opponent isn't using missiles themselves. Personally, I think that ECCMs should be used to negate a successful ECM attempt, at least this way they would be almost as useful as defender missiles.

It would be dumb NOT to apply a stacking penalty to something that's already chance based. Of course, you provided no reasoning in your post, so I don't really feel it necessary to provide any in this one either.


Maybe you should use there rather than their...

ECCM is fine as it is people just need to fit the correct sensor type and turn it on.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:11:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Takeshi Yamato

The Pilgrim/Curse have a 72km optimal on TD's with max skills and 38 km on neuts. This puts them in a high danger zone. They fit a tank because they have to.



They fit a tank because they are *designed* to.

Quote:
Falcons have the option to fit for a good buffer tank if the want, but barely anyone does so. It seems that most Falcons pilots think filling meds with ECM is better and fit accordingly though.


The complaints all originate from falcons that have mid slots full of ECM. You think people complain about the falcons that have 3x ECM Multis fit? As it stands, the Falcon has to have a MWD+Sensor Booster+3 Sig Distortion Amps.

Quote:
While 1-2 TD's can ruin a turret ship's day, Curse/Pilgrim need to actually worry about things like keeping cap up, dictating range and having a buffer tank, and for this reason a typical Pilgrim has 1-2 TD's fitted and a typical Curse 2-3. Of course one could fill the meds with TD's but this actually has real disadvantages unlike for a Falcon.


1 TD from a Curse can **** up any turret ship's day, meaning that the curse as you are suggesting can 100% of the time remove 3 turret ships from combat - without any of that pesky "randomness" crap ECM deals with. Add to that the "cap-go-away" factor and now the opponent can't even tank. Add to that that the Curse and Pilgrim are expected to *kill* things and the picture starts to change slightly.

Quote:
Furthermore, TD's are not 100% debilitating. It's still possible to use drones, webs, remote reps and stuff.


Furthermore, ECM is not 100% debilitating. It's still possible to use drones, smartbombs, missiles, gang mods, and many other modules while jammed. Oh yeah, and lemme see that remote rep work while being neuted. Com'mon! Lemme see it! Neutral

Quote:
Gallente and Minmatar recons are in a similar situation as the Amarr ones but have the additional problem of damps and tp's being crap (too narrow purpose).


No, they are far worse than the Amarr recons. As I predicted during both of their nerfs. :)

Quote:
That is true but then again doesn't warrant degree of superiority that the Falcon has over other recons for their intended role, which is e-war.


That's true. However you're *failing* to account for the single role that they fill. The Pilgrim fulfills three roles (theoretically): damage, damage mitigation, and cap denial. The Falcon fills one: target disruption.

If you demand that the Falcon be toned down "to TD levels", then you also have to fix things like requiring sig amps and the lack of other roles. Will CCP fix those things? No, they'll just sit there and languish like the Arazu has done for the last two years. Nobody wins the nerf game.

Quote:
It's not disadvantaged by default. It's disadvantaged if the falcon pilot didn't fit a buffer tank. It's also a victim of its own success: jamming ships are primary by default because they're such a big threat.


So this is the point at which I ask you just what you're expecting. Because if the Falcon *did* fit a buffer tank, then he's not the nasty bad "OP" falcon everyone keeps describing. If he *didn't* fit a buffer tank, then he's very vulnerable.

Simple fact: the ship can't do everything that its detractors describe with the same fit. Stop trying to nerf it and focus on boosting the other recons. :)

-Liang

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:15:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
[You should never make assumptions, especially when it comes to the intellect of persons on a forum. You also should not use 'your' when you mean to use 'you are', but that's neither here nor their.


Their != there. If you're going to go all grammar **** on us, try not to foul up your own grammar.

Quote:
Actually, to the best of my knowledge, defender missiles will make you virtually immune to incoming missile fire.


This is false.

Quote:
But then again as far as I can tell people generally don't use defender missiles because they take up a slot and arn't useful for anything except shooting down incoming missiles, which doesn't do anything if your opponents arn't shooting missiles at you.


This is also false.

Quote:
Although in this respect defenders are vastly superior to ECCMs in that they work every time, and you can switch them out for other missiles if your opponent isn't using missiles themselves. Personally, I think that ECCMs should be used to negate a successful ECM attempt, at least this way they would be almost as useful as defender missiles.



No.

Quote:
It would be dumb NOT to apply a stacking penalty to something that's already chance based. Of course, you provided no reasoning in your post, so I don't really feel it necessary to provide any in this one either.


Obviously you failed to include anything more than false statements and fanciful opinions too. :)

-Liang

nabort
Muppet Factory
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:17:00 - [41]
 

Meh, in BS RR Buffer gangs I'd normally prefer another Geddon/Mega/Abaddon tbh.

But then that's just me, and I'm wearing shades.

nabort
Muppet Factory
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:19:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: nabort on 10/03/2009 00:21:04
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Not all fighting happens "defensively" on a gate. In any situation in which the Falcon has to make the jump, it's at a *huge* disadvantage to other recon types.


This is so true that I had to quote it. You've got to love it when a gang with 4 Falcons jumps into you, thinking they can jam you out.

Pop, pop, pop, pop.

Sorry, did you say ECM?

EDIT - For fairnesses sake it has to be mentioned that the other Recons don't fair much better, but at least they don't get primaried as fast!

Babydoom
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:20:00 - [43]
 

I can't help but notice that no one complains about blackbirds or Scorps being overpowered...so obviously its not Ecm in general that needs adjusted. Just tweek the Falcons bonuses to make them more in line with the rest of the recons.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:25:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Babydoom
I can't help but notice that no one complains about blackbirds or Scorps being overpowered...so obviously its not Ecm in general that needs adjusted. Just tweek the Falcons bonuses to make them more in line with the rest of the recons.


Most falcon whines are in fact ECM whines. :)

-Liang

Takeshi Yamato
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:40:00 - [45]
 

Quote:
They fit a tank because they are *designed* to.


They aren't any more designed to fit a buffer tank than caldari recons. None of them have tanking bonuses. All recons have increased base resists.

Quote:
1 TD from a Curse can **** up any turret ship's day, meaning that the curse as you are suggesting can 100% of the time remove 3 turret ships from combat


This is false. The effect of a TD can be partially countered by player actions. With two TD's the debilitating effect is usually too large to be countered, but regardless of that, even a heavily tracking disrupted ship can usually contribute to combat in some way.

Also, as you said we're talking about turret ships. Logistics, tacklers and other e-war ships are unaffected.

Quote:
That's true. However you're *failing* to account for the single role that they fill. The Pilgrim fulfills three roles (theoretically): damage, damage mitigation, and cap denial. The Falcon fills one: target disruption.

If you demand that the Falcon be toned down "to TD levels", then you also have to fix things like requiring sig amps and the lack of other roles. Will CCP fix those things? No, they'll just sit there and languish like the Arazu has done for the last two years. Nobody wins the nerf game.


In my opinion ECM optimal bonus + cloak is too good. I don't think any of the other EC ships are too strong. As some have suggested swapping the falcon's optimal bonus to a falloff bonus would just about right.

Others have suggested scripted ECM's, ie. ECM strength and optimal cut in half and a script with a +100% optimal and one with a +100% strength, but that is a heavier nerf and would affect other ECM ships as well.

Last but not least, jamming and then warping off is pretty much an exploit if you ask me.

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:50:00 - [46]
 

I went mining yesterday in my hulk mining away at some veld.

Next thing i see a fleet of 1 orca and 5 falcons (each fitted with 2 x t2 mining lazers), these falcons then procceeded to outmine my hulk.

this made me a sad, pls nerf falcons & remove their turret hardpoints.

aak88
Caldari
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.10 00:54:00 - [47]
 

If ccp make Falcons "in line" with other recons, then the following needs to happen:
no drones or weapons for the other recons. Falcons have 2 roles they fill very well, recon and jamming. I've never seen a Falcon solo another ship. I have seen pilgrim, arazu, and rapier solo others.

We have to give up any effective defense by hoping we get all our jams or we can warp before missiles/ceptor gets to us. The other recons don't use chance based ecm, so they don't HAVE to fill all their mids with td's or damps. That allows them to fit a tank. I could tank my Falcon, but I'd be useless to my gang.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.10 01:00:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Irida Mershkov on 10/03/2009 01:00:01
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: LegendInMyOwnMind
Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
Just think how amazing a 1000 falcon fleet would be.


The fact that falcon's cant perform all tasks better than any other ship says nothing about whether or not it is overpowered.

The problem with the falcon is that it is flat out superior to all other recons for gang support. This is quite silly. No other ship is so superior to its counterparts in this way.



The problem here is that the other recons obviously need help. Maybe make the Arazu/Lach get another 5% dampening power per level and the Huginn/Rapier get a web strength bonus, and the Pilgrim gets a cargo hold expansion per level.... :)

Did the AB'ing Pilgrim of Doom ever materialize after QR btw?

-Liang

I've wondered where you went too.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.10 01:06:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Look people, answer these 2 questions.

(1) Is the Arazu a good ship right now?

(2) If Falcons were completely removed from the game, would the Arazu be any better in any way whatsoever?



Arazu is decent, but the damps are only really effective once you're using three of them or more, and then you'll need to generally apply all three for any type of serious effectiveness that a Falcon can hit multiple targets with. Damps are also only limited to a certain degree, be it range or time limit (range damp & scan res damp). Where the falcon doesn't have any limits, it can keep jamming away, yes, you can fit ECCM (Like I currently am to almost every setup) and you'll still get reliably jammed most of the time and be rendered completely useless in a fight.

If the Falcon was removed, how could the Arazu actually be better? It's still the same damn ship. But, to answer what I think you actually meant, not really no, as mentioned earlier, the Arazu is limited in its own use and viability because damps suck ass. The tackling side of it is great, especially when combined with damps, but that's one target you've limited yourself to tackling, which an interceptor can also do just the same, the different being once in a gang tackling, the interceptor isn't going to be called primary and ache the wallet for a new one.


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.10 01:07:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Takeshi Yamato

They aren't any more designed to fit a buffer tank than caldari recons. None of them have tanking bonuses. All recons have increased base resists.



Let's pay attention this time. I'm not talking about tanking *bonuses*. I'm talking about the ship being designed (by slot layout, required modules, etc) to have a tank of some sort (buffer or maybe even a real tank in certain cases). The Falcon is not one of those ships.

It doesn't even have a DC II for a tank, otherwise it would drop a sig distortion amp and wouldn't have all of that jamming power that makes you complain

It doesn't even have a LSE for a tank, otherwise it wouldn't have all those jammers and wouldn't have all of that jamming power that makes you complain.

Quote:
This is false. The effect of a TD can be partially countered by player actions. With two TD's the debilitating effect is usually too large to be countered, but regardless of that, even a heavily tracking disrupted ship can usually contribute to combat in some way.


So here's the thing about it. The TD hits you in a battleship and you might have the range to hit, but you certainly don't have the tracking. A BC may have the tracking but not the range, and a frig is just ****ed. You say that the target can juke around to minimize transversal, and that's true.... but so can you.

Quote:
Also, as you said we're talking about turret ships. Logistics, tacklers and other e-war ships are unaffected.


I like you you nicely removed the reference to how ECM also doesn't completely debilitate you. I also like how you say that tacklers unaffected by the Curse - perhaps the single greatest frigate killer of all time. Again, what you're trying to do is compare the *entirety* of one ship's role with a *third* of another and say that they have to be balanced.


Quote:
In my opinion ECM optimal bonus + cloak is too good. I don't think any of the other EC ships are too strong. As some have suggested swapping the falcon's optimal bonus to a falloff bonus would just about right.


This is a falcon nerf. Probably too strong, really, but it might give me an excuse to train Amarr cruiser 5 again.

Quote:
Others have suggested scripted ECM's, ie. ECM strength and optimal cut in half and a script with a +100% optimal and one with a +100% strength, but that is a heavier nerf and would affect other ECM ships as well.


This is an ECM nerf. Like I said.

Quote:
Last but not least, jamming and then warping off is pretty much an exploit if you ask me.


Also something that *all* of the ships do ... that you claim are not overpowered.

-Liang

Elyse Schwartz
Posted - 2009.03.10 01:10:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
[You should never make assumptions, especially when it comes to the intellect of persons on a forum. You also should not use 'your' when you mean to use 'you are', but that's neither here nor their.


Their != there. If you're going to go all grammar **** on us, try not to foul up your own grammar.
I'm a stickler for the rules just as much as you are. Which is why I abide by Muphry's Law, just as you abide by Godwin's. Thanks for playing, better luck next time.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.10 01:14:00 - [52]
 

Edited by: marakor on 10/03/2009 01:15:51
FALCON
Actually they only have a "chance" to jam ships, but in a small to med sized gang id choose the falcon.


CURSE/PILGRIM
Arguably the two greatest solo ships in the game (depending on witch you prefer) i would most proly choose one these over any other solo ship in the game.


RAPIER
Weaker since the web nerf but had a very long day in the sun as the "most used recon" during the nano age, although during that age they also probably earned the title "most shot at" as well...Very HappyLaughing.


ARAZU
Using this ship correctly with a buddy in a dmg dealer can make you gankers to be reckoned with. Its guaranteed effect within its optimal makes it a ship you can totally rely on when ganking a larger dangerous foe.

Unlike jammers on a falcon that can fail and get your team mate melted by a monster the damp/scram fitted arazu is a ship that can be relied upon and plan your tactics around when in 2-3 man roaming ganks (works rather well along side the rapier and cerb in a 3 man gank team as a matter of fact).

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.10 02:03:00 - [53]
 

being more serious though the falcon is one of the few ships that does what it's supposed to do well. I think all it needs is say 1 mid swapped for low or the 20% jam strength changed to 15% and it would be more than enough of a nerf. Just don't change it away from doing ecm that is it's job.

Though tbh it's more of a case of the other recons not doing their job of ewar properly though this is true of a lot of ships. For example lets have a look at my favorite race minmatar which while it works very well I sometime wonder wth ccp are thinking when they design our ships.

- our recons/ewar support are good at tackling and solo (ewar != tackle and support != solo)

- our heavy assault ship is good at running away but has poor dps (heavy assault, what do you imagine when you hear those words)

- Our haulers are good at tanking but poor at hauling (except the minmatar freighter which is worst at tanking)

- The ship that has the best alpha out of the race that specializes in alpha does not get any bonuses to alpha causing it to be the 2nd best alpha ship in the game (if you look at mael's ship stats it seems to be a sniper yet it's bonuses are more aimed at a close up small gang tank/dps ship)

- Minmatar ceptors (the fastest ships of the fastest race) are the heaviest and have up to a 0.21% speed advantage over amarr yet our non nanoable bs's have up to 20% faster speed than the next fastest ship.

- Out of the logistics cruisers ours repairs tie the least hp/sec yet when we get to carriers ours repairs the most.

Sorry for minor derail but point is falcon is one of the few ships that does what it's supposed to do and does it well. The best option would be to make other ships that are supposed to do ewar support actually do ewar support. Or if you need to nerf it do so but for the love of god don't try and change it into something it's not supposed to be or kill the last of the ewar ships in game.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.10 16:43:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Elyse Schwartz
Their != there. If you're going to go all grammar **** on us, try not to foul up your own grammar.
I'm a stickler for the rules just as much as you are. Which is why I abide by Muphry's Law, just as you abide by Godwin's. Thanks for playing, better luck next time.


It's a standard term. Get over it, thanks for playing. :)

-Liang

Xiao T'Urell
Posted - 2009.03.10 16:53:00 - [55]
 

Nerf Falcon so my FC's will ask me to fly a FUN ship instead! *regrets training falcon* :(

Pac SubCom
True Creation
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:15:00 - [56]
 

Against ECM, damps + ECCM work and that is what the Fed prescribes. Rails + tracking links should be good too.

ELECTR0FREAK
Eye of God
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:18:00 - [57]
 

Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 10/03/2009 17:23:34

Honestly, I'm getting sick of this. I've been watching people whine about ECM for over 5 years now, and I've YET to see someone propose a working solution.

I have watched the devs buff the in-game fitting alternative, which is ECCM, and I've watched them completely rework ECM into a chance-based system where it used to be just a matter of whoever had more sensor strength.

If you don't have a better solution, quit your complaining, honestly. This is the same old crap and if you've been on these forums as long as I have, you'd understand why the whole "Nerf ECM!" argument has gotten old ages ago.

Spectre3353
Gallente
Heavy Risk...
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:18:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Coriander Rinne
it's true, a falcon killed my corp's mothership fleet the other day

and then it rescued a kitty out of a tree.

AND THEN ATED THE KITTY. DAT'S TOO FAR MR FLACON Mad


You just won the thread! Hurrrrrray!!!!

Misaki Yuuko
Caldari
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:29:00 - [59]
 

Solution to falcon "problem" (disclaimer: I do not either agree or disagree with the notion that actually a problem exist):
- Scripted ECM mods: script for range/strength

There you got your fix.

Sun Clausewitz
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:47:00 - [60]
 

To kill a falcon you need two things...
MWD and Smart Bombs.
Then let he jam you all he wants while you fly beside and splatter him. It has no tank and does no DPS.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only