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

z0de
The Bastards
The Bastards.
Posted - 2009.03.13 15:03:00 - [121]
 

I would like killboard links to all falcon gangs getting kills.

Jan'z Kolna
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.03.13 18:39:00 - [122]
 

there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons

on top of that, there's inreasing number of falcons in those gangs , currently it's about 30% of all ships in gang

so, tendency is clear: no need for 'tactics' or whatever, all you need is to bring more falcons than they have - OUTFALCON them

still can't see anything wrong with falcons, eh?

if ppl don't fly falcons , it's because they haven't trained for them yetTwisted Evil

Naomi Knight
Amarr
Posted - 2009.03.13 18:52:00 - [123]
 

Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons

on top of that, there's inreasing number of falcons in those gangs , currently it's about 30% of all ships in gang

so, tendency is clear: no need for 'tactics' or whatever, all you need is to bring more falcons than they have - OUTFALCON them

still can't see anything wrong with falcons, eh?

if ppl don't fly falcons , it's because they haven't trained for them yetTwisted Evil

Still better than the 70-80% vaga+rapier gangs before speed rebalance.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 19:19:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons


What do they tackle smaller ships with if they only have BS and falcons?.

Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
on top of that, there's inreasing number of falcons in those gangs , currently it's about 30% of all ships in gang


Sounds like a good balanced gang setup to me:

50-60% dmg.
20-30% ewar.
10-20% tackle.

Obviously the figures can be switched around a little if you are using logistical ships instead of having RR fitted to your dmg dealers ect........


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.03.13 19:27:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons
What do they tackle smaller ships with if they only have BS and falcons?.
BS + SB, of course… Razz

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 19:31:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons
What do they tackle smaller ships with if they only have BS and falcons?.
BS + SB, of course… Razz


You aint gonna catch much small stuff even with a boosted BS, ppl like him who exaggerate should think before they post imho.

Zubakis
The Carebear Stare
Hydroponic Zone
Posted - 2009.03.13 19:35:00 - [127]
 

Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Jan'z Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons - mind you, no other recons
What do they tackle smaller ships with if they only have BS and falcons?.
BS + SB, of course… Razz


You aint gonna catch much small stuff even with a boosted BS, ppl like him who exaggerate should think before they post imho.


Hics are for smaller stuff.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.03.13 19:36:00 - [128]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 13/03/2009 19:37:16
Originally by: marakor
You aint gonna catch much small stuff even with a boosted BS, ppl like him who exaggerate should think before they post imho.
Why do you need to catch smaller stuff? Too cheap to hurt the target; too little loot to be worth the effort.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 20:19:00 - [129]
 

Originally by: Zubakis


Hics are for smaller stuff.


Read the original post...the gangs had only BS and falcons.....bolded and underlined just for you.


Originally by: Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons

Zubakis
The Carebear Stare
Hydroponic Zone
Posted - 2009.03.13 20:28:00 - [130]
 

Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Zubakis


Hics are for smaller stuff.


Read the original post...the gangs had only BS and falcons.....bolded and underlined just for you.


Originally by: Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons



So what? Chill a pill, he exagerated.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.03.13 21:09:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Zubakis
So what? Chill a pill, he exagerated.
No he didn't. There are plenty of those gangs, and having the battleships do the tackling is good enough for the kinds of targets they're after.

loldongs III
Perkone
Posted - 2009.03.13 21:30:00 - [132]
 

Make ecm a directional aoe weapon problem solved (the jamming chance stays the same).

This fixes the problem with falcon alts.
This gives it an anti blob role.
This gives it other stuff I cannot think of right now.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 21:31:00 - [133]
 

Originally by: Zubakis
Originally by: marakor
Originally by: Zubakis


Hics are for smaller stuff.


Read the original post...the gangs had only BS and falcons.....bolded and underlined just for you.


Originally by: Kolna
there's increasing number of lowsec gangs comprised entirely of BS and falcons



So what? Chill a pill, he exagerated.



If you need to exaggerate to try and prove that summat needs a nerf it obviosly does not.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.03.13 21:34:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: marakor
If you need to exaggerate to try and prove that summat needs a nerf it obviosly does not.
Fortunately, he doesn't need to. Whether that proves the thing overpowered or not is a different matter. Wink

Ynos Fukse
Posted - 2009.03.13 21:54:00 - [135]
 

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



You are wrong.

Pilgrim/Curse can neut 1-2 ships from 12km/34km depending on size, and reduce to 100% damage effectiveness to 1-2ships in the same time with tracking disruptors. And have a good tank too.

Falcon have no tank, and the most used range in gangs is 100km. Falcons die often. You dont have time always to make 200km ss.

Falcon have almost the same power as Pilgrim.

Rapier is maybe the best tackler in the game. It's role is not to disable the enemy, but to stop it. You cant compare it with Falcon.

Arazu is nerfed like hell. I agree this ship need a boost.






Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
Perditus Peregrinus
Posted - 2009.03.13 22:39:00 - [136]
 

Look guys,

Tracking Disruptors are now scripted (range/speed).

Remote Sensor Dampeners are now scripted (range/strength).

Target Painters could be scripted (range/strength).

ECM could be scripted (range/strength).

I believe that if you throw out ALL THESE OTHER CRAP ARGUMENTS of what the ship does in the role of a solo ship or fleet ship (seriously, you expect me to buy your lame argument about how the Falcon can't solo things, but yet I can fit ECM to any ship with 2 Signal Amps and appropriate rigs and still have a powerhouse of an ECM boat? Get out of town).

I am upset that the ship can receive a dual bonus to one type of electronic warfare that HAS NOT YET BEEN NERFED TO HELL AND BACK LIKE OTHERS HAVE.

Besides, I find tracking disruptors useful on a myriad of ships.

If ECM was scripted range or strength, I am imagining it would do exactly what it did to Arazus: Make pilots really THINK about using them. An Arazu can have a 1600mm plate, but so can a Falcon. You fit up a Falcon to have max strength and your range is crippled to where anyone that starts taking pot shots at you would likely scare you off. Or, if you fit for ECM range, you would not jam as often, making your actual "role" in the fleet pointless.

It's all about balance. I believe that things are currently unbalanced, and that this is a step towards balancing them once again.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 22:46:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: marakor on 13/03/2009 22:47:35
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Look guys,

Tracking Disruptors are now scripted (range/speed).

Remote Sensor Dampeners are now scripted (range/strength).

Target Painters could be scripted (range/strength).

ECM could be scripted (range/strength).




TD's and DAMPS EFFECTS are either range or str/speed.

TP's do not use scripts at all.

ECM does not have 2 separate effects so it cannot be scripted to do one or the other like damps and TD's...


Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
Perditus Peregrinus
Posted - 2009.03.13 22:48:00 - [138]
 

Originally by: marakor
Edited by: marakor on 13/03/2009 22:47:35
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Look guys,

Tracking Disruptors are now scripted (range/speed).

Remote Sensor Dampeners are now scripted (range/strength).

Target Painters could be scripted (range/strength).

ECM could be scripted (range/strength).




TD's and DAMPS EFFECTS are either range or str/speed.

TP's do not use scripts at all.

ECM does not have 2 separate effects so it cannot be scripted to do one or the other like damps and TD's...



No, man. I'm saying that we should script Target Painters and ECM to bring them inline with other forms of electronic warfare.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 22:53:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Originally by: marakor

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Look guys,

Tracking Disruptors are now scripted (range/speed).

Remote Sensor Dampeners are now scripted (range/strength).

Target Painters could be scripted (range/strength).

ECM could be scripted (range/strength).




TD's and DAMPS EFFECTS are either range or str/speed.

TP's do not use scripts at all.

ECM does not have 2 separate effects so it cannot be scripted to do one or the other like damps and TD's...



No, man. I'm saying that we should script Target Painters and ECM to bring them inline with other forms of electronic warfare.


Bad idea for 2 reasons

1. It will make the the bonused ECM ships worthless for med sized gang combat.

2. It will bring us back to the days where every ship with a extra mids will have a STR scripted ECM fitted.

ECM is fine as it is, although some of the other recons could do with a bonus boost to their ewar systems.

Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
Perditus Peregrinus
Posted - 2009.03.13 22:59:00 - [140]
 

Originally by: marakor
Bad idea for 2 reasons

1. It will make the the bonused ECM ships worthless for med sized gang combat.

2. It will bring us back to the days where every ship with a extra mids will have a STR scripted ECM fitted.

ECM is fine as it is, although some of the other recons could do with a bonus boost to their ewar systems.

No, it is not a bad idea.

1. Yes, it will make them worthless for med sized gang combat. When was the last time you saw an Arazu or a Lachesis in a small gang? Not as much as you see Falcons, I can assume. Because the Arazu and Lachesis are at risk of being ganked. But the Falcon has an out, because it can be at extreme ranges and warp at the first sign of trouble. I'm saying limit that ability, and either it'll get jams off occasionally at a distance, or more frequently at close range, but at risk of being blown up.

2. But there is a reason that that happened. Recently I have been flying around a good old Nos Domi with ECM. (Well the Nos are replaced with Neuts but whatever.) Anyway, 1 signal distortion amp in the low and 2 flavors of ECM with a point, MWD and cap booster. And it works. Do you know why? Because ECM is GOOD. And, now that ECM is the only type of electronic warfare with a module that BOOSTS its strength, don't you think more ships should benefit from it?

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2009.03.13 23:06:00 - [141]
 

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Originally by: marakor
Bad idea for 2 reasons

1. It will make the the bonused ECM ships worthless for med sized gang combat.

2. It will bring us back to the days where every ship with a extra mids will have a STR scripted ECM fitted.

ECM is fine as it is, although some of the other recons could do with a bonus boost to their ewar systems.

No, it is not a bad idea.

1. Yes, it will make them worthless for med sized gang combat. When was the last time you saw an Arazu or a Lachesis in a small gang?.


That depends on how small cos in a 2-3 man gang they are much better than the falcon as the ewar support. And the other recons apart from the falcon are also pretty awesome solo ships as well...curse/pilgrim have to be the best solo ships in the game.

To everything their is a niche and the falcon is the med sized gang ship while it is useless at everything else.

And yes its annoying if you get ganked by a gang with a falcon in it but the fact is if you are in a single ship against a gang with ewar and setup to kill you were gonna die anyway and being jammed made no difference it just gave you summat to blame.


Marzug
Royal Order of Security Specialists
Posted - 2009.03.13 23:14:00 - [142]
 

Yeah devs should brin ecm ships in line with other ew ships.. like arazu = lose one max target per jammer or rapier = make it look ugly or drop their base range to 25km or something

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.03.13 23:19:00 - [143]
 

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
No, man. I'm saying that we should script Target Painters and ECM to bring them inline with other forms of electronic warfare.
Yes, but "other forms of ewar" is just to broad a group to be easily balanced across the board. Before you try to compare functionality and bring them "in line" like that, you need to figure out if "in line" is actually a useful concept.

Overall, we have three categories:
Offensive limiters — Sensor damps, Tracking disruptors, ECM.
Flight inhibitors — Scrams, Disruptors, Bubbles.
Evasion inhibitors — Webs, target painters, (scrams to some extent).

On top of this we have the half-ewar/half-weapons netus and nos, which work on completely different principles.

Since the different categories have vastly different purposes, there's just no way to balance them across the board. The best you can hope for is to have some sort of balance within each category. Within the two last groups, that's fairly well done already by using different ranges, strengths, and limitations.

Within the "offensive limiter" group, however, there are some issues. (Range) damps and range disruption forces targets to come closer; tracking disruptors forces them to fly away; scanres damps slows down your targeting, ecm and ecm bursts remove your targeting alltogether… In short, there are a number of way to mess up the enemy, but ECM in particular does it far more thoroughly than the others. The others have a very clear "you do X so the enemy has to do Y" kind of logic — ECM does not. If we want to balance that category, a similar kind of logic needs to be found for ECM.

Franga
NQX Innovations
Posted - 2009.03.13 23:20:00 - [144]
 

Originally by: Gneeznow
Originally by: But Sects
ECCM


74 sensor strength, 2x ECCM, was jammed with ease 3 cycles in a row, the falcon never missed a jam, had a similar repeat the following day in the same ishtar, falcon jammed me with ease for 2 cycles enough for his frighter to warp out

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

FALCONS ARE BROKEN

cue the achura falcon defence squad to this thread to feverently try to defend it


I don't post on this topic at all, but I've had this problem myself.

What he said. Totally agree. Having a jam strength of 14.something and being able to apply this huge jam strength from about 190km optimal is ludicrous.

I can remember a dev (think it was Nohz?) saying that having a certain module as a 'must fit' in PVP is something they weren't looking for and don't want in the game. When he said this he was talking about MWD prior to the speed nerf.

I can remember another dev saying (about 2-3 years ago now) that having a 'must fit' module in PVP is not what they were looking for. He was referring to ECM modules prior to their first nerf. Back when everything we flew had at least one multispec fitted.

I don't think people would be quite so upset about this if ECCM were a smidge more effective. I've gone out before with 3 ECCM fitted, just under 100 sensor strength and been jammed for a large portion of the fight.

Tbh, I think scripts or something of that nature is a possible solution. It's why sensor damps were made to use them. You still see Arazu/Lach around, they're still used and they can still tip the scales in your favour. But they don't make it a landslide.

Music TSP
Caldari
Clown Punchers.
Clown Punchers Syndicate
Posted - 2009.03.14 05:50:00 - [145]
 

What about increasing the effectiveness of ECCM, and making it a script for sensor booster modules. That way you wouldn't be completely throwing away a midslot just to counter falcons.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.14 06:07:00 - [146]
 

Originally by: Music TSP
What about increasing the effectiveness of ECCM, and making it a script for sensor booster modules. That way you wouldn't be completely throwing away a midslot just to counter falcons.


I don't mind this, and I've suggested it several times, but this would force a damp boost. :)

The most fleshed out idea I've seen along this line was to combine damps and ECM into the same module, and to combine sensor boosters/ECCM into the same module. The ships get different bonuses for the same module.

-Liang

Gavin Darklighter
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.03.14 06:13:00 - [147]
 

Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 14/03/2009 06:16:02



I'd like to see ECM changed so that when someone is "jammed" they only lose the ability to lock someone that hasn't aggressed him/her in the last 60 seconds. Anyone that is shooting you or recently shot at you would still be vulnerable. This of course would also include the falcon, which would make them a lot more vulnerable to tacklers since they wouldn't be able to just jam them and get away.

Then ECM would be useless for ganking the solo player since he can still shoot back, but would still be of use in gangs if your guys know how to focus fire. ECM would be a way for the outnumbered to fight back, not a way for the blob to gank with impunity.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.03.14 06:17:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Franga
I don't think people would be quite so upset about this if ECCM were a smidge more effective. I've gone out before with 3 ECCM fitted, just under 100 sensor strength and been jammed for a large portion of the fight.


You know, this hasn't happened to me, but I've seen things like a single low slot ECCM make my Rupture impossible to jam. But there's alot more stories your way than mine... which makes me wonder if anyone has actually done a statistical analysis of jam percentages recently.

Quote:
Tbh, I think scripts or something of that nature is a possible solution. It's why sensor damps were made to use them. You still see Arazu/Lach around, they're still used and they can still tip the scales in your favour. But they don't make it a landslide.


I dunno man, I haven't seen many situations since the damp nerf that my Arazu was a better option than a Domi or Ishtar. The simple fact is that the force 'multiplier' of an Arazu is less than one in virtually all cases.

Don't get me wrong, you can maneuver things so that you can use the 'zu, but it's really hard. It's like maneuvering things so that you can solo a Domi with a Bellicose. It can be done... it's hard.

-Liang

EFT Warrior
Posted - 2009.03.14 06:31:00 - [149]
 

How would ECM sound as a means to reduce the number of maximum targets available to lock, down to 1?

Pros: it is not an I Win Button, as you will still have a primary target locked and he will be boned regardless. Perhaps ECCM would then give a bonus to max targets, and in turn boosting signal amps and auto targeters for those ships that have plenty of low slots to spare or the extra high slot.

Cons: It will demolish the carrier. Of course, it may not be a bad thing but at best people would fly carriers less and battleships more, or more carriers would be fielding triage.


Also, ECCM and sensor strength is removed as it is now, you could still keep the ECM and sensor type as they are now, to where a multispec would reduce 1 maximum target and racials 2 (juast as an example, based on the current max targets for ships, I would say 2 targets for multispec and 3 for racials at max skills would work well). Alternatively you could have it reduce max targets to 0 instead of 1. This would make auto targeters, signal amps and "new" ECCM mandatory, BUT you have the side benefit of having more max targets to lock, which is an improvement over the current use of ECCM being used only to counter falcons. Also, with enough modules you can overcome a falcon attempting to jam you.

All things being equal, this would bring the falcon in line with all the other recons as far as effectiveness as a force multiplier goes. Would it hit it too hard? Maybe, maybe not. I kind of like the idea.

Pac SubCom
True Creation
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2009.03.14 08:36:00 - [150]
 

Edited by: Pac SubCom on 14/03/2009 08:40:14
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Liang Nuren
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.
This is the real problem, as I see it. Range dampening is an obvious aggressive counter-measure to long-range ships (including the falcon's ECM), but that role is completely nullified by the short range at wich dampening works.



A rigged Lachesis or Arazu has 31% dampening chance for each dampener at 180km, 38% if it is supported by warfare links. 2 damps without support are 47%, with support 60%. A Lachesis putting 4 damps on a ship at 210km still has a chance of 50% every 10 seconds (where a Falcon would need 3 sensor boosters to target the Lach directly while damped). Damps are not that clearly useless at longer ranges.

At 160km (unsupported/supported):

1 damp: ~45/54%
2 damps: ~70/78%
4 damps: ~90/96%


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