open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked ECM Ships - Looking at better defined roles
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Pian Shu
Probability Directive
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:01:00 - [901]
 

Originally by: Gut Punch

Unfortunately this is just CCP continuing down the path of making the game nothing but DPS vs Tank at point blank ranges.


This. If -- by tank -- you mean keeping a small signature radius, going fast, fitting ECM, fitting sensor dampers, fitting tracking disruptors, and enhancing your armor and shields. And, if -- by DPS -- you mean countering those protective measures with target painters, webs, ECCM, sensor boosters, tracking enhancers, guns and missiles.

There are a variety of means at your disposal, unless you're in a 0.0 alliance where everyone is ordered to fly one of two acceptable battleship configurations (remote rep or sniper), an interdictor or a Falcon. Oh noes! Now they'll have to let their members think creatively!

Research Rachel
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:08:00 - [902]
 

people only fly azuru for the web disrupter range and ccp had to introduce the web scrams because people hardly used them. Whats the point of damps when the only ships you can damp enough is ceptors?

Falcon only has ecm bonus, they don't have a secondary function like the others and given no tank, reduced jam strength, then there really is no point flying one unless you want a cyno!

Guess as mentioned already, the only useful thing left for caldari is the basilick. Sad

Yourdoom
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:16:00 - [903]
 

yes wonderfull. instead of giving eccm a boost you are f*in up the falcon.

i'll go past the fact that it was maybe one of the only awsome caldari ships out there ( 1vs1 ,same type any other race will pwn caldari)

you choose to f*** up the ship and give no reasons at all to fly it. what should have been done would be to give means to counter it ... eccm is too low. a boost would have it fixed. expecting jammer fit 1 long range ship with eccm ...there fixed it. instead just throw away a ship ( a line of ships in fact ).

If you do this plsx .... make the vagabond fly at max 1.5k/sec
make the domi only being able to fit 1 nos or 1 neut
apoc and all other snipers should only hit from 100k max.
make ishtar not able to use sentries

and why not just remove all other weapons except blasters... then all battles will be two blobs sitting in front of eachother hitting untill one is finished.

Been in null space for some time now. I only remember flacon being used in 1/3 of either gangs. but 2/3 of gangs had taranis, 2/3 of gangs had ishtar , 80% of them had a vagabond.

Problem is ecm boat's only defence is range. it'd ONLY defence. a cycle missed on a ship with enough range = death. and most figts happen @ 150 km, it's the only way to enshure you are in optimalsince enemy will not allways be a blob that will stay fixed.

But i guess to mucg wines came from ppl that are too lazy to fit eccm ... oh wait eccm kind of ****s up the tank ? oh noes ecm ships have no tank at all ....

Falcon was ok as it was. It was just too much whine about it.

now it's just another line of useless ships. hell let's just all be amarr. delete other races compleetly.

Trebor Notlimah
Lone Star EVE Group
Veni Vidi Vici Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:16:00 - [904]
 

I'm glad you pulled your head out CCP. Just two months ago:

"We don't see any problems with current ECM implementations and we have no plans to change it in the near future"


Col Callahan
Caldari
Boogie Monsters
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:33:00 - [905]
 

Fail falcon nerf is failRolling Eyes

Aoa Lux
Caldari
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.03.26 22:46:00 - [906]
 

Are covert recons snipers... or are they brawlers?
Why is the falcon a sniper while the pilgrim is a brawler?

Consistency plz.

Myra2007
Millstone Industries
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:11:00 - [907]
 

While i liked the first iteration of changes the second seems to not make any sense. For me the neither the falcon nor ecm in general need to be changed but if you have to do it - do it right.

The second iteration does not change anything for small gang combat. The falcon would still be in sniper range and its jam strength would still be considerable to say the least. Basically it only prohibits the use of falcons if you have to deal with sentries or are into fleet combat. Everyone else will just continue like now.

The problem (or the percieved one) stems from the combination of long range, best ewar and covert ops cloak. Realize how no one ever whined about a rook or scorpion?

Either reduce the strength of ecm in general, increase the effectiveness of eccm. If you really have to fiddle with range then be consistent: make people choose between higher strength or higher range. Either by introducing scripts and leaving ships/bonuses unchanged or by using your "brawler" approach: falcon looses range bonus (think 50-60km with multispec)/gets higher jam strength, a bit more hp/speed/agility/dronebay/launcher to be inline with arazus/rapiers etc. Every other recon has to deal with this too and they have less powerful ewar (even considering they have 2 kinds of it).

However your changes are only going to unbalance the use of falcons between outlaws and non-outlaws in lowsec and also screw fleet people.

Marco Ragnos
eXceed Inc.
Minor Threat.
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:13:00 - [908]
 

Edited by: Marco Ragnos on 26/03/2009 23:15:54
This is how you "Fix" the falcon.

1) operate more in falloff which means that your jam isnt always 100%, and you risk more the farther you go.

2) boost Eccm (what you dont want to fit one? sorry, tough luck, take off one of your precious sensor boosters, you killmail W h O r E)



What you guys are doing is very ...silly to say the least.

NO matter what bonus you give the falcon, its going to get smoked anywhere near 100km off targets. In 0.0 space, most entities fly sniper hacs... Zealot, muninn, cerb will own the falcon at those ranges. Id say if you have to mess up the falcon that bad, at least make it able to jam at a distance that would put it out of reach of snipe hacs. I guess in BS fleets, the falcon wont be able to do much except keep support away from your battleships...i guess we'll have to use the scorp for...oh wait...the scorp is a "brawler" too now.



While im on the topic of failed ideas...SB? TORPS? no please, just no



also while im here, fix the pilgrim, and the arazu

Johan Sabbat
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:18:00 - [909]
 

Originally by: Marco Ragnos
Edited by: Marco Ragnos on 26/03/2009 23:15:54
This is how you "Fix" the falcon.

1) operate more in falloff which means that your jam isnt always 100%, and you risk more the farther you go.

2) boost Eccm (what you dont want to fit one? sorry, tough luck, take off one of your precious sensor boosters, you killmail W h O r E)

What you guys are doing is very ...silly to say the least.

NO matter what bonus you give the falcon, its going to get smoked anywhere near 100km off targets. In 0.0 space, most entities fly sniper hacs... Zealot, muninn, cerb will own the falcon at those ranges. Id say if you have to mess up the falcon that bad, at least make it able to jam at a distance that would put it out of reach of snipe hacs. I guess in BS fleets, the falcon wont be able to do much except keep support away from your battleships...i guess we'll have to use the scorp for...oh wait...the scorp is a "brawler" too now.

While im on the topic of failed ideas...SB? TORPS? no please, just no

also while im here, fix the pilgrim, and the arazu


WTB Falcon that jams 100% in optimal.

GTC seller72
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:29:00 - [910]
 

Edited by: GTC seller72 on 26/03/2009 23:31:48
Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte



We are not playing the same game then. I play a game called Eve online in 0.0 security systems. From my experience damps and tds are not used on non-bonused ship at all, because it's a wasted midslot for a tiny benefit. You seem to be stuck somewhere 2 years ago in the past, when everybody was using dampeners until they were nerfed. They are sometimes used on recons, however they are not effective against mutliple enemies and certain ship types on the contrary to jammers. I hope I bring my point across well.



Im not talking about 2 yrs ago im talking about now, they may be used less but damps and TD's are still very effective at reducing a gangs over all dps, TP's are regular fits on phoons ect.

Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte
So what I hope for is that Falcons will have to spend more midslots on their tank, compensating for a shorter range. 2 LSE + Invul for instance or just 2 LSE like on any other shield tanked recon. there will be less jammers available and they will have to make tougher decisions in terms of tactics and piloting, which in turn will result in more pew pew for the rest of us.


For somebody who makes comments on playing eve in 0.0 systems you either think like a clueless noob or you are so wishful for this nerf you are trying to pitch a line that you hope the stupid or naive will buy...Shocked

It will mean nobody will fly a falcon in gang vs gang combat just like nobody flies the other recons in it. The differance will be that the other recons can be used solo or in 2-3 ship gank squads becasue their effects can be planned around, while the falcon with its gimped mids used for tank and its chance based effect will be worthless.

2 x lse, 1 x invul..oh do not forget the mwd...oh and maybe a slot or two for a chance based jammer....i guess its just a shame there are 4 races and jammers are racial?...

What game are you playing?...Laughing

wide
Capital Construction Research
Pioneer Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:34:00 - [911]
 

How about fixing sensor damps instead? An increase on SD optimal to match that of ECM would be a good counter to falcons.

SD's have been pactically useless for the last 2 years compared to ECM. For some reason they also receive far fewer bonus than the ECM modules. For example:
  • overheating (ECM: +20% strength, SD: not an option)
  • gang modules (ECM: 25% strength, SD: 15% strength)
  • range (ECM: 228km SD: 80km)
  • module bonus (ECM: SDA's 20%, SD: no equivalent)
  • Ship bonus (Falcon: 100% to ECM strength and range, Arazu: 25% to SD strength)

Here's an idea; keep sensor damps as they are, however add the ability to damp ECM at the same rate at which they damp scan resolution and maximum targetting range.

DNSBLACK
Gallente
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:34:00 - [912]
 

I have isues with making these changes and testing on sisi

Honestly the sisi test server is a joke for making

changes that effect the diverse pvp game of eve. What I have

enjoyed about eve the most has been the human element and our

creative abilities to effectivly create gangs and fight with

the ship platforms in the game. Honestly any leader worth a

darn who is trying to fight and win in EVE knows his best

asset are finding people who are willing to take on a role for

his fleet, Ewar, Logistics, and so on. These leaders recruit

and build fleets with this in mind. Honestly it is sad to

see ship platforms people have work hard at getting into

nerfed or adjusted. I have seen the arazu rapier, ceptors,

mrym and many more just get there ships nerfed to hell

now the falcon is up for round 2. If you are any good at

this game you have already found away to beat falcons. We

have found close to a dozen plus. Not because the DEV

balanced this, but because we are humans and we

can think and over come. EVE is not an easy game that is why

we play. To all the new people and faction warfare empire

people who just signed on please stop trying to wreck

the platforms of ships that thousands of us have trained for

all you are doing is wrecking the game for others. To the

DEVS please stop making the years of training we have put in

mean nothing. You and I both know the newer players will

never catch up so why hurt the older players by making our

training and skill points mean nothing in the end. Honestly

you will never balance this game or any other so let us enjoy

the game you have created and let the human nature be the

best tool you could ever have to create balance. We will do

just fine. Honestly havnt you icelanders learned from your

banking colapse about GOV and Foriegn involment in your way

of doing business. Well CCP you are the GOV and the newer

player are the foriegners who really dont get it yet but they

will once they have put the time in and can see it from this

side of the fence. If they never make it to this side so be

it and thank them for there 45 dollars and testing eve out

but dont listen to them and change the game we all love.

Conclusion: In the end vets know how to beat Falcons and the

DEVS know that a boost to ECCM and educating noobs about the

modual would solve this issue. I am willing to say that most

player complaining about the Falcon and ecm are newer and

dont even know ECCM an dhavnt trained to use it yet. So

the solutin is so easy ECCM learn how to use it and DEV give

it a buff please and leave all the platforms alone.

Black

Chris Fierce
Caldari
NoD Imperium
Posted - 2009.03.26 23:34:00 - [913]
 

Edited by: Chris Fierce on 26/03/2009 23:35:48
Give the Scorp the rate of fire bonus for Hybrids and maybe the launchers please. The recommended certs have hybrids so it would make sense.. no?
Also the ability to fit and use 5 heavy drones would make it a real brawler.

The first Scorpion-class battleship was launched only a couple of years ago, and those that have been built are considered to be prototypes. Little is known of its capabilities, but what has been garnered suggests that the Scorpion is crammed to the brink with sophisticated hi-tech equipment that few can match.



Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.03.27 00:02:00 - [914]
 

If we step back from the ECM redesign idea and just look at what needs to be tweaked in order to shift ECM balance in the right direction, then all we need to do are these 3 simple things:

1) reduce falcon ECM strength bonus by 5% (Rook would still be as powerful)
2) add range penalty of SDA - between 15-20%
3) increase ECCM strength by 20%

that's it. No major game changes, just surgical precision adjustments. Simple, elegant, balanced

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.03.27 00:09:00 - [915]
 

Originally by: Trebor Notlimah
I'm glad you pulled your head out CCP. Just two months ago:

"We don't see any problems with current ECM implementations and we have no plans to change it in the near future"




Because it was never a problem with ECM as it is, but with the modules in game to protect against ECM. That and the rediculous nerfs they handed out to the other forms of ECM.

Think before you cut and paste.

Retsil Evad
Caldari
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.03.27 01:08:00 - [916]
 

If the ECM range is being reduced then find a way to give the ECM boats better tanks. A tech II cruiser that lasts about as long as a frigate in a fight sucks.

How about moving the ECM modules to the high slots, so that a decent tank can be fitted.

Ellatan Deruimte
Surreal corp
Stain Empire
Posted - 2009.03.27 01:35:00 - [917]
 

Originally by: GTC seller72
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 26/03/2009 23:31:48
Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte

We are not playing the same game then. I play a game called Eve online in 0.0 security systems. From my experience damps and tds are not used on non-bonused ship at all, because it's a wasted midslot for a tiny benefit. You seem to be stuck somewhere 2 years ago in the past, when everybody was using dampeners until they were nerfed. They are sometimes used on recons, however they are not effective against mutliple enemies and certain ship types on the contrary to jammers. I hope I bring my point across well.



Im not talking about 2 yrs ago im talking about now, they may be used less but damps and TD's are still very effective at reducing a gangs over all dps, TP's are regular fits on phoons ect.


Yes, TP are sometimes used in pvp setups. I never said anything about tp. However I've never seen damps and tds used on a non profile ships, except for some TD interceptors and stealth bomber damps with poor results, they never made a difference.



Quote:
Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte
So what I hope for is that Falcons will have to spend more midslots on their tank, compensating for a shorter range. 2 LSE + Invul for instance or just 2 LSE like on any other shield tanked recon. There will be less jammers available and they will have to make tougher decisions in terms of tactics and piloting, which in turn will result in more pew pew for the rest of us.


For somebody who makes comments on playing eve in 0.0 systems you either think like a clueless noob or you are so wishful for this nerf you are trying to pitch a line that you hope the stupid or naive will buy...Shocked

It will mean nobody will fly a falcon in gang vs gang combat just like nobody flies the other recons in it. The differance will be that the other recons can be used solo or in 2-3 ship gank squads becasue their effects can be planned around, while the falcon with its gimped mids used for tank and its chance based effect will be worthless.

2 x lse, 1 x invul..oh do not forget the mwd...oh and maybe a slot or two for a chance based jammer....i guess its just a shame there are 4 races and jammers are racial?...

What game are you playing?...Laughing


Oh yes, I'm a total noob, unlike you dear anonymous alt, you are a very experienced pilot. Recons are still flown in gangs, rapiers, curses and arazu are still useful in their niche roles. However a lot of them are fitted without TD, TPs and dampeners, because of their low effectiveness. Instead they primarily use neut, web and disruptor\scrambler bonus. As for your "other recons can fly solo" comment. Rook should be able to fill that role, not falcon, he is a brawler. Also flying solo with minmatar and gallente recons is not easy and you won't be able to kill much solo, they are gang ships, just like a falcon.

Why do you always talk in absolutes? Nobody will fly a falcon! I'm quitting the game if this happens, etc. Childish. A falcon will still stay a very effective recon, but it will have to adapt and maybe change some setups to compensate for shortcomings. Just like everybody declared nano vagas and ishtars dead after the speed nerf, yet although no longer fully nano, they are still very alive and doing quite well. I'm sure that falcons will turn out the same way, because nobody will be there to fill that role.

Yes imagine that, 3 jammers and 4 races. What to do, what to do?! Maybe it will be time to start thinking and start cooperating with another falcon with 3 different jammers. Or maybe it's time to risk it and decrease your tank to fit 4 jammers. Those are the choices, the same choices that every other recon pilot has to make.

Quynn
Posted - 2009.03.27 01:49:00 - [918]
 

I am strongly against turning the Falcon into a gun boat... please keep it missiles. It doesn't need a missile bonus (though it would be nice), just keep it the way it is as far as missiles go, don't remove a missile slot. I didn't pick Caldari to shoot guns, I picked it to shoot missiles.

Solid Prefekt
Haven Front
Posted - 2009.03.27 02:33:00 - [919]
 

With the current suggested changes the Falcon will still have a 150km range, but at 50% effectiveness. So instead of jamming 4 ships you will jam 2 ships. The Falcon won't be as popular as before, but they will definitely still be used. This really puts it more in line to the pre speed nerf days where a standard Vaga went 6km/s. After the speed nerf the distance to reach the Falcon was effectively doubled. It still takes as long to reach, but they are not only half as strong (from 150km).

IMHO, I think the changes are more then fair and the Falcon will still be used more then any other Recon. I do find the second option of a close range Falcon and long range Rook to be pretty interesting, but I know the Falcon pilots hate that idea.

spinarax
Spawns of Thanatos
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2009.03.27 03:04:00 - [920]
 

Edited by: spinarax on 27/03/2009 03:14:22
to all that complain that falcon doesn't have a tank. lets compare it to the rapier

Rapier: 3 e-war mods, 2 LSE, DCU, shield rigs = 28k EHP with 60dps passive tank.

Falcon: 3 e-war mods, 2 LSE, 1 Invul, DCU, shield rigs = 36.7k EHP with 80dps passive tank.

With 2 speed mods, and MWD, the Rapier(2km/s) does goes faster then the Falcon(1.6km/s), but speed is a Minnie thing, so no biggie.

So just like the Rapier, the Falcon going to be useful as forward scout and support, not a PVP Zeus who sit cloaked at 200km and chose who dies next.

For fleet fights, u have the Rook to jam from range and since it cant cloak, it have just as much chance to die as other sniping ships.

A hybrid turret range bonus for Rook and missile ROF bonus for the Falcon seems more fitting though, and give the Rook 3-4 turrets while the Falcon 3-4 Missile hardpoints.

EDIT: just notice the stealth edit in the OP. Falcon as a ranged ship doesn't really change much from the current situation, switch it back to Rook:sniper, Falcon:brawler pls.


Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.03.27 03:48:00 - [921]
 

Edited by: Mara Rinn on 27/03/2009 03:58:24
Edited by: Mara Rinn on 27/03/2009 03:51:49
Originally by: spinarax

to all that complain that falcon doesn't have a tank. lets compare it to the rapier

Rapier: 3 e-war mods, 2 LSE, DCU, shield rigs = 28k EHP with 60dps passive tank.

Falcon: 3 e-war mods, 2 LSE, 1 Invul, DCU, shield rigs = 36.7k EHP with 80dps passive tank.



The Rapier with 3 e-war mods is 100% effective against 3 targets. The Falcon with 3 ECM mods is still not 100% effective against 1 target.

Quote:
So just like the Rapier, the Falcon going to be useful as forward scout and support, not a PVP Zeus who sit cloaked at 200km and chose who dies next.


The Falcon only decides who can't target stuff next. The Falcon's target can choose to leave the field (in order to break the Falcon's target lock), or have their snipers shoot the Falcon to force it off the field.

Quote:
EDIT: just notice the stealth edit in the OP. Falcon as a ranged ship doesn't really change much from the current situation, switch it back to Rook:sniper, Falcon:brawler pls.


Significantly reduced range on the Falcon is a nerf, regardless of your own personal feelings on the matter. In addition the change from long optimal with short falloff, to short optimal with long falloff, should severely "rebalance" (ie: nerf) Falcons from being the super-long-range ship that they are today. They'll still get primaried, it's just that these days there will be more people that can actually hit them.

Balance needs to be achieved through small changes, not by whacking the game table with a sledgehammer.

edit: I'm a little worried about the Rook in the new incarnation though - it's basically a faster, tougher Caracal. Same missile capacity & bonus, has 3 more drones, moves faster, has higher targetting range, and uses ECM on top of all that.


Solid Prefekt
Haven Front
Posted - 2009.03.27 04:32:00 - [922]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
The Rapier with 3 e-war mods is 100% effective against 3 targets. The Falcon with 3 ECM mods is still not 100% effective against 1 target.
The Rapier is 100 effective in reducing speed by 60%. A Falcon has a 98% in 100% stopping someone from targeting. If you want to be fair lets make the Falcon work 100% of the time but be only 60% effective. So you will only take 40% damage when you jam a ship. And lets drop your range to under 40km also. Now we are fair.

Or better yet, lets switch it. I will take webs that work 95% of the time from a distance of 170km and have it reduce a ships speed to ZERO. I can then web up to 4 ships to 0 speed. You then can have your ECM hit 100% of the time, at a 40km max range, and have it be only 60% effective (so the ship still does 40% dps). You want to trade? I am sure the ENTIRE Matar race would switch with you.

Research Rachel
Posted - 2009.03.27 05:54:00 - [923]
 

Originally by: Solid Prefekt
Originally by: Mara Rinn
The Rapier with 3 e-war mods is 100% effective against 3 targets. The Falcon with 3 ECM mods is still not 100% effective against 1 target.
The Rapier is 100 effective in reducing speed by 60%. A Falcon has a 98% in 100% stopping someone from targeting. If you want to be fair lets make the Falcon work 100% of the time but be only 60% effective. So you will only take 40% damage when you jam a ship. And lets drop your range to under 40km also. Now we are fair.


if your a cepter/cruiser then yes, maybe a falcon can jam you 100% of the time, but seriously... anything bigger than a cruiser, hacs, bc's, bs's, recons, even in a max skilled falcon they have a hard time jamming.

I know, i fly a maxed skilled Falcon and i know what sort of jams i get. If people fit ECCM, i'd have serious problems getting a jam.

You do realise you have to relock a target after the cycle? Wink

Parsival
Minmatar
The Avalon Foundation
The Drift.
Posted - 2009.03.27 05:57:00 - [924]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
The Rapier with 3 e-war mods is 100% effective against 3 targets. The Falcon with 3 ECM mods is still not 100% effective against 1 target.


This is wrong, 3 webs are barely effective against one target any more. In fact I would suggest not bothering and just go with a 'zu or Curse.

Oh and +1 turret and Hybrid optimal bonus for the Falcon? Nice to see confirmation that the devs don't actually fly the ships they ruin.


Warden Nightstar
Caldari
Posted - 2009.03.27 06:45:00 - [925]
 

Here is my idea instead:

Repurpose backup sensor arrays. Currently these are almost never used and pretty much useless. You also have to use the same type as your ship's sensors.

My idea is to allow you to use a different type other than your ship's sensors, effectively giving your ship an extra set of eyes. That way, if your primary sensors are jammed, your secondary (albeit weaker) sensors may not be. This will then require a second ECM module directed at your ship to effectively jam you.

Turning the Scorpion into a short-range brawler is a poor idea. You may as well not have a battleship at that point, as one of the main strengths of any battleship design is increased range. Effectively, you will be sacrificing all the range advantages that come with a battleship's weapons. Don't do this.

Lilith Velkor
Minmatar
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2009.03.27 07:23:00 - [926]
 

Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 27/03/2009 07:31:31
Quote:
if your a cepter/cruiser then yes, maybe a falcon can jam you 100% of the time, but seriously... anything bigger than a cruiser, hacs, bc's, bs's, recons, even in a max skilled falcon they have a hard time jamming.


Hate to say it, but as a seasoned BC/HAC pilot I can assure you they have no trouble jamming you almost 100% of the time.

The usual technique to kill a falcon in a vagabond is by bumping it and let your drones kill it Rolling Eyes

Kateryne
Minmatar
Kat's Discount Weapon Emporium
NISYN Inc.
Posted - 2009.03.27 07:33:00 - [927]
 

I fully endorse the ECM changes, just so long as ECCM pretty much negates a non-bonused ECM module, but has little effect against ECM bonused modules.

Perry
Amarr
The X-Trading Company
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.27 09:17:00 - [928]
 

Some comments from a 6+ years 0.0 pvper that according to newest forum intel is no real pvper:

Scorpion
-Caldari Ships are usually long range ships. The Scorpion has thus a tradition of beeing used in long range Fleet Warfare as ECM support. Taking that role away and turning it into a short range ship makes about zero sense. The more logical chang would focus the Scorps role to long Range Fleet Warfare by giving it 6 Turret Slots and an optimal range bonus to hybrids and ECM systems:

Scorpion - Fleet Warfare
- 10% Bonus in optimal range of Hybrid Turrets per level
- 20% Bonus in optimal range of ECM Jammers per level
+2 Turrets
+ Grid

Falcon
The T2 Cruisers of Caldari are all very long ranged. The Eagle has about 80% more maximum range then the Zealot or Muninn. The Cerberus reaches 250km with heavy missiles, which fly at very fast speeds. The logical conclusion is, that Caldari Recons should also have longer ranges then other recons. Thus i agree with the latest changes to make the Falcon the long range mediocre strenght ECM Sniper with optimal range bonus to ecm and hybrids. It shoud get a bit more grid though! Its very difficult to fit 200mm Rails to it right now while maintaing a decent buffer or mwd.

Rook
To step out of the Falcons Shadow, the Rook should be overall stronger then the Falcon. It needs Dps, it needs staying power. The recent changes turning it into a closer range "brawler" are fine with me, it will rival the curse now for the best solo pvp recon but adding to this it will propably be the best roaming T2 Cruiser next to Sniper Hacs, overshadowing its Combat Recon Brothers. A minor Grid boost of +25MW is needed to fit a decent set of items, though. Right now its impossible to fit 5x HML MWD and a Shield extender at the same time. This holds true for the other Recons, ofc. So i guess its balanced fitting wise ^^


maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2009.03.27 09:32:00 - [929]
 

Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte
Recons are still flown in gangs, rapiers, curses and arazu are still useful in their niche roles.


The other recons are flown solo or in small gangs of recons that gank solo or 2 - 3 targets depending on type class ect, i have never seen them flown in med sized gangs as ewar support.

I have seen and do fly a lot of my hac, BC and even BS gang ships with a damp or TD fitted because as your buddy said they can and do a lot reduce the dps of the gangs you may face.


Originally by: Ellatan Deruimte
Yes imagine that, 3 jammers and 4 races. What to do, what to do?! Maybe it will be time to start thinking and start cooperating with another falcon with 3 different jammers. Or maybe it's time to risk it and decrease your tank to fit 4 jammers. Those are the choices, the same choices that every other recon pilot has to make.


Really how many of the other recons are shield tankers and how many of their ewar effects are limited to 1 race per module, and how many of them are chance based even within optimal?...


Wave your kills around as much as you like but if you actually believe what you are saying then my bet is that you either dislike falcons so much you will say anything to support the nerf or you are on a bought account.

Rumpelstilski
Caldari
Blood Covenant
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.03.27 09:35:00 - [930]
 

TO ALL PEEPS COMPARING FALCON WITH OTHER RECONS


When falcon will have the agility, speed, drone bay, two bonused ewars and some dps to speak of + the ability to do well in different roles in solo roaming, small gangs, mid gangs and huge fleets, then we can start comparing falcon to other recons.

Until then, any comparison between falcon and rapier, pilgrim + arazu is misplaced.

All other recons are flexible pwn machines with good agility, speed, drone bays, two ewars and some dps, falcon is a highly specialized beast that can only do one thing under specific conditions and shines/overpowers in small to mid sized gangs.

Frankly, I don't think any of other races' pilots want to trade flexibility of their recons with falcon's specialization.

Basically, ccp is going in that direction. They are giving caldari recons more maneuverability, dps and tank thus reducing a bit of diversity in the recon class but making caldari recons easier to balance against other recon types.


The only thing troubling me now is all those falcon alts starting training logistics V now that there is no effective counter to logi/rr gangs other then another logi/rr gang or an overwhelming sniping alpha-strike blob


Pages: first : previous : ... 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 ... : last (38)

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