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 : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 : last (38)

Author Topic

Merdaneth
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.28 11:51:00 - [991]
 

Edited by: Merdaneth on 28/03/2009 11:54:10
ECM modules were good, not super-overpoweringly good, but better than average. People that 'play to win' started training for and using nosferatu's. Best available counter against a ECM module was another ECM module. Result: nearly everybody started training for and using ECM, one was crammed into every available midslot. Result: ECM nerfed.

Nosferatu's were good, not super-overpoweringly good, but better than average. People that 'play to win' started training for and using nosferatu's. Best available counter against a nosferatu was a nosferatu. Result: nearly everybody started training for and using nosferatu's. Result: more and more nosferatu setups. Nosferatu's nerfed.

Nano's were good, not super-overpoweringly good, but better than average. People that 'play to win' started training for and using nano's. Best available counter against a nano was a nano. Result: nearly everybody started training for and flying nano's. Result: more and more nano's. Nano's get nerfed.

Falcons are good, not super-overpoweringly good, but better than average. People that 'play to win' started training for and using Falcons. Best available counter against a Falcon was a Falcon of your own. Result: nearly everybody started training for and using Falcons. Result: more and more Falcon heavy fleets. Nerf coming? Of course.....

If a module/ship is better than average AND its best counter is a module/ship of the same flavor, it will (and must) eventually spin out of control and will be nerfed. Either accept the nerfs, or submit to ECM-online, Nano-online, Falcon-online or whatever one-dimensional EVE flavor.

Marrano Cardosa
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.03.28 11:51:00 - [992]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

...

ECM Range



Generally the ECM optimal range is a little too long with massive optimal ranges possible which would place the ECM specialised ships so far out of the fight to be almost completely safe but suffer no effective hit quality decrease. To bring them closer to the fight we are looking at swapping the base optimal and falloff ranges so at the longer ranges jammers would be operating more in falloff and hence have a lower chance of 'hitting' with their jammers at the extreme ranges.

Ship Changes



Falcon:
Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus:
12.5% Bonus to ECM Target Jammer Optimal & Falloff Range per level
10% Bonus to Medium Hybrid Optimal Range per level

Recon Ships Skill Bonus:
20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength per level
-96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level

Attribute Changes:
+1 turret hardpoint / -1 launcher hardpoint




Too much of a nerf to the optimal range. At recon IV, a falcon needs to be effective at 100km, and at recon V it needs to be effective at 150km.

Kerdrak
GreenSwarm
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.03.28 11:54:00 - [993]
 

Edited by: Kerdrak on 28/03/2009 11:55:11
There is a fact that CCP is missing here about ECM:
ECM is not fun: being disabled 20 seconds + having to lock again is not fun for anyone. You have nothing to do in that time but watching how others kill you.

When you get neuted, dampened, tracking disrupted, webbed, painted, etc... you have time and options to react against. Jammed, you are simply not playing by 20 seconds.

Jack Dant
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.28 11:57:00 - [994]
 

Originally by: Marrano Cardosa
Too much of a nerf to the optimal range. At recon IV, a falcon needs to be effective at 100km, and at recon V it needs to be effective at 150km.


I've been doing numbers, and will try to get a summary (biggest unknown being the SDA changes), but at 150km the new falcon will have 70% of the strength of the current one (given a 65km optimal and 130km falloff). By itself, it does not look like a huge nerf, really.

Marrano Cardosa
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:00:00 - [995]
 

Here is what I think will work better for a change.

Rather than swapping optimal and falloff ranges for the ECM modules, instead put both ranges at 40km. Then having the range bonus apply to both will make more sense and leave things workable. You need to shoot for having ECM be effective for pilots with Recon IV at more than 100KM, and keep pilots with Recon V from having effective ranges much beyond 200km.

What I see as the biggest remaining problem, is that during a cycle of a jammer, if it does achieve a jam, the jammed pilots have to wait till the next cycle to even start a lock attempt. This means that ships with a long lock time may never get a chance lock even when the jammer fails. Change this instead so that one can always attempt to lock, but jammer will break the lock immediately if it is achieved, rather than having the lock attempt fail immediately. That way, I can start to get a lock when still jammed, but if my lock attempt brings me into a new jammer cycle where the jammer fails, that lock atempt gets me a lock.

Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:02:00 - [996]
 

Umm... Looking at this whole "Falcon Sniper" thing, it still seems that the ranges are going to be pretty extreme. Sure it swaps falloff for optimal, so 27km base optimal. And reduces the ship range bonus from 20% to 12.5%. But what would the optimal be for a max skilled pilot with rigs? Looks about 92km. Which is still fairly invulnerable to most weapons and tackles. And that's just optimal. Falloff extends another 75km or so. Oh and hey, SDAs might boost the range up even more. Joy.

And since the ship's ECM strength bonus doesn't change (still 20%), the Falcon still jams just as well as it did before.

So basically, not a damn thing will change. Still has range. Still has same jam strength.

That's... great.

Marrano Cardosa
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:02:00 - [997]
 

Originally by: Kerdrak
Edited by: Kerdrak on 28/03/2009 11:55:11
There is a fact that CCP is missing here about ECM:
ECM is not fun: being disabled 20 seconds + having to lock again is not fun for anyone. You have nothing to do in that time but watching how others kill you.

When you get neuted, dampened, tracking disrupted, webbed, painted, etc... you have time and options to react against. Jammed, you are simply not playing by 20 seconds.


And that's why you fail against Falcons, you can win if you surrender at the very start of the fight. You have plenty of options in those 20 seconds. Just because they aren't identical to the options you have against other EWAR doesn't mean you don't have options.

Marrano Cardosa
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:05:00 - [998]
 

Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
Umm... Looking at this whole "Falcon Sniper" thing, it still seems that the ranges are going to be pretty extreme. Sure it swaps falloff for optimal, so 27km base optimal. And reduces the ship range bonus from 20% to 12.5%. But what would the optimal be for a max skilled pilot with rigs? Looks about 92km. Which is still fairly invulnerable to most weapons and tackles. And that's just optimal. Falloff extends another 75km or so. Oh and hey, SDAs might boost the range up even more. Joy.

And since the ship's ECM strength bonus doesn't change (still 20%), the Falcon still jams just as well as it did before.

So basically, not a damn thing will change. Still has range. Still has same jam strength.

That's... great.



What don't you understand about PAPERTHIN TANK? Would you be happy if someone proposed cutting your ships effective hitpoints by nearly a third? Because that is essentially what you are claiming is not enough of a nerf for the Falcon.

Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
Bloody Amarr's
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:06:00 - [999]
 

Buff also eccm:
-eccm dont prevent lock loss
- *new effect* prevents jamming timer

this way batleships wont shoot like now becouse very long relock time, and small ships will be finaly able to do any job.

Marrano Cardosa
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:08:00 - [1000]
 

Originally by: Jack Dant
Originally by: Marrano Cardosa
Too much of a nerf to the optimal range. At recon IV, a falcon needs to be effective at 100km, and at recon V it needs to be effective at 150km.


I've been doing numbers, and will try to get a summary (biggest unknown being the SDA changes), but at 150km the new falcon will have 70% of the strength of the current one (given a 65km optimal and 130km falloff). By itself, it does not look like a huge nerf, really.


But that does effectively mean that you won't be able to pilot a Falcon without Recon V. And it likely means that even then, a single Falcon will not be flyable.

Jack Dant
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:22:00 - [1001]
 

Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
Umm... Looking at this whole "Falcon Sniper" thing, it still seems that the ranges are going to be pretty extreme. Sure it swaps falloff for optimal, so 27km base optimal. And reduces the ship range bonus from 20% to 12.5%. But what would the optimal be for a max skilled pilot with rigs? Looks about 92km. Which is still fairly invulnerable to most weapons and tackles. And that's just optimal. Falloff extends another 75km or so. Oh and hey, SDAs might boost the range up even more. Joy.


27km base optimal, 40km after skills, 65km with ship bonuses. Falloff extends 131km at max skills, too. Without taking SDAs or rigs into account, the new falcon will be nearly as effective at 100km, 68% at 150, and actually better past 200km.

The killer is that, since SDAs will no longer give strength bonuses, actual falcon fits will only have about half the strength at 150. Which is fine with me, tbh.

Ellatan Deruimte
Surreal corp
Stain Empire
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:35:00 - [1002]
 

I also think, that the optimal range is too great, doesn't really change much. The range bonus needs to be tweaked slightly more, to make a falcon successfully operate in 80km range with SDAs fitted. Otherwise this patch will not lead to any significant changes in game.

Rumpelstilski
Caldari
Blood Covenant
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.03.28 12:51:00 - [1003]
 

My concern is that all small gang pvp will eventually turn into previous years alliance tournament matches look-a-likes. Ecm at 100-150km that can't cloak effectively gets blown out of the sky fast (or is useless against multi eccmed ships) and dual logistic setups on each side try to fool each other into repping the wrong target for 15 minutes.

I like flying rr bs gangs and what everyone defending them says about their fun factor is absolutely true. Every one needs to be on the ball and the feeling of looking your armor going up and down like a yoyo is awesome.

But if there is no cruiser-sized ranged counter (on average 40% ecm strength reduction currently proposed, not worth it against multi eccmed logis, rr bses and carriers) and if outsmarted / outgunned rr gangs can just disappear due to lousy aggro mechanics fitting only them really, never mind the insurance payouts, there will be little other gangs around and that is not good for my eve because I like my hacs too.

The least painful way for rr to settle that imbalance is to buff the counters, namely ecm and damps or (much better!) make rr ships more susceptible to the effects of those. The alternative is nerfing rr itself which will not make me happy and will make all of us VERY unhappy if ccp doesn't remember to nerf poses and cyno jammers too while they're at it.

Logistic setups are next in the nerfline

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.03.28 14:05:00 - [1004]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 28/03/2009 14:27:48
mhhhhh am I skilling for several moths for getting a worthless ship in near future???

I think making a ship of a cruiser class with no tank ability and which is getting primary for sure to brawlers and misses completely its role purpose.

Dont cripple falcons to death, dont nerf them into unusability like other races recons. Or is this your approach to balance things? Just nerfing them to death so nobuddy like to use them anymore.

Ships like falcon must not operate in the engage range of other bigger ships which all want to pop it.

The Falcon is one of the few caldari ships those are worth being used in PvP. You should rename the Caldari race to Caredari then, since there are almost no ships left for PvP if the Falcon gets practically removed from the battlefield.

Ankor Gamoodi
Posted - 2009.03.28 14:25:00 - [1005]
 

Heres my dilemma , I too have been spending a lot of training time toward something that is going to be rendered useless. We already have to devote a low slot to warp stabilizing so why don't we force a passive anti-ecm mid slot to counter potential jamming or would that be too easy.nerfing is not the answer a counter is but its too inconvienant for those who don't want to devote another slot to thier survivability outside shield and armor. Lets face it this nerf is for the whining gate campers who get caught w/ their pants down. And for a change leave some way for the 'care bears' to defend themselves, not all of us want to pvp all the time!

Johan Sabbat
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.03.28 14:33:00 - [1006]
 

Edited by: Johan Sabbat on 28/03/2009 14:33:25
Originally by: Ankor Gamoodi
Heres my dilemma , I too have been spending a lot of training time toward something that is going to be rendered useless. We already have to devote a low slot to warp stabilizing so why don't we force a passive anti-ecm mid slot to counter potential jamming or would that be too easy.nerfing is not the answer a counter is but its too inconvienant for those who don't want to devote another slot to thier survivability outside shield and armor. Lets face it this nerf is for the whining gate campers who get caught w/ their pants down. And for a change leave some way for the 'care bears' to defend themselves, not all of us want to pvp all the time!




You have a passive ECCM low slot item, an active ECCM mid-slot item and projected (high slot) ECCM if you want it...

It's not like there are no counters to ECM.

Ankor Gamoodi
Posted - 2009.03.28 14:41:00 - [1007]
 

Originally by: Johan Sabbat
Edited by: Johan Sabbat on 28/03/2009 14:33:25
Originally by: Ankor Gamoodi
Heres my dilemma , I too have been spending a lot of training time toward something that is going to be rendered useless. We already have to devote a low slot to warp stabilizing so why don't we force a passive anti-ecm mid slot to counter potential jamming or would that be too easy.nerfing is not the answer a counter is but its too inconvienant for those who don't want to devote another slot to thier survivability outside shield and armor. Lets face it this nerf is for the whining gate campers who get caught w/ their pants down. And for a change leave some way for the 'care bears' to defend themselves, not all of us want to pvp all the time!




You have a passive ECCM low slot item, an active ECCM mid-slot item and projected (high slot) ECCM if you want it...

It's not like there are no counters to ECM.



My point exactly, the whiners don't want to dedicate a slot or train to counter, so they squeek till they get some grease.

Destructor1792
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.03.28 15:31:00 - [1008]
 

CoolCurrently, there are 3 problems with ECM:

No.1 : Get ECM'd, out the frame for 20secs - NO other module has this effect & no-one like just sitting there twiddling their thumbs whilst getting their butts handed to em!!

No.2 : ECCM - Pretty much useless - enough posts on the forums about this so won't bother with details.

No.3 : Falcons - Their ability to sit in relative safety 200km from the fight jamming god knows who!! NO other recon has this range ability so wtf is that about!!??

To fix, a simple a solution:

ECM to be scripted. 2 Scripts, 1 for range, 1 for strength.
EXAMPLES (note here, only examples)

Script 1:
50% strength increase / 50% decrease in optimal range

Script 2:
50% optimal range increase / 50% strength decrease

ECM modules to be tweaked (or should i say nerfed!) for unscripted and go from there.

ECCM modules to be tweaked so they do what they're supposed to.

Now others are gonna use the "Yeah but the Falcon is wafer thin" argument.. Hellooo, all recons are!! It's just the others have to get in close to do their job which requires sacrificing some mids (or lows) for a small buffer tank.

Those of you who have played for many a year will probably remember how feared the Scorps were if u came across those in a fight! would be nice to see more of them on the front lines again.

And for the love of god, do one change at a time & view the results.. If it doesn't work, try something else, rinse & repeat.

**edited bit**
Maybe even change how ECM operates - instead of completely knocking out a ship for 20secs, each mod reduces the number of max locks on the locked target so:

EXAMPLE (yep, only an example)

T1 ECM: - minus 2 locks per target ship (still racial dependant)
T2 ECM: - minus 3 locks per target ship (still racial dependant)

or something like that..

Right, that's my 2 cents worth... coffee, smoke & food time Razz Flame / b*tch / Applaud / Moan away Twisted EvilLaughing



Johan Sabbat
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.03.28 15:40:00 - [1009]
 

Originally by: Destructor1792


No.2 : ECCM - Pretty much useless - enough posts on the forums about this so won't bother with details.




I totally disagree with point 2.

IF you fit the correct racial ECCM, turn it on and still get 'perma-jammed' then it means the jamming ship is devoting a large proportion of its jamming capacity against you.

This leaves your mates to go about ganking his gang.


Arakkis Melanogaster
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.03.28 15:42:00 - [1010]
 

Shortening the range of ECM some is fine, but as has been already stated here, ECM goes in the midslots, same place as the Caldari tank. This makes the Scorpion anything but a brawler. Increase the effectiveness of ECCM if you want to have a lasting impact on ewar.

Destructor1792
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.03.28 15:54:00 - [1011]
 

Edited by: Destructor1792 on 28/03/2009 16:03:45
Originally by: Johan Sabbat
Originally by: Destructor1792


No.2 : ECCM - Pretty much useless - enough posts on the forums about this so won't bother with details.




I totally disagree with point 2.

IF you fit the correct racial ECCM, turn it on and still get 'perma-jammed' then it means the jamming ship is devoting a large proportion of its jamming capacity against you.

This leaves your mates to go about ganking his gang.




And herein lies the problem.. The Mythical Perma Jam which apparently doesn't happen but we all know does. Wink
In theory, by overloading said ECCM should counter this, but doesn't! No other module ingame has this ability to stop your victim (soz, target) from fighting back once a successfull hit has been achieved.

FOF;s could be a choice but are highly unpredictable and are only good if you have launchers fitted (which rules out about 90% of PVP ships) & also have the issue of lack of range.
iir, they also go for the nearest hostile near you (which in itself can cause alot of problems Neutral )

Drones are the same & are only good if the jammer is in your drone control range & you've got them about before he gets a jam on you. Also, they've a habit of doing their own stuff which can cause you even more problems Laughing

This leads to one of 2 conclusions, either ECCM is underpowered or ECM is overpowered!!

**edited bit**

Arakkis, this is a problem all ships have when dealing with EWAR ship bonuses that rely heavily on mid slot fits. Take the rapier for example, It has to sacrifice a few mids to fit a few buffers for the shield. Could go armour, but have u seen its stats??!! Laughing

If people choose to fit all mid slots for Ewar instead of sacrificing the odd slot, that's down to their own choice. Not much we can do about that ugh

Johan Sabbat
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.03.28 16:26:00 - [1012]
 

Originally by: Destructor1792
Edited by: Destructor1792 on 28/03/2009 16:03:45
Originally by: Johan Sabbat
Originally by: Destructor1792


No.2 : ECCM - Pretty much useless - enough posts on the forums about this so won't bother with details.




I totally disagree with point 2.

IF you fit the correct racial ECCM, turn it on and still get 'perma-jammed' then it means the jamming ship is devoting a large proportion of its jamming capacity against you.

This leaves your mates to go about ganking his gang.




And herein lies the problem.. The Mythical Perma Jam which apparently doesn't happen but we all know does. Wink
In theory, by overloading said ECCM should counter this, but doesn't! No other module ingame has this ability to stop your victim (soz, target) from fighting back once a successfull hit has been achieved.

FOF;s could be a choice but are highly unpredictable and are only good if you have launchers fitted (which rules out about 90% of PVP ships) & also have the issue of lack of range.
iir, they also go for the nearest hostile near you (which in itself can cause alot of problems Neutral )

Drones are the same & are only good if the jammer is in your drone control range & you've got them about before he gets a jam on you. Also, they've a habit of doing their own stuff which can cause you even more problems Laughing

This leads to one of 2 conclusions, either ECCM is underpowered or ECM is overpowered!!

**edited bit**

Arakkis, this is a problem all ships have when dealing with EWAR ship bonuses that rely heavily on mid slot fits. Take the rapier for example, It has to sacrifice a few mids to fit a few buffers for the shield. Could go armour, but have u seen its stats??!! Laughing

If people choose to fit all mid slots for Ewar instead of sacrificing the odd slot, that's down to their own choice. Not much we can do about that ugh


I think you miss my point, if you soak up all the jammers with your overheated ECCM the your frieds are free to gank - at which point the other gang would have been better off fielding another gank ship.

As an aside, how many overheated active hardners do you think should be needed to give you a 100% damage type resist?

Childstar
Minmatar
Republic University
Posted - 2009.03.28 16:36:00 - [1013]
 

Originally by: Destructor1792
CoolCurrently, there are 3 problems with ECM:

No.1 : Get ECM'd, out the frame for 20secs - NO other module has this effect & no-one like just sitting there twiddling their thumbs whilst getting their butts handed to em!!


Then do not just sit their, its a jammer not a webber, point, nuet...ect ect.

Originally by: Destructor1792
No.2 : ECCM - Pretty much useless - enough posts on the forums about this so won't bother with details.


ECCM works fine, that has been PROVEN many times with usage and math.

Originally by: Destructor1792
No.3 : Falcons - Their ability to sit in relative safety 200km from the fight jamming god knows who!! NO other recon has this range ability so wtf is that about!!??


The other recons are not used in gang combat because of the range they operate at, that means they need a boost in range not that the falcon needs a nerf to make it usless as well.


Originally by: Destructor1792

Maybe even change how ECM operates - instead of completely knocking out a ship for 20secs, each mod reduces the number of max locks on the locked target so:


So make it useless in other words?, most of the time you jam ships because of the effect they may have like a webber or dmg dealer ect ect. So the effect would be worthless as long as the effected ships could lock a single target.





Childstar
Minmatar
Republic University
Posted - 2009.03.28 16:46:00 - [1014]
 

Originally by: Destructor1792


And herein lies the problem.. The Mythical Perma Jam which apparently doesn't happen but we all know does. Wink
In theory, by overloading said ECCM should counter this, but doesn't! No other module ingame has this ability to stop your victim (soz, target) from fighting back once a successfull hit has been achieved.


It depends on the ship you are in as well as how many racial and non racial jammers the falcon has on you.



Originally by: Destructor1792
Drones are the same & are only good if the jammer is in your drone control range & you've got them about before he gets a jam on you. Also, they've a habit of doing their own stuff which can cause you even more problems Laughing


Drones may not reach the falcon but they will continue to attack a target they are assigned to and they will auto aggro other ships that are within range.

Originally by: Destructor1792
Arakkis, this is a problem all ships have when dealing with EWAR ship bonuses that rely heavily on mid slot fits. Take the rapier for example, It has to sacrifice a few mids to fit a few buffers for the shield. Could go armour, but have u seen its stats??!! Laughing


The webs and TP on the rapier are not racial nor are they chance based that is why the rapier is a effective solo and 2-3 man gank squad ship and why the falcon sucks at it.

Ilija Veliki
Posted - 2009.03.28 17:04:00 - [1015]
 

After 2 F****** years of training caldari ships I have only one PVP ship and that is Falcon. Caldari is greatly nerfed with Scorpion and now you will nerf scorpion too??? soon they will no be caldari ships in pvp.

Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
Posted - 2009.03.28 17:20:00 - [1016]
 

Originally by: Marrano Cardosa
What don't you understand about PAPERTHIN TANK? Would you be happy if someone proposed cutting your ships effective hitpoints by nearly a third? Because that is essentially what you are claiming is not enough of a nerf for the Falcon.
Lrn2read... Idiot.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis

Signal Distortion Amplifiers



The SDAs are something of a conundrum. They are really only worth fitting on the ECM specialised ships and are the only EWAR enhancing module we have besides the rigs. Currently they increase your ECM strength and we were looking at swapping this to an ECM range bonus and altering either the base strength of the jammers or the ECM strength bonus of the ships so they become less required in every setup and the low slots could be used for tanking for example.

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Caldari
Medhacks
Posted - 2009.03.28 17:55:00 - [1017]
 

Edited by: Kassasis Dakkstromri on 28/03/2009 18:08:55
The fact that CCP is considering a modification to ECM and ECM ships indicates there is an issue that has been noticed... point conceded.

ECM is always primary... so without serious revision and consideration in light of this 'fact', changes similar to what have been floated would eliminate the range ECM ships need to ensure survivability --- and while ECM is the tank of such ships, there is no ECM boat that can Jam a gang to avoid being focus fired into his pod... (not even making changes to allow for a tank - because there is no such thing as an individual ship tank in a Fleet battle)

Such a dramatic change to ECM after all this time and the long time familiarty with how to run these ships, necessitates an imperative re-evaluation of bringing back a "VIABLE" ECM Burst module that can act as a 'last ditch' (but not I win button) attempt to break locks and cloak up inorder to regroup and fight another day...
If my knowledge of EVE history is accurate - the ECM Burst Scorp from days past caused the nerf of the Burst, as we know it now, to nothing better than a "Junk Module" now best for the Market Buy Orders of Market Traders.

I would caution CCP not to make such 'wonderful' changes so readily - you have a working system... and In my opinion any perceived problems solution lies is in the Cloak mechanic --- as crazy as it may sound... if traditional 'Cloakable' ships were allowed to cloak up during the window between initial targeting lock, and a confirmed lock (when you can fire); but unable to cloak if under fire, then you could make these changes because the nature of such ships would be preserved regardless of range --- In short - any changes need to be done in a way that preserves the 'viability' of these ships, as they are primaried in all non-solo engagements.

CCP must take into consideration how these ships are flown and what tactics players on Tranquility are using before adjusting things only 'by the numbers'... And whatever you come up with in the end I hope that it still allows the ship to be flown as a viable option (i.e. How many pilots actually fly ECM Scorpions [besides just a proud few :P])

------------------------------------------------

*Edited --- Added thought:

New Charge: F.o.F Missile that only Seeks ECM Signal Disruptions
New Charge: Laser Dispertion Crystal(AoE)/Flak Round(AoE)/Timed Detonation Hybrid Charge(AoE): Turret versions of an FoF that seeks out ECM by allowing the pilot to fire a weakened AoE type round in the direction of the ECM jammer with/without a random hit alogorithm)

hyesp24
Posted - 2009.03.28 18:28:00 - [1018]
 

give the rook and falcon drone space. Give rook missile damage and velocity bonus and leave things as they are. Stop nerfing caldari damnit. I consider ecm to be my tank whenever i fly one but i do admit those ships are paper thin.

Lijhal
Posted - 2009.03.28 19:53:00 - [1019]
 

seriously, there are some good feedback here ... but of course a lot of sh*** talk and mimimi

fact is, ecm is and will stay a valid form of electronic warfare .. caldari are the "long range" race ... yes, a falcon can cloak .... but most of you here forget, that the falcon is the only ew ship, which needs to fit 4! racial ew modules to be effective instead one td or one webber against all other ships ....

deal with it ... i for one dont understand some people telling here on the boards, they cant fight falcons without falcons .... you fail all the day long ... really ... iam so sorry for you

to be ontopic:
remove racial jammers, buff multi's and stay the old falcon/rook/kitsune bonuses ... end of game

True Ace
Gallente
Fat Bastards
MACHI MISCHIEF
Posted - 2009.03.28 20:56:00 - [1020]
 

Originally by: Lijhal
seriously, there are some good feedback here ... but of course a lot of sh*** talk and mimimi

fact is, ecm is and will stay a valid form of electronic warfare .. caldari are the "long range" race ... yes, a falcon can cloak .... but most of you here forget, that the falcon is the only ew ship, which needs to fit 4! racial ew modules to be effective instead one td or one webber against all other ships ....

deal with it ... i for one dont understand some people telling here on the boards, they cant fight falcons without falcons .... you fail all the day long ... really ... iam so sorry for you

to be ontopic:
remove racial jammers, buff multi's and stay the old falcon/rook/kitsune bonuses ... end of game



falcon doesnt need 4 racials btw.

why is the falcon the only cloak recon with a range bonus. lose its range bonus and give it to the rook. that way u have a reason to use the other recon.


Pages: first : previous : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 : 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