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


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 : last (20)

Author Topic

5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
Posted - 2009.04.14 13:02:00 - [481]
 

Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 14/04/2009 13:01:52
Originally by: Robert Caldera
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
After reading this whole thread I've been put in the mood to just delete all the ewar bonused caldari ships from the game.

If there was any real balance in the game then the called primaries wouldnt be the same old shiptypes in every single fight.


I translate: make the ships all the same finally, the way it does not matter anymore what you declare primary to get rid of all that annoying stuff called "strategy".


That thing you're calling strategy is a list of ships predeterminately written out first to last to take out in order before a fleet or it's makeup is ever seen, because the list is always the same when capital ships aren't involved.

That thing that is incredibly biased to what race you picked at the start of the game.

CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.04.14 13:33:00 - [482]
 

Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.14 13:40:00 - [483]
 

please increase them for the falcon as well.

Zamolxiss
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.14 13:48:00 - [484]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
please increase them for the falcon as well.

Dude.. not again ffs.. stop this *****ing allready, tbh the amount of whining in this thread is disgusting.. pointless whining that is..
No range boost for Falcon please, it has more than enough allready.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.14 14:40:00 - [485]
 

100km with all skills to V dude! Way too close.

Zamolxiss
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.14 15:10:00 - [486]
 

Edited by: Zamolxiss on 14/04/2009 15:11:33
Originally by: Robert Caldera
100km with all skills to V dude! Way too close.

No dude, it should be well below 100k concindering the CovOps cloak.. the >100k range should be the realm of the Rook..
Infact, this whole thread is pointless to some extent, noone ever bothered to state the Role of each ship in particular, the diferences betwin Combat and Force Recons and the reason behind them..

I belive that Combat Recon ships should be the true Ewar support, with powerfull EWAR effects at 100K ranges, and somehow effective combat abilities..

On the other hand the CovOps versions, namely the Force Recons should not have EWAR effects as powerfull as Combat Recons, and very limmited range.. they should have enough EWAR and Gank to defend themselfs from tacklers and the likes and give some EWAR support to the gangs they bring in threw the CovOps Cyno, they're best suited for reconnaissance duty and infiltration tactics given the CovOps Cloak & Cyno and the ability to bring in entire gangs of more potent combat ships, effectively 'under the radar'

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2009.04.14 15:41:00 - [487]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.


Nice one. This should ensure that it's more sensible to fit ECM on a Fleet Scorp, rather than RSD.

Although I can't help but think that maybe RSD should be the ewar to use at fleet ranges, with ECM for use at closer ranges. That would push the Scorp into the brawler role initially discussed...

Lornnar
Posted - 2009.04.14 17:24:00 - [488]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.


Give the Falcon a Optimal of 100-110 km and some 40-50 falloff, it will hit the falcon alts that fight from bookmarks (and nobody want to have them around) but, especially in bigger Fleetfights the Falcon needs those Range..its still in range of the most sniper and some other counters but at 50-60km (as now) you dead in fleetfights...you will have drone-aggro very quickly, take some lag (as common in bigger fights) and you dead bevore you can ever see what hits you.

More Range for Falcon and lower ECM Strengh Bonus....exactly other for Rook...short Range but more strengh and bigger tank.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.14 17:39:00 - [489]
 

130-140km would be fine, 100 is too much of a nerf!!
The falcon needs its range.

Zamolxiss
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.14 18:24:00 - [490]
 

Edited by: Zamolxiss on 14/04/2009 18:25:40
Originally by: Lornnar
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.


Give the Falcon a Optimal of 100-110 km and some 40-50 falloff, it will hit the falcon alts that fight from bookmarks (and nobody want to have them around) but, especially in bigger Fleetfights the Falcon needs those Range..its still in range of the most sniper and some other counters but at 50-60km (as now) you dead in fleetfights...you will have drone-aggro very quickly, take some lag (as common in bigger fights) and you dead bevore you can ever see what hits you.

More Range for Falcon and lower ECM Strengh Bonus....exactly other for Rook...short Range but more strengh and bigger tank.


What are you doing in a fleet engagement in a Flacon dude!? for that you take the Rook or the Scorp.. cause tbh, why do you need a CovOps Cloak if you want to commit to the fight!? if you want the CovOps Cloak you should sacrifice something for it, and range is the best choice..
Keep it constructive if you insist on posting.. crying for overpowered ships/bonuses isn't that tbh..

Lilith Velkor
Minmatar
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2009.04.14 19:41:00 - [491]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
130-140km would be fine, 100 is too much of a nerf!!
The falcon needs its range.


Speaking for the perma-flashy population, either make it 170km+ so we can use them as well, or make it nice and close so we can actually get rid of them easy.

Gut Punch
Shade.
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.04.14 21:05:00 - [492]
 

Edited by: Gut Punch on 14/04/2009 21:05:59
100km range is still to far. Thats still around 50 seconds for cruisers to close and BCs/BSes are even longer!

Falcons max ECM range needs to be 30-60km like every other EW ship. And I don't care about the "secondary" bonus bull - Minmatar Recons never use the TP bonus, RSDs are a waste of time and completely ineffective if you have more than one hostile on the field, and Tracking Disruptors don't work against EVERYONE like ECM.

Lets stop beating around the bush and really bring ECM in line with Webs, Disruptors, and Neuts.

Stefan F
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.14 21:07:00 - [493]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.


A much needed improvement, now the scorp will become somewhat viable as an armortanking ecm sniper. With a small armor tank in the lows and all rig slots dedicated to range you'll get 150k optimum with all skills maxed (about 120-130k with average skills) and then a nice falloff of about 80-100k. Makes you jam 1 eccm'ed BS (or 2 who decided not to fit one). Even in tanking mode it still only has half the HP of other tanked BS, so taking them out first shouldn't be too much of an issue.

If you forego your tank entirely you'll get to jam 1,25 eccm'ed BS, so indeed the SDA's are made perfectly useless now, as intended :) In its current form it's ok-ish to fly one. Not half as good as a falcon once was, but hey, costs decreased by 50% aswell.


One other, more general issue: lot of people are/where complaining about being taken out of the fight for 20 whole seconds. This will not change with the current changes. Why not make the cycle time of ecm 10s, so this will be less of an issue? The "permajammed" issues are now mostly gone aswell (with a 30% to miss if you stick 3 racial jammers on a non-eccm BS) and it would give the scorpion (ex falcon) pilots more to do in micromanaging, now the cloaking cycles aren't needed any more.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.14 21:08:00 - [494]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 14/04/2009 21:12:17
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 14/04/2009 21:08:11
Originally by: Gut Punch
Edited by: Gut Punch on 14/04/2009 21:05:59
100km range is still to far. Thats still around 50 seconds for cruisers to close and BCs/BSes are even longer!

Falcons max ECM range needs to be 30-60km like every other EW ship. And I don't care about the "secondary" bonus bull - Minmatar Recons never use the TP bonus, RSDs are a waste of time and completely ineffective if you have more than one hostile on the field, and Tracking Disruptors don't work against EVERYONE like ECM.

Lets stop beating around the bush and really bring ECM in line with Webs, Disruptors, and Neuts.


right, lets make the situation worse than it is right now.
Caldari Recon the only useful one? Naaahhhh, no good, nerf it into oblivion similarly like the useless recons other races have plsthx.

Salmeria
Tovarsky Pharmaceuticals
Posted - 2009.04.14 23:18:00 - [495]
 

How about this idea. Remove racial jammers and just make multispecs be able to use a script which changes it to a racial jamming type. You can only change a script once every 30 seconds.

No more fitting the wrong jammer anymore. Plus it would fit in with the rest of the types of ECM having to use a script.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.14 23:22:00 - [496]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:

The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.

This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.


There's been 10 pages of pretty good posts about the falcon since you last posted, and this is all we can get? Please reply to the many good ideas put forth.

Stefan F
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.15 00:54:00 - [497]
 

I think this was the most needed change. Apparantly CCP wants to see the falcon's long range go and there is no amount of whining that can change that. During that process they also killed the scorpion (that has been hit by the overall ECM module nerf already) and now partly restored their error.

For example the scorp fitting i posted with 150k range on sisi, would have 250k range on TQ at this point in time.

I do like the proposal of changing ecm into scripts though, now the long range advantage has gone maybe its time to change that aswell. Would be weird to fit a different king of web (or sensor damp) for differnt kind of ships, wouldn't it?

Lilith Velkor
Minmatar
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2009.04.15 00:59:00 - [498]
 

Originally by: Salmeria
How about this idea. Remove racial jammers and just make multispecs be able to use a script which changes it to a racial jamming type. You can only change a script once every 30 seconds.

No more fitting the wrong jammer anymore. Plus it would fit in with the rest of the types of ECM having to use a script.


Actually, just remove off-racial strength from racials. That way the range issue is solved, or if you want range you got limited jammers available.

Best part is it doesnt impact fleet warfare in any way.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.04.15 01:13:00 - [499]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 15/04/2009 04:19:17
Originally by: Gypsio III
Well, maybe I'm being thick, but I'm still not seeing the difference between a 50% to-hit module chance, and a 100% to-hit chance with halved jam strength.


Consider:

Chance to jam = max(J/S, 1) (The traditional jamming formula is J/S, but we introduce the max(J/S, 1) because you never have 110% chance to jam something - probability is on the range [0-1]. I'll treat it as a continuous piecewise function for dealing with the max.)

Falloff chance = 0.5 ** ((max(0, range-optimal)) / falloff ** 2) (This may be slightly wrong, it's from memory)

We'll call falloff chance F.

Since they are independent events, you multiply the chances together. P(x) = max(J/S, 1) * F

When J/S >= 1
P(x) = max(J/S, 1) * F
= 1 * F
= F

When J/S < 1
P(x) = max(J/S, 1) * F
= J/S * F
= JF/S

(You are correct in your assertion only if J/S < 1)

-Liang

Ed: Added some notation and that the events are independent.
Ed2: Also, someone should update the Grismar wiki with this information because it's currently incorrect. That or maybe I should sign up for a few of these wiki accounts. :|
Ed3: Explained max() in jamming chance as probability.

DiseL
Dirt Nap Squad
Posted - 2009.04.15 02:25:00 - [500]
 

Edited by: DiseL on 15/04/2009 09:04:39
Logic obviously has went out the window. Why reduce the Falcon drone bay down to 10m3 after starting out giving it 25m3? A close range brawler gets 10m3 while the long range sniper gets 25m3. Do you honestly expect 10m3 to be useful in a close range brawling ship? I started out being optimistic because it appeared you were listening but it is obvious you have no idea what exactly you want these ships to do other than die significantly more often. Nothing better than ccp nerfing a ship that was last buffed about 2 years ago because it was nerfed to much previously(cough, cough, all ecm boats). I predict that the next nerf/change will be the stealth bomber that is getting tweaked in this patch also. At least we have ambulation coming, lol!

Astal Atlar
Caldari
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.15 11:23:00 - [501]
 

Well in previous posts i said i understand the changes CCP are about to make..
But why they need to tweak it this way leave falcon 100 -150 with falloff rook down to 100 with falloff and things are still good.
People will always whine but why CCP make 1 whole race Caldari non existant in pvp despite 2 ships 3 at most, crow onyx cerberus.
Most people whine are low sec residents noob pvpers ect. What i see after changes falcons will deminish the same as rook,why i give 100mil for falcon as i can have my zealot curse sac cerberus for the same amount of money and be usefull with alpha dmg,not being primary the moment i am seen and really helpful for my fleet.

It will go the same with scorps, ravens are no to be seen in major aliances pvp and fleets in most of them ravens are forbiden in fleet,scorps are rare to be seen so they will disapear too being less efective then before.

If ccp are going to chance something let them think: why only apoc tempest mega are used in fleet sniper fleets and ect,people like to have fun they train for ships they like the race they like,but if you want to be in o.o aliance you have to fly certain ship have to train certain skills...

AZN Steve
Amarr
Posted - 2009.04.15 12:02:00 - [502]
 

so , pirates wont be able to use falcons anymore ? ... that's not really fair , is it ?

Fish Mittens
Minmatar
0utbreak
Posted - 2009.04.15 14:33:00 - [503]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
please increase them for the falcon as well.


Please Decrease the optimal for the falcon too.

Having the scorp as the long range jammer and the falcon as close range like every other recons would be perfectly balanced.

50k ecm optimal on a falcon with rigs and SDAs please.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.15 14:54:00 - [504]
 

other recons are cr*p, save the falcon

Zamolxiss
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.15 15:10:00 - [505]
 

I really like most changes that made it to the patch.. what i fail to see is why the Falcon's 25m3 drone bay was converted to a 10m3 and acording bandwidth.. give it another thought Chronotis, to some extent the 10m3 drone bay & bandwidth has absolutely no use, except maybe for taking out other small drones., 25m3 will not give it 'lol' DPS for a Recon but it will give it more options in dealing with Frigs and larger drones.. and there's still time to drop it with the new patch..
C'mon man!

Master Hu
Caldari
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
Posted - 2009.04.15 18:24:00 - [506]
 

Now it is painfully obvious that some of the dev's have never really played this game or intend to listen to logic of any type. A 10m3 drone bay on a brawler Falcon but the sniper has 25m3 drone bay? Come on, what is going on at that office? Do you really think about what is going on or just roll a set of dice and assign random items to ships?

Are you going to lower the other recon's to 10m3 of drone space?


Gromik
The Yaar Offices of Pointe Webb and Podemall
Posted - 2009.04.15 19:27:00 - [507]
 

Originally by: AZN Steve
so , pirates wont be able to use falcons anymore ? ... that's not really fair , is it ?

Please explain to me why Falcons should perform any differently than any of the other recons when the pilot has a negative sec status. Please explain to me why a Falcon should perform differently than a Blackbird when the pirate has a negative sec status.

How many Rapiers, Pilgrims, and Arazus do you see in pirate camps without remote rep support? Not many, because the pitiful excuse for a buffer tank the other recons can fit doesn't last long under sentry fire. There is nothing that prevents a Falcon from being supported under sentry fire in the same ways the other recons can be.

Interesting that the changes are going out so soon, it will be interesting to see how the smarter pilots adapt and still take advantage of the Falcon's high jam strength. I'm curious to see if we'll stop seeing gangs that are 30% falcons (10-30 man fleet).

Omara Otawan
Posted - 2009.04.15 19:58:00 - [508]
 

Originally by: Gromik

Interesting that the changes are going out so soon, it will be interesting to see how the smarter pilots adapt and still take advantage of the Falcon's high jam strength. I'm curious to see if we'll stop seeing gangs that are 30% falcons (10-30 man fleet).



My personal guess is we'll see a ton of gangs that are half falcons (supplemental dps) and the other half tacklers ruining any small gang fight for teh lulz.

Then we'll see a crapton of whinethreads on these exact forums, probably from the same people that made the old whinethreads.

Then it'll get changed again...

Htrag
The Carebear Stare
Hydroponic Zone
Posted - 2009.04.15 22:03:00 - [509]
 

While not having 'adapted' to the new changes yet, my impression is that this significant ship role overhaul was not very well thought out. The objectives were unclear from the start and the implementation is questionable.

Sol Halcon
Minmatar
Brotherhood of the Eastern Light
Posted - 2009.04.16 09:49:00 - [510]
 

Originally by: AZN Steve
so , pirates wont be able to use falcons anymore ? ... that's not really fair , is it ?


Actually my friend, in their haste to remove the evil Falcon from the average fleet, they created quite the belt prowler. Think about it, it warps cloaked, therefore can slide around undetected until it finds a victim. Then it can get within 2K decloak, jam, and kill. It's got great jam strength, will easily fit 4 racials, (or multis, your pref) can fit a large shield extender, warp scram, MWD, 3 t-2 electron blasters, 2 SDA's and a mag stab...or visa versa. Ether way, you'll most likely never get caught if you play it right. Get 2 of ya working together, and you can really rule the belts.YARRRR!!

Cheers!
~Sol



Pages: first : previous : ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 : last (20)

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