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

Lijhal
Posted - 2009.04.16 10:40:00 - [511]
 

hello ccp,

give the rook & falcon the same amount of drone bandwith/cargo like the others recons

10m3 drone cargo on a "close-brawler" recon is just laughable!

thanks

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.04.16 12:11:00 - [512]
 

Originally by: Sol Halcon
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




wow falcon is literally a gank monster with its 2 HM/HAM launcher + 2 unbonused medium rails doing approx. 130 DPS in total.

Sol Halcon
Minmatar
Brotherhood of the Eastern Light
Posted - 2009.04.16 14:35:00 - [513]
 

Edited by: Sol Halcon on 16/04/2009 14:35:58
Originally by: Robert Caldera
Originally by: Sol Halcon
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




wow falcon is literally a gank monster with its 2 HM/HAM launcher + 2 unbonused medium rails doing approx. 130 DPS in total.


Just so ya know Robert, they gave it 3 gun slots took back the extra missile, (down to 1 now) and gave a 5% per level damage bonus on the guns. So, 3 t-2 Electron blasters loaded with Void will tend to give anyone a bad day. And, if said pilot has bitten off more than he can chew, jam, cloak, and warp. Two of you out there, and just about any target is in trouble.

mmmkay? Wink

~Sol

Gaogan
Gallente
Solar Storm
Sev3rance
Posted - 2009.04.16 16:45:00 - [514]
 

Someone explain to me why the falcon, rook, and widow needed a whopping 25% increase to their jam str.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.16 17:14:00 - [515]
 

Originally by: Gaogan
Someone explain to me why the falcon, rook, and widow needed a whopping 25% increase to their jam str.



Brcause the 20% str boost per SDA module is being removed.

Gaogan
Gallente
Solar Storm
Sev3rance
Posted - 2009.04.16 18:02:00 - [516]
 

Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Gaogan
Someone explain to me why the falcon, rook, and widow needed a whopping 25% increase to their jam str.



Brcause the 20% str boost per SDA module is being removed.


It is? I took the patch note to mean they were reducing it some ( maybe to 10 or 15% ) and adding a range bonus.

Zeo 68
Posted - 2009.04.16 18:22:00 - [517]
 

Well, lets have a look the falcon is now very vulnerable to drones and dictors. I can understand the major hit to the range but you then give the falcon a 10m3 drone bay for its defense, I am sorry but thats laughable.

Emphasisng the 30% bonus to jam strength is a poor way to make us think we are getting a boost, the jam strength is on a parr to what it was prior to the patch with mods factored in.

I propose either:
1: Remove the shield hp penalty for the jam rigs
2: Give the falcon a 20m3 drone bay so it can put up a fight (remove turret slot)
3: Give the falcon better fittings to utalise the extra turret slot
4: Give the falcon an extra 10-15km jam range so it wont be as likely to get drone swarmed.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.16 20:54:00 - [518]
 

This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. I have already been in a fight where a falcon perma-jammed 2 other recons and a hac for about 3-4 minutes, even with one recon being at 80k.

So yeah, mad props CCP, this TOTALLY fixed the falcon/ecm issue.

It won't be more than a week before we see roaming gangs of 5 falcons, able to jam anything on earth and able to jam / cloak / run away whenever they feel like it.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2009.04.16 21:15:00 - [519]
 

Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare.


Not really, but it still works in very small gangs.
The nerf just eliminated them for fleet fights and larger gangs were they always worked fine.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.16 21:39:00 - [520]
 

Edited by: isdisco3 on 16/04/2009 21:39:24
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare.


Not really, but it still works in very small gangs.
The nerf just eliminated them for fleet fights and larger gangs were they always worked fine.


Incorrect. It is a major, major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. They're able to be in close, able to jam 2-3 ships minimum with little difficulty (because of the absurd 30% jam strength per level bonus), and can throw dps on them at the same time.

As I said along, this 'nerf' is completely insufficient. The falcon is going to be even more dominating in a small (say, less than 5 per side) engagements. It's still fully capable of completely neutralizing multiple enemies of the same shipclass, something no other ship can do, with little to no drawback because it can jam its tacklers and GTFO whenever it wants.

It's a terrible change, and whats worse is that now that it's implemented, people will be resistant to more useful changes because "the falcon's already been nerfed."

Yeah, some focus on small-gang pvp.

KissedByDeath
Posted - 2009.04.16 21:47:00 - [521]
 

So SDA strength has been decreased from 20% to 10% but no ECM strength bonuses added to BlackBird? Oh i know everyone's trying to save the falcon but BB in small gangs work pretty well. Please don't make it into another useless caldari ship and give it better ecm strength bonuses.

And lastly stop making a joke of caldari and give the falcon 25m3 minimum drone space it deserves. all other faction have 40+ m3 drone space

ezraniel
Caldari
0ccam's Razor
The Volition Cult
Posted - 2009.04.17 08:40:00 - [522]
 

Originally by: isdisco3

Incorrect. It is a major, major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. They're able to be in close, able to jam 2-3 ships minimum with little difficulty (because of the absurd 30% jam strength per level bonus), and can throw dps on them at the same time.

Incorrect, the Signal Distortion Amps where adjusted to give range ASWELL as strength so the falcon got a bigger buff to strength to compensate, the strength is the same as pre nerf.

Originally by: isdisco3

As I said along, this 'nerf' is completely insufficient. The falcon is going to be even more dominating in a small (say, less than 5 per side) engagements. It's still fully capable of completely neutralizing multiple enemies of the same shipclass, something no other ship can do, with little to no drawback because it can jam its tacklers and GTFO whenever it wants.

Drawback is that you are limited in slots and now that you need to be in close range you need to fit a decent buffer tank, something which'll cost you 2 slots probably if you want anything decent worth a buffer. So you can't do as you say since your jams are restricted and if your out of racial for that type, your out of luck most likely.


Originally by: isdisco3

It's a terrible change, and whats worse is that now that it's implemented, people will be resistant to more useful changes because "the falcon's already been nerfed."


It is a terrible change, but not because of what you think.

What CCP should've done is made the falcon "top off" at 100 km optimal with a falloff of 30-40. (keep strength as it was) that way the falcons used by pirates would not be viable no more (200km+ Falcons), the 'normal' falcons would be pretty untouched and still be fair, since what is 100 km to cross for a ceptor anyways? its actually only 80 km because of the 20km point, so at the slowest speed I can think of 4km/s it'll take you 20 seconds, and thats not even 1 jam cycle as the falcon tends to have to wait a few secs to lock after decloaking (lag I guess) so a "on-the-ball" ceptor will be able to tackle it, probably long enough for the likes of a vaga to close in and blast it.

Xira Xarien
Caldari
Sith Squirrels
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:01:00 - [523]
 

Ship: Falcon
Rigs: 2 ECM optimal range enhancer
Low: 3 Signal Distortion Amplifiers
Skills: ECM related to level 4

Optimal range before patch: 212 km
Optimal range after patch: 69 km

The role of the Falcon is to ECM ships.
So the buff / bonus now is to give it Medium Hybrid Guns and Drones?

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:09:00 - [524]
 

Originally by: ezraniel

Incorrect, the Signal Distortion Amps where adjusted to give range ASWELL as strength so the falcon got a bigger buff to strength to compensate, the strength is the same as pre nerf.


And since the falcon was overpowered pre-nerf (not just due to range, but also due to its overwhelming ability to completely shut down opponents), its still overpowered.

Originally by: ezraniel

Drawback is that you are limited in slots and now that you need to be in close range you need to fit a decent buffer tank, something which'll cost you 2 slots probably if you want anything decent worth a buffer. So you can't do as you say since your jams are restricted and if your out of racial for that type, your out of luck most likely.


Doesn't matter in small-gang situations, because the falcon can still easily perma-jam 2-3 ships. The only solution to a falcon is to bring so many ships that it can't jam them all, or fit a dedicated module to every ship you fly solely to counter 1 over-powered recon. This 'nerf' does nothing to solve the problem.

Originally by: ezraniel

What CCP should've done is made the falcon "top off" at 100 km optimal with a falloff of 30-40. (keep strength as it was) that way the falcons used by pirates would not be viable no more (200km+ Falcons), the 'normal' falcons would be pretty untouched and still be fair, since what is 100 km to cross for a ceptor anyways? its actually only 80 km because of the 20km point, so at the slowest speed I can think of 4km/s it'll take you 20 seconds, and thats not even 1 jam cycle as the falcon tends to have to wait a few secs to lock after decloaking (lag I guess) so a "on-the-ball" ceptor will be able to tackle it, probably long enough for the likes of a vaga to close in and blast it.



I disagree completely, but this is all beside the point.

Falcons are still overpowered in many situations. The only counter to them CONTINUES to be either bringing more ships (so that the falcon can't jam them all) or fitting a dedicated ECCM module, which may or may not work in the first place.

People cannot sit here and actually tell me that a falcon should be able to perma-jam 2 recons and a hac for 4 minutes, and that doing so is somehow balanced gameplay.

Xira Xarien
Caldari
Sith Squirrels
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:13:00 - [525]
 

People cannot sit here and actually tell me that a pilgrim should be able to perma-neutralize 2 recons and a hac for 4 minutes, and that doing so is somehow balanced gameplay.

--------

People cannot sit here and actually tell me that an Arazu should be able to perma-sensor damp 2 recons and a hac for 4 minutes, and that doing so is somehow balanced gameplay.

--------

People cannot sit here and actually tell me that a bellicose should be able to perma-target-paint 2 recons and a hac for 4 minutes, and that doing so is somehow balanced gameplay.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:43:00 - [526]
 

Originally by: Xira Xarien
dumb examples


None of these completely eliminate the opponent's dps and remove them entirely from the fight. Your comparisons are patently bad.

lecrotta
Minmatar
lecrotta Corp
Posted - 2009.04.17 18:15:00 - [527]
 

Originally by: isdisco3
Originally by: Xira Xarien
dumb examples


stupid answer


Some of them actually do and they are also 100% gaurenteed to have their effects within their optimal.

Gromik
The Yaar Offices of Pointe Webb and Podemall
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:52:00 - [528]
 

Originally by: lecrotta
Some of them actually do and they are also 100% gaurenteed to have their effects within their optimal.


Incorrect. Here's why:
A Pilgrim can eventually cap out 3 ships, albeit slowly (one medium neut with max skills and LG talismans is about -40cap/sec. This can be counteracted with a cap booster. Cycle time means that there is at least 5 seconds of cap recharge to activate modules even without a cap booster. Cycle time also allows for a cap booster to provide bursts of capacitor. Even while neuted, the pilot can target, direct drones to attack specific targets, and fire capless weapons at the Pilgrim. Those 3 things cannot be done at all while jammed. Tracking disruptors can be highly effective at certain ranges vs turret ships, but do nothing against drones or missile ships.

An Arazu can reduce a ship to about 20% of its targeting range with damps. The target ship can still target anything below that range, direct drones to specific targets, fire any and all weapons at targets within that range, remote repping gang mates, etc. Those cannot be done while jammed. Maneuvering is still possible vs. and Arazu (though at under 20km MWD-ing may be an issue), whereas maneuvering does nothing for you while jammed.

A Rapier painting a target makes it effectively take more incoming damage, but does nothing to prevent that target from targeting anyone, firing any and all weapons, directing drones, remote repping gangmates, etc. Those things cannot be done while jammed. ECM is a much larger force multiplier than painting, webbing, neuting, and to a lesser extent, tracking disrupting.

Effects may be 100% guaranteed to occur, but the effect is not 100% guaranteed to remove the target from the fight for the duration of the effect. Not even close.

lecrotta
Minmatar
lecrotta Corp
Posted - 2009.04.17 20:19:00 - [529]
 

Originally by: Gromik
Originally by: lecrotta
Some of them actually do and they are also 100% gaurenteed to have their effects within their optimal.


Incorrect. Here's why:
A Pilgrim can eventually cap out 3 ships, albeit slowly (one medium neut with max skills and LG talismans is about -40cap/sec. This can be counteracted with a cap booster. Cycle time means that there is at least 5 seconds of cap recharge to activate modules even without a cap booster. Cycle time also allows for a cap booster to provide bursts of capacitor. Even while neuted, the pilot can target, direct drones to attack specific targets, and fire capless weapons at the Pilgrim. Those 3 things cannot be done at all while jammed. Tracking disruptors can be highly effective at certain ranges vs turret ships, but do nothing against drones or missile ships.

An Arazu can reduce a ship to about 20% of its targeting range with damps. The target ship can still target anything below that range, direct drones to specific targets, fire any and all weapons at targets within that range, remote repping gang mates, etc. Those cannot be done while jammed. Maneuvering is still possible vs. and Arazu (though at under 20km MWD-ing may be an issue), whereas maneuvering does nothing for you while jammed.

A Rapier painting a target makes it effectively take more incoming damage, but does nothing to prevent that target from targeting anyone, firing any and all weapons, directing drones, remote repping gangmates, etc. Those things cannot be done while jammed. ECM is a much larger force multiplier than painting, webbing, neuting, and to a lesser extent, tracking disrupting.

Effects may be 100% guaranteed to occur, but the effect is not 100% guaranteed to remove the target from the fight for the duration of the effect. Not even close.


We are all well aware of the effects and limitations of all the varios ewar systems including ECM, this does not change the fact that the other recons should have a range and effect buff to certain systems instead of the falcon ect getting a range nerf.

Along with giving ECCM a secondary useful effect.

Sekundar Burnes
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.04.17 21:32:00 - [530]
 

Once again I'd like to say that the biggest issue of ECM is it's binary nature. You are either jammed for 20 seconds, or you aren't.

Some jams should be for 5 seconds, some for 30, depending on signal strength and luck. This would make an ECCM mod almost always useful and would bring ECM in line with other weapons systems.

KaiH
Club Bear
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:42:00 - [531]
 

Edited by: KaiH on 18/04/2009 01:42:23
Originally by: Cletus Graeme
Edited by: Cletus Graeme on 10/04/2009 18:10:03

Originally by: Omara Otawan
As it stands, the current strength of a single racial on TQ is enough to permanently jam any HAC without ECCM fitted (even a blackbird does that pretty well actually).


This is a misrepresentation of the facts.

HACs have the following sensor strengths:
Cerb (16), Eagle (18),
Ishtar (16), Deimos (15),
Zealot (13) Sac (15),
Vaga(14) , Muninn (13)


The maximum possible jam strength of a racial ECM fitted on a Falcon/Rook with 3 SDAs, T2 jam strength rigs and used by a pilot with maxed ECM skills is approx 15. So only a max skilled ECM pilot can permajam a HAC.

Also Recons, BC and BS all have higher sensor strengths than HACs so they're less likely to be permajammed.

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

Why am I bothering with all this? Let me first say that I think the current proposed changes are well thought out and look promising. However, as many people have already mentioned they don't address the main issue with ECM.

I don't think that ECM jam strength is the problem. I also don't agree with CCP that ECM jam range is the problem.

The problem is that jammers can be stacked onto the same target without penalty.

Allow me to explain.

When using ECM you must make a choice.

You can either

(1) spread your jammers over several targets and try to jam them each for only a few cycles

or

(2) concentrate them on one or two targets in the hope of permajamming them

ECM is fine in long range fleet fights.

Tactic (1) is more commonly used in fleet fights because there are large numbers on both sides so targets die fast and ECM ships are quickly primaried so you rarely get a chance to permajam anyone.

Indeed, even if (2) succeeds it still doesn't imbalance the fight since you've used your ship to take out another ship (or at most two). While this is annoying for the pilots whom you've permajammed it can be considered a fair trade as they still have the option to warp out and if/when they return your attention will hopefully be elsewhere.

ECM is overpowered in close range small gang fights

In such fights pilots can still choose between either (1) or (2), but usually opt for (2).

This is because each ship in a small gang is vital to the success of the fight. so being able to disable one or two of them for the duration of the engagement gives one side a huge advantage. Additionally, these fights usually occur at close range so the jammed targets may also be tackled and thus unable to warp out.

The Falcon compounds the above imbalance because it can also (A) jam from far away (B) cloak.

(A) means that in a close range fight it remains safely at distance, effectively untouchable. (B) means that it can choose if/when to join the fight while remaining completely invulnerable until it does so.

ECM as a whole isn't broken and neither are most of the ECM ships. However, certain ships such as the Falcon become overpowered in certain pvp situations. Any changes should aim to re-balance them in these special circumstances without nerfing their abilities overall.

The crux of the problem is that it's currently worth using mulitiple jammers (see above) to attempt to permajam a target.

However, if jammers were stacking penalised then it would only be worth placing one or two (or at most 3) on a single target and permajamming would decrease significantly. The addition of a stacking penalty wouldn't affect tactic (1) above. It only affects (2) which is the cause of the current ECM problems.







This, this is how you post

This is a fantastic idea, and I support it fully. Small gang pvp is suffering quite severely right now, and solo is on the edge of extinction. Something like this might just even things out abit.

DiseL
Dirt Nap Squad
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:46:00 - [532]
 

Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. I have already been in a fight where a falcon perma-jammed 2 other recons and a hac for about 3-4 minutes, even with one recon being at 80k.

So yeah, mad props CCP, this TOTALLY fixed the falcon/ecm issue.

It won't be more than a week before we see roaming gangs of 5 falcons, able to jam anything on earth and able to jam / cloak / run away whenever they feel like it.


This is just hilarious. So the ship has the exact same jam strength as before but optimal was reduced around 65%. So you come in here with your high tech testing session where 3 ships were perma jammed in one whole engagement and proclaim it was a buff! You should be the CCP official tester because no one tests as thorough as you.

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.04.18 05:12:00 - [533]
 

Originally by: DiseL
Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. I have already been in a fight where a falcon perma-jammed 2 other recons and a hac for about 3-4 minutes, even with one recon being at 80k.

So yeah, mad props CCP, this TOTALLY fixed the falcon/ecm issue.

It won't be more than a week before we see roaming gangs of 5 falcons, able to jam anything on earth and able to jam / cloak / run away whenever they feel like it.


This is just hilarious. So the ship has the exact same jam strength as before but optimal was reduced around 65%. So you come in here with your high tech testing session where 3 ships were perma jammed in one whole engagement and proclaim it was a buff! You should be the CCP official tester because no one tests as thorough as you.


The overall problem with ECM wasn't the range. It was the strength of the ECM and the complete uselessness of the module specifically designed to protect against jamming.

The only thing this change does is oust Falcons as fleet EWAR and completely neutered the Scorpion.

xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.18 11:15:00 - [534]
 

This game is ****ing horrible.

KaiH
Club Bear
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2009.04.18 19:51:00 - [535]
 

Originally by: DiseL
Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. I have already been in a fight where a falcon perma-jammed 2 other recons and a hac for about 3-4 minutes, even with one recon being at 80k.

So yeah, mad props CCP, this TOTALLY fixed the falcon/ecm issue.

It won't be more than a week before we see roaming gangs of 5 falcons, able to jam anything on earth and able to jam / cloak / run away whenever they feel like it.


This is just hilarious. So the ship has the exact same jam strength as before but optimal was reduced around 65%. So you come in here with your high tech testing session where 3 ships were perma jammed in one whole engagement and proclaim it was a buff! You should be the CCP official tester because no one tests as thorough as you.


You dont seem very bright so I'll spell it out for you. He's saying that the changes seem to be yet another nail in the coffin for small gang warfare. (Which would be in line with my own experiences post patch, after 4 different engagements)

If you have more than cheap sarcasm to offer, such as an actual counter-argument, im sure most people here are all ears - but if not, maybe it would be best if you stopped posting. Completely.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.18 20:00:00 - [536]
 

Originally by: KaiH
Originally by: DiseL
Originally by: isdisco3
This 'nerf' is a major boost for falcons in small-gang warfare. I have already been in a fight where a falcon perma-jammed 2 other recons and a hac for about 3-4 minutes, even with one recon being at 80k.

So yeah, mad props CCP, this TOTALLY fixed the falcon/ecm issue.

It won't be more than a week before we see roaming gangs of 5 falcons, able to jam anything on earth and able to jam / cloak / run away whenever they feel like it.


This is just hilarious. So the ship has the exact same jam strength as before but optimal was reduced around 65%. So you come in here with your high tech testing session where 3 ships were perma jammed in one whole engagement and proclaim it was a buff! You should be the CCP official tester because no one tests as thorough as you.


You dont seem very bright so I'll spell it out for you. He's saying that the changes seem to be yet another nail in the coffin for small gang warfare. (Which would be in line with my own experiences post patch, after 4 different engagements)

If you have more than cheap sarcasm to offer, such as an actual counter-argument, im sure most people here are all ears - but if not, maybe it would be best if you stopped posting. Completely.


I suppose it could be considered another nail in the coffin for small gangs that insist on not bringing ANY ewar at all along with them and then cry when others do and beat them....

At the optimal range that falcons now have they are vulnerable to damps and most med range weapon systems.

PS: I think the fella making claims about "perma jamming" is exhagerating the amount of time and the consecutive jams.........As per usual..WinkRolling Eyes

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.18 20:20:00 - [537]
 

Edited by: isdisco3 on 18/04/2009 20:22:30
My point is that this 'nerf' does nothing to change the actual problem with falcons, which is their ability to completely eliminate ships from the fight with little to no danger. In a small-gang situation (3 v 3, for example), a falcon can permajam 2 ships with little to no problem. That's 66% of the opponent's squad that is now relegated to being nothing but damage takers.

The only solution to falcons that works in a small-gang situation is to bring more ships than it can jam, or hope to god you can jam it yourself before it jams you.

Now, you can say 'fit ECCM', but fact is that even with ECCM the odds are quite high that you'll still get jammed. Furthermore, its a bit ridiculous that every ship in the game should be expected to fit one module simply to counter-act the overpowering abilities of one specific ship (the falcon).

In a small-gang situation, all this 'nerf' did was give the falcon dps. Nothing changed with regards to its overpowering capabilities as it completely shuts down entire gangs. In a fleet engagement, this change helps because falcons are now in a more targetable range; but CCP has stated that one of its main goals is to encourage small-gang pvp, and this does absolutely nothing to help that. Furthermore, because this 'nerf' happened, people are going to be against changing the falcon again.

Also, I like how CCP has completely disappeared from this thread in the past 12 pages. They put up a thread, said "what do you think?", ignored pretty much all suggestions, and did what they wanted to do anyway. But they did change the scorp some. So I guess that's something.

</bitter>

Quote:
At the optimal range that falcons now have they are vulnerable to damps and most med range weapon systems.


This assumes that the opposing ships are able to target said falcon, which in a small-gang situation, they're not.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.18 21:04:00 - [538]
 

Originally by:
My point is that this 'nerf' does nothing to change the actual problem with falcons, which is their ability to completely eliminate ships from the fight with little to no danger. In a small-gang situation (3 v 3, for example), a falcon can permajam 2 ships with little to no problem. That's 66% of the opponent's squad that is now relegated to being nothing but damage takers.


You can easily do the same with a arazu's damps or a pilgrims/curse's TD's as long as your gang has the sense to keep its distance. Admittedly those ships need to be piloted correctly but on the other hand their effects cannot fail within optimal so.....




Quote:


Quote:
At the optimal range that falcons now have they are vulnerable to damps and most med range weapon systems.


This assumes that the opposing ships are able to target said falcon, which in a small-gang situation, they're not.


Because the falcon has a magic ability to always lock ships first?.

BroTom
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:15:00 - [539]
 

This long thread demonstrates the problem with history re-writing "adjustments".

Consider that the point of a game is for players develop strategies and use those strategies to play. They invest serious time training up skills and purchasing ships/equipment to follow their plan. Only to discover that, because it's "too good" of a strategy, the rules are abruptly changed.

Mid-game rule changes that don't advance the game are simply not fun.

Moving the game forward could be achieved by slowly giving other ships resistance via new inventions and then measure the results for a while and repeat if needed. It should result with the same net effect without all the drama. (And as a bonus, it works within Universe rules. Arms races advance tech, not somehow magically roll back abilities. If I want magic, I'll play a different MMOG.)

Oh, and just because a majority of players seem OK with this type abrupt rule change that doesn't make it right.

Consider that Eve has already lost players NOT ok with this approach, so naturally the only remaining users are going to be more inclined to not leave when facing such a heavy handed approach. The game (and CCP) is better with more players, not fewer.

Personally, I'm a fairly new player and I'm pretty tired of it already. Don't bother asking for my stuff, it will be going to my corp mates when the time comes.


Lornnar
Posted - 2009.04.19 06:47:00 - [540]
 

as expected (and predict) this patch has killed falcons in big fleet fight´s (no way with all the lag and at this range) in there nobody has complain about them due to all the ways to counter them and changed not much in small combat where all the whiners were^^ (you hear overall new whine´s as predict too since the simpletons still to simpele to counter a Falcon in their short range spider tank bs gangs).

Scorps still useless (now for to small ecm strengh and too small range in big fleet fights....full in range in sniperfleets and still no tank availiable to come even to 10 points of ecm strengh.
Rook is still as useless as it was in any way compared to Falcon.
Only *positive* chanage is that a Falcon is now a capable solo gank boat versus smaller ships^^

really..thanks ccp for this great work and the implement of the (sometimes really good) ideas we have seen here^^
of course nobody of us will atm stop eve due to this stupid changes but if a other mmo scifi game will come (and JGE is not MMO but WoW in Space^^) at last i will reminder those *changes*

anyway i still have much fun to read all the whines,complaining and insults in local from simpletons after fight (in my falcon^^).
only sad thing is the, now, useless ecm in big, laggy Fleet fights.

So once again (i speak now only for falcon) overthink it an give Falcon 100km Optimal and 50km falloff, this will allow once again be usefull in bigger fights and still kill all the Falcon alt´s (that nobody likes but most people have^^).

sorry for english mistakes


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