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 : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (20)

Author Topic

TZeer
BURN EDEN
Posted - 2009.03.31 13:26:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Team Dresch
So what does that make the optimal and falloff on a Falcon as they are currently fit - SDA II x 3, Sensor Booster w/Targeting range and 2x ECM range rigs?



Below 100km.

2xECM range rigs will be useless with 3xSDA cause of stacking

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2009.03.31 13:55:00 - [62]
 

stealth bomber nerf and another ECM nerf incomming ... glad my subscription ends today ... don't have to get angry about the idiotic proposals here ...

quik90
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:00:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: quik90 on 31/03/2009 14:06:50
Originally by: Gypsio III
Thanks for the update.

The Rook must have advantages in ECM range/strength to counter the covops cloak.


Absolutely. Personally I would prefer to see the Rook with a range advantage over the Falcon, making it suitable for both fleet and small gang combat. This will bestow the Rook with a versatility advantage over both the Falcon and the Scorpion, giving pilots a real reason to fly it.

A range bonus on the combat recon variant has been the only effective balancing factor against the force recon's covert cloak which has so far been employed. I'm thinking of the Curse here: the only popular combat recon. Perhaps, the same bonus could later be applied to the Lachesis and Huggin. What combat recons they lack in stealth they make up for with more projectable EW systems. Force recons should use their stealth systems to get closer to their targets before engaging.

The higher dps combat recons put out with a greater number of high slots currently cannot justify forfitting a covert cloak. A recon's strength has always been in its EW systems not in its damage output, so this is where the distiction between variants should be.

Young Team
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:08:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: TZeer
Originally by: Team Dresch
So what does that make the optimal and falloff on a Falcon as they are currently fit - SDA II x 3, Sensor Booster w/Targeting range and 2x ECM range rigs?



Below 100km.

2xECM range rigs will be useless with 3xSDA cause of stacking


I'm guessing most folks already have at least one ECM range rig attached to their Falcons, probably two.



Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:08:00 - [65]
 

Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 31/03/2009 14:10:45
Originally by: quik90

A range bonus on the combat recon variant has been the only effective balancing factor against the force recon's covert cloak which has so far been employed. I'm thinking of the Curse here: the only popular combat recon. Perhaps, the same bonus could later be applied to the Lachesis and Huggin. What combat recons they lack in stealth they make up for with more projectable EW systems. Force recons should use their stealth systems to get closer to their targets before engaging.



That's a good point. Making a general tweak across the board with the cloaking recons being more close-range and the non-cloaking ones having more range would make all sorts of sense. It works for the Pilgrim/Curse pair pretty well.

So give Rook, Lachesis and Huginn some range love (and balance other stats to compensate). Keep Falcon close-range as in the current proposal -- Arazu & Rapier already are.

(here I use "close-range" to mean ewar optimals in the 40-60km ballpark).

That would give a clear role to all the recons. Choose cloak. Or choose range. Not both.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:22:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Robert Caldera on 31/03/2009 14:27:57
well, with the shorter range the falcon gets unusable for fleet fights, but at least its still a good option for small scale PvP due to its increased ECM strength. I could live with that... thanks for not nerfing the falcon to death.

The only thing I wish would be 4 launcher or 4 rails (prefered) slots for defence(HAM or rails).

Relyen
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:23:00 - [67]
 

Bringing both recons in so close, is pretty much suicide. They are already the primary of any gang that is in range. If they pop right in the middle of combat, they will instantly die (most of the time).

So, this reduces the desire quite greatly for people to take a 100-150mil isk ship with no insurance. As they will be effective in any decently sized gangs for about 1 minute before they go pop. Sure in a 4vs4 they'd be fine, but in a 30vs30 they would die fast.

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:41:00 - [68]
 

Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 31/03/2009 14:42:08
Originally by: Relyen
Bringing both recons in so close, is pretty much suicide. They are already the primary of any gang that is in range. If they pop right in the middle of combat, they will instantly die (most of the time).



Funny enough, all the other recons need to operate in that close range, too. Guess what? They fit tank. Like the Falcon needs to do. Those lowslots? Use them.

Falcon pilots just need to get used to the same risks other recon pilots run all the time.

quik90
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:49:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: quik90 on 31/03/2009 15:31:51
Edited by: quik90 on 31/03/2009 15:19:26

Originally by: Relyen
Bringing both recons in so close, is pretty much suicide. They are already the primary of any gang that is in range. If they pop right in the middle of combat, they will instantly die (most of the time).


Not necessarily, in fact it should create an interesting dynamic which will reduce both the effectiveness of ECM boats and their value as a primary target.

Being forced close will generate a requirement for non-suicidal pilots to fit some sort of tank (buffer or speed) like the other recons and maybe some tackling gear. This in turn will leave room for fewer jammers (2-4 i imagine), reducng their jamming effectiveness. Will ECM boats which only have a high chance of jamming one ship, small chance of two, really justify being primaried over for example a damping/webbing/neutralizing recon or a high dps HAC which are guaranteed incapacitate or shortly destroy a ship? Its all starting to balance nicely imo.

Falcon nerf whiners: you really should divorce yourselves from your ship preference, this is a balancing/role defining issue. The possibility of not "always being primary", should make you realise that not all reductions in effectiveness are negative. Its also not a question of whether your favorite ship will still be useful in scenario X, not all ships are suitable in every situation, and all the better for it. What is important is that every ship has at least a strength and a clear role in which it excels.

Falcon - covert cloakable - solo/small gang warfare, probe tackling, cynos and covert ops
Rook - versatile roamer - small/medium/fleet combat (ECM Range bonus required!)
Scorpion - Durable platform - Fleet combat
Widow - Well given its cost it should be able to do all of the above, minus the covert cloak.

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:50:00 - [70]
 

eh ....

2 questions

1) why would i fly a rook
2) why would i fly a widow



wink wink nudge nudge
get back to me

Glen Morange
Posted - 2009.03.31 14:52:00 - [71]
 

Edited by: Glen Morange on 31/03/2009 15:12:43
I again reiterate the call for altering ECM to something more player friendly such as the max target lock reduction. Just increasing the randomness isn't going to help, as the problem is the fundamental flaw of locking out player activity for a long period. Any "fix" that doesn't address the lockout is just another nerf in waiting, as complaints won't stop, people won't fit ECCM (and/or will still complain about getting jammed with it fit), and people will continue to lockdown and gank solo ships.

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
...
3. Caldari Recon ships (Falcon & Rook) will have their ECM range reduced so they will not be effective at such huge distances any more but will still be much longer range than any of the other recons are capable off. In lieu, they will gain a ECM strength bonus increase and a small damage increase through addition of drone bay and the some additional bonus changes such as heavy missile velocity to increase the range at which they can damage targets as well as being able to jam them.

Without any other rigs or modules fitted with max skills, the BZ-5 (caldari jammer) will have an optimal range of 48km and falloff of 53km with a strength of 11.25 to gravimetric. The same bonuses are applied to the Rook.



This puts the falcon and rook into the dead zone, with no tank, no resistances bonus to armor, and no point for anything _other_ than ganking lone ships. No fleet combat will be viable with this range, as you aren't in range of remote rep, nor are you able to withstand anything more than a bs alpha (and only 3 BC vollies). So why would I bother pulling an 80+ million isk ship out of my hanger if my only choice is to go pirate with it.

Quote:

4. The scorpion will be kept in the role of long range ECM platform useful in the longer range fleet fights. This made more sense as the ship is large and not very agile and is better able with its higher number of slots to reach the required distances. The max range will be the same as before but it will operate more in ECM falloff range now.

The scorpion with max skills and a BZ-5 (caldari racial jammer) will have a optimal range of 72km and a Falloff range of 80km with a ECM strength of 7.875 without any other modules or rigs fitted.

Feedback is welcome on these latest changes and as ever, this is not set in stone and things may change following further playtesting and feedback.



Again, this either forces the ship into close up combat without a significant tank (lol for an enforced armor tank on a boat without significant lows) or large enough range to live within the remote rep cloud (without fitting SDAs in all the low slots, and rigging for range).

Glen Morange
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:06:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Glen Morange on 31/03/2009 15:07:17
double post

musgrattio
Convergent
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:10:00 - [73]
 

CCP... I think we were all hoping that while nerfing the Falcon, you would boost the Rook. First, this isn't a big nerf at all to the Falcon, if it has the same strength as a Rook. Second, the Rook will still be a horrible ship, even with missile velocity. It's like taking the Scorpion, and adding a missile velocity bonus, and telling us you've fixed the ship. NO.

Give the Rook 1 strength and 1 tanking bonus, as well as a drone bay.

Give the Falcon a lower strength bonus, and a falloff bonus.

After that, do whatever you want. That's definitely a nerf for the Falcon, but the Rook is still an unviable ship. Make it worth flying, please.

AngryMax
Gallente
Warriors tribe
DarkSide.
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:12:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Glen Morange

This puts the falcon and rook into the dead zone, with no tank, no resistances bonus to armor, and no point for anything _other_ than ganking lone ships. No fleet combat will be viable with this range, as you aren't in range of remote rep, nor are you able to withstand anything more than a bs alpha (and only 3 BC vollies). So why would I bother pulling an 80+ million isk ship out of my hanger if my only choice is to go pirate with it.



Yep, welcome to the life of Arazu pirate. Bring a 100+ mil isk recon ship that you trained months for to shut out ONE battleship as your small gang jumps into a medium blob. Then pray that their ceptor doesnt lock you and get into sub 2km orbit killing you in seconds.

Originally by: Glen Morange
Again, this either forces the ship into close up (high damage taken, in case you forgot about the blasters vs rails tradeoff) combat without a significant tank (lol for an enforced armor tank on a boat without significant lows) or large enough range to live within the remote rep cloud (without fitting SDAs in all the low slots, and rigging for ).

I have to say that if these changes go live I will be very tempted to close out my accounts, as I apparently chose the wrong race when I was going through the character creation screen, and I honestly am not terribly fond of the idea of another 6 months of training to get into decent pvp ships.


What we have had in last year and a half is a steady march towards the flat middle ground where everything is about the same... and you fly specialized (aka worthless) expensive pieces of junk that no one but the confused fly anymore.

Falcon now joins the long line of castrated T2 hulls... along with Ishtar, Arazu, EOS, Curse... and these are just the ones i have experience with. I feel for you Caldari guys, it can't feel good having the last inch of your testicular fortitude chopped off.

p.s.
I am still coping with the post-bordem of the nano nerf.

Young Team
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:13:00 - [75]
 

An average, level 4 skilled Falcon pilot is going to be stuck with an optimal of around 55-60km.

At that range he'll be so busy dealing with the hordes of intys MWD'ing towards him that he'll have no time to jam anything else in the enemy fleet.

A Max skilled Scorp pilot with two range rigs would get an optimal of 100km, right?
He won't be hanging with the other snipers BS out at 160km in a fleet fight any more.

As it stands you're leaving Caldari with only one Sniper fleet ship - the Rokh.
Combined with the strength nerf, surely putting Caldari ECM within sniper range is enough to balance things?

Range is pretty much all Caldari have :)

Let the Scorpion optimal at 170km (with a range fit and level 4 skils).
Let the Falcon optimal at 120km (with a range fit and level 4 skils).
Let the Rook optimal at 70km, but make it a bit meaner.

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:22:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Young Team
An average, level 4 skilled Falcon pilot is going to be stuck with an optimal of around 55-60km.

At that range he'll be so busy dealing with the hordes of intys MWD'ing towards him that he'll have no time to jam anything else in the enemy fleet.



If the enemy fleet really does have a "horde of inties", then good for them. And in that case, yes, the Falcon needs to use all its ECM on the inties, neutralizing them (they'll be permajammed, due to sensor str).

Do you actually think it's a problem that the enemy needs to use 4-5 ships to neutralize your one ship, in that scenario?

Uzume Ame
Gallente
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:27:00 - [77]
 

Please make the Rook usefull!!!!

My fav suggestion for an usefull Rook is close range DPS/tank boat, with dronebay and missile damage bonus + some tanking. And leaving the scorp as fleet ship is a good decission (its able to fit fit some tank and withstand some damage), but if you decided to make the Rook short range recon it would be a good idea going with the scorp intial proposed changes (I actually liked the idea).

Either way make the Rook usefull, Curse i.e.?

Gloria Lewis
Caldari
GoonFleet
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:33:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: quik90

Not necessarily, in fact it should create an interesting dynamic which will reduce both the effectiveness of ECM boats and their value as a primary target.

Being forced close will generate a requirement for non-suicidal pilots to fit some sort of tank (buffer or speed) like the other recons and maybe some tackling gear. This in turn will leave room for fewer jammers (2-4 i imagine), reducng their jamming effectiveness. Will ECM boats which only have a high chance of jamming one ship, small chance of two, really justify being primaried over for example a damping/webbing/neutralizing recon or a high dps HAC which are guaranteed incapacitate or shortly destroy a ship? Its all starting to balance nicely imo.



This post has excellent points that bear repeating. When your falcon gets nerfed, it's no longer overpowered nor a juicy primary.

Vina
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:34:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
I updated the original post with some ECM stat examples which is hopefully enough though shout if you need any more. We will be applying changes to sisi very frequently now based on feedback and sisi so will update when these changes or any others hit sisi.

Re: the scorpion change:

This was a tough call, the close range role would have been great for gang work but combined with the other changes meant there was not a long range variant and the battleship class made more sense to have in this role for fleet warfare despite the cool short range role it could of had.

The widow will remain focused on close range attacks which means it is not inheriting the role of the scorpion and we think that is fine (though yes the black ops as a whole need a little love and they are getting some)

Re: SDAs

Players who want to 'ECM Tank' their ships can do so and gain a range and strength increase however coupled with the ship bonus changes, there should be less need to focus on ECM tanking the ships alone and it is quite easy to come up with setups.

Changes may still happen on these, but we want to see how all the current changes as a whole to ECM jammer range and strength on each of the ships affects the desire to fully 'ECM tank' at the expense of a HP tank.




widow needs a big cpu increase so that it can use torps instead of cruise. I never understood why the widow was designed to use cruise (233km range) but does not have an ECM range bonus (ecm range is about 80km with multispecs.) How does this make any sense?

Yunaka Vicc
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:35:00 - [80]
 

Will jammer overload mechanics be changed?

Gaia Vita
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:45:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Gaia Vita on 31/03/2009 16:14:42
Edited by: Gaia Vita on 31/03/2009 15:46:08
Originally by: Uzume Ame
Please make the Rook usefull!!!!

My fav suggestion for an usefull Rook is close range DPS/tank boat, with dronebay and missile damage bonus + some tanking. And leaving the scorp as fleet ship is a good decission (its able to fit fit some tank and withstand some damage), but if you decided to make the Rook short range recon it would be a good idea going with the scorp intial proposed changes (I actually liked the idea).

Either way make the Rook usefull, Curse i.e.?


FFS will people stop suggesting this! How can the Rook ever be balanced with the Falcon if it can't fit a covert cloak AND has to fight at closer range. Lets remember that having to fight a close range in almost all situations is a disadvantage regardless of the dps you achieve when/if you get there (think about blaster boats). It is the Falcon that should be forced into close(er) range to counter and make use of its cloaking advantage. The "Curse i.e." you mention has a neut/nos RANGE advantage over the Pilgrim, which is what makes it more "useful" in certain situations, and would do the same for the Rook.

It is crazy suggestions like this that led the developers astray from their originally positive proposals for change.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2009.03.31 15:54:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

The scorpion with max skills and a BZ-5 (caldari racial jammer) will have a optimal range of 72km and a Falloff range of 80km with a ECM strength of 7.875 without any other modules or rigs fitted.




Fair enough. This will mean that pilots who have spezialized in it can reach lower edge of normal fleet engagement range with outer edge of falloff with one SDA (159 km). Altho with Caldary BS 5 trained it's tough decision if one would bring Rokh or Scorpion for that fleet fight.

With targets being in falloff area 'effective' strenght will be then approx 4 points against racial target (with 1x SDA) resulting in approx 25% propability of getting off jam against proper battleship target. Cosidering that fleet scorpion has usually 6 jammers it will mean at first glance (without doing proper calculation atm) that one Scorpion will be able to negate 1.5 opposing battleships.

Current 'regular' Scorpion range is 180 km (and that is also currently in falloff) in fleet (ie MWD + booster + 6x ECM).

Have not looked at guns ... can T2 425 mm rails with spike reach those ranges without ship bonuses to range ? I kinda doubt, but if they can Scoprion would be kinda okish - altho in real situation it would prolly not matter as he does not have mids nor lows to spare for gun range enchanting mods.

russkinnor
Failed Diplomacy
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:05:00 - [83]
 

As a full time Falcon Pilot, in my opinion, taking range away from the Falcon might as well be signing a death warrant for it. I do however understand the frustration that many people have with the ship being used against them.
Most of the people that will complain are the people who have never spent any real time flying a falcon, who dont know where it works and where it doesnt or just arent prepared for it.

The Falcon is not a solo boat, it is a support vessel. In my opinion it is best used in small fleet engagements and typically is a wildcard. In fleets that are supporting armor tanking ships, most prepared PVP pilots have 1 or 2 mid slot ECCM rendering Falcon support sketchy at best. EW to me is more blind luck in certain combats, hoping for that magic roll of the dice to knock out a key ships guns. I personally have gone into combats where the prepared pilots made me feel useless. Overloaded, Strengthed out Jammers just cycling with 1 maybe 2 jams getting off out of the whole combat. Yet, I digress.

Giving the falcon a tank vs. range is not applicable in any case. If a Falcon is in scram range, its dead unless you have the correct support for it.
There are many ways to defeat a Falcon.
1. ECCM
2. Sniping Ships
3. Your own ECM ships in fleet
4. Support Ships/Remote ECCM
5. Ceptors/Fast closing ships(once they get on top of you, short range jamming seems to hit alot less.)

Those of you that are talking about range of the other Recons vs the Falcon lets touch on that.

Rapier(can tank and produce dps) vs. Falcon (Can ECM tank or Shield Tank and not DPS) much less it has a totally different role, its basically a tackling Recon.

Arazu (Can DPS with drones and Sensor Damp) vs. Falcon(See above)
Again, totally different role, tackle plus a limited form of EW. Still easy to counter a Falcon with, get in your range under cloak and damp him. If he is already cycling on your fleet he might not get a jam on you, or he warps.

Seriously you cant really compare these ships as if they are all the same.

CCP Chronotis, I appreciate the work you all are doing in trying to find a true way to Niche the EW ships, I really do. However that being said I implore you and the Dev team to really take a hard look at what the Falcon does best, ECM at long ranges with light armor and even lighter weaponry. I enjoy that aspect of the ship. To me its like chess, needing to keep 1 step ahead of the opponent or adapt quickly before checkmate.

Oh and if you would be interested in doing some testing or suggestions with the Black Ops in general, please let me know id be happy to volunteer some time to help make those ships more appealing. Till then, ill fly my Widow anyway. :)

Russ

Winterreign
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:09:00 - [84]
 

Not happy with loosing the Scorpion changes.

Scorp is the only battleship with out a damage mod or Rof bonus out of all the battleships in eve.

Sure jamming is ok, but the orginal ECM idea 20% jamming str, no optimal range bonus and the 5% ROF was an amazing.

Essentialy your just making a T1 battleship only for pvp
-BA

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:36:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Carniflex
Originally by: CCP Chronotis

The scorpion with max skills and a BZ-5 (caldari racial jammer) will have a optimal range of 72km and a Falloff range of 80km with a ECM strength of 7.875 without any other modules or rigs fitted.




Fair enough. This will mean that pilots who have spezialized in it can reach lower edge of normal fleet engagement range with outer edge of falloff with one SDA (159 km). Altho with Caldary BS 5 trained it's tough decision if one would bring Rokh or Scorpion for that fleet fight.



Don't forget the possibility of also bringing a mindlinked Eos with ECM optimal range + ECM strength gang modules. While quite rare nowadays, with the reduced optimals they might just become a nice force multiplier for your ranged ECM.

Hmmm, Falcon nerf a (small) Eos boost. Who knew? Very Happy

Cassius Longinus
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:40:00 - [86]
 

Edited by: Cassius Longinus on 31/03/2009 16:50:14
Originally by: Alex Harumichi

Pule



You are killing me.

Long range Rook/Short range Falcon is absolute fail, and I'll be happy to get the hell out of those ships is that is how this ends.

If SDA's are removed, If racials are removed, then strength and range can be balanced, and you will start seeing caldari recons that resemble other racial recons in terms of mixed tanking.

Anything less than that and strength and range "balances" won't be anything but wasting our time or consigning the best caldari pvp option to the wastebin.

I mean, ffs, boost RSD's on the side, but don't let your gallente emo drive your desire to nerf the caldari recons.

(all of this presumes the mechanic stays as it is, which is kind of questionable in my mind, but whatever- we've been using it for years).

I suppose I should add something positive: My impression of a good ecm rebalance (regarding recons) is simply to nerf falcon strength and boost rook strength, nerf rook range, add rook dronebay. Buff ECCM, then call it a day and see how things work. Incremental changes also seem to be much better than large-reworks.

Good luck with that CCPC.

Omarvelous
Destry's Lounge
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:40:00 - [87]
 

My humble suggestions...

Make signal distortion amps more powerful but limited to 1 per ship. Like Damage Control Units.

Make signal distortion amps affect ALL EWAR.

- Increase Strength (NOT range) of:
- ECM
- Sensor Damps
- Target Painters
- Webs (Now a Rapier/Hugin can get better than 60% webs)
- Tracking Disruptors
- Increase range of Warp Disruptors/Scramblers

Now its a nice strength modifier but its only 1 slot.

If you're lowering the range of ecm - just make the rook's missile range match up. Increase its damage potential.

The scorpion needs some work.

Please give its high slots the ability to fit 6 of a type of weapon. 6 missile launchers, or 6 turrets. It doesn't have a damage bonus and does abysmal damage with 4 weapons - I'm not asking for a damage bonus - just 6 weapons of the same type capable.

I think my proposed SDA change, coupled with 6 weapons makes the Scorpion able to do decent dps and jam. Or it can be a dedicated jammer, and have some low slots available to armor tank.

I wouldn't say no to increasing its drone bay to 100 or even *gasp* 125 (it would be nice to have 1 Caldari ship capable of field 5 large drones - I'm picturing a Torp Scorpion with 5 sentry drones...)

Shorten Jam cycles. Make the module and effect cycle 50% as long. Requires more attention from the ecm pilot, and reduces the ZOMG I'm PERMA JAMMED feel of the fight. Over a long fight it wont matter, as the odds will even it out. In a short fight, the ecm victim might get some locks.

I'm a fan of removing ECCM, and just making sensor boosters have an ECCM script.

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:40:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: Winterreign
Not happy with loosing the Scorpion changes.

Scorp is the only battleship with out a damage mod or Rof bonus out of all the battleships in eve.

Sure jamming is ok, but the orginal ECM idea 20% jamming str, no optimal range bonus and the 5% ROF was an amazing.



Agreed. I really wish that idea was brought back (with the Rook taking the ranged fleet jammer role, maybe).

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:44:00 - [89]
 

Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 31/03/2009 16:44:50
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 31/03/2009 16:44:04
Originally by: Cassius Longinus

Long range Rook/Short range Falcon is absolute fail, and I'll be happy to get the hell out of those ships is that is how this ends.



*shrug* Your opinion. Our own Falcon pilots seem to think it would be a great way to balance the ships and give each of them a role.

Face it: you can't keep both the covert ops cloak and the ranged full-power ECM, the combo is just too powerful (as we've seen, over the last year). Choose one.

quik90
Posted - 2009.03.31 16:49:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: quik90 on 31/03/2009 17:08:39
Originally by: russkinnor

If a Falcon is in scram range, its dead unless you have the correct support for it.
There are many ways to defeat a Falcon.
1. ECCM
2. Sniping Ships
3. Your own ECM ships in fleet
4. Support Ships/Remote ECCM
5. Ceptors/Fast closing ships(once they get on top of you, short range jamming seems to hit alot less.)


Name another cruiser sized ship that isn't vulnerable to exactly the same (excluding ECCM). At least a falcon has the chance to jam its tackler and get away. There is no short range ECM strength penalty, you just notice the misses more because they are crucial to your survival. Point is void and inaccurate.

Originally by: russkinnor

Those of you that are talking about range of the other Recons vs the Falcon lets touch on that.
Rapier(can tank and produce dps) vs. Falcon (Can ECM tank or Shield Tank and not DPS) much less it has a totally different role, its basically a tackling Recon.


Assuming the Falcon gets the proposed drone bay (no one has argued against this) the Falcon will have similar dps to the Rapier and Arazu when using small drones. Point is void.

Russ, you need to start thinking about what your Falcon will be able to do rather than what it won't. A tanked close range falcon with stronger but shorter range jammers could be used to tackle cruiser and above sized targets in small gang situations. With its probe launcher it could pick them off at safespots and hold them until support arrives. This was a role last filled by the damp/rapiers (remember them?), before damps and nanos were nerfed. The Rapier now serves almost exclusively as a support tackler, but the Falcon potentially has a new role. Geez you'd think you would be pleased!

Originally by: russkinnor
Seriously you cant really compare these ships as if they are all the same.


Err, don't get me wrong i love Falcons, but what do you think? Should it be a bit more "special", just for you? Why is that the falcon pilots are so happy to maintain the staus quo, even it condemns the Rook into obsolecence, or the dubiously cool "close range" role that they don't want their falcon's to fill? Detach you opinions from your ship preference before you post. Can you not see that you have an agenda?

Originally by: russkinnor
CCP Chronotis, I appreciate the work you all are doing in trying to find a true way to Niche the EW ships, I really do... Oh and if you would be interested in doing some testing or suggestions with the Black Ops in general, please let me know id be happy to volunteer some time to help make those ships more appealing. Till then, ill fly my Widow anyway. :)


Don't listen to him devs, there are enough emos around here who's personal attachment to Falcons is clouding their judgment and impartiality. Such posters shouldn't be allowed on the dev forum let alone involved with testing. Rolling Eyes


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : 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