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

Glen Morange
Posted - 2009.03.31 23:57:00 - [121]

I find I should make clear my issue: I feel that this "nerf" isn't going to fix anything, and just puts off dealing with the larger issue of the imbalance brought by ECM. I don't feel that any ability that can completely remove a player from action for 20+ seconds will ever be well balanced, as it is a razor thin difference in a game that is known for is constant changes.

Originally by: quik90

Oh contrare obsessive Falcon lover, I fly Falcons too. Your comment however smaks of someone who has never flown any recon other than the Falcon. WTF do you think ALL other race recon pilots have been fitting to survive up till now? Minimal speed/buffer tank and your wits! Something pilots like you are clearly missing. With the agility/speed modifications which were originally proposed for the Falcon/Rook(heard no more about this) you could nano your three lows and use a LSE in your mids. Not happy? Well thats what most Rapier pilots have to do to fit dual/tripple webs. Lacking cap? Well wtf, you might have to fit a cap mod.

The difference is that the mods for a rapier use 4 cap, but the multispecs that you suggest require over ten times that much cap. As both ships have the exact same base recharge, the falcon will have two choices: use the jammers or use the MWD. Fit _a_ cap mod? Pull the other one, it hath got bells on.

In addition, you have to remove one third of the range and power from the numbers quoted in the first post if you are discussing multispec ECM, leading to the question: "why bring a falcon at all?" Given that a scorpion would have the same ECM strength as the multispec mods at a much more viable range, I don't see a huge point to the Falcon outside a very narrow niche (2-3 man gank squads).

Originally by: quik90

If you insist on filling your mids and lows with offensive mods dont be surprised when you and your ship variant gets a reputation as a dangerous gank ship which should be primaried, resulting in an instapop, cause your MWD ran dry and you didnt bother buffering.

What makes flying force recons other than the Falcon interesting is that they are ships that can produce a strong positive effect with the drawback that you are likely be primaried. This always makes the decision to decloak and engage a tense one. I guess Falcon pilots sitting 150km from the hurt just aren't used to making this risk vs gain decision, just like they dont know how to sacrifice gank for tank.

We have never had a question, we haven't needed any tank because anything that can hit us is probably going to pop us within 2-3 volleys, as stated above, we don't have the flexiblity for any tanking. I will agree that the 200km + range for the falcon means that our tank is overpowered, but when the mods you use deny the cap to use any speed tank, and the slots for a passive tank, where should one look for survivability?

Originally by: quik90

Originally by: Glen Morange

Can we jam a tackler off? We might be able to, but they are almost guaranteed a 20 second delay while we target and wait for the correct racial jammer to cool down.

Consider fitting a sensor booster and multispecs then and live with the concequences. More decisions for you to make, and fewer spaces for your EW mods, congratualions on becoming a real recon pilot.

Again, you cannot compare the two. A rapier isn't going to be harassed by an inty, as all it's abilities are designed to kill them. Two webs on the tackler plus the rapier's minimal firepower would equal a dead tackler (well, any interceptor/frigate based tackle). Other solutions present themselves for the Amarr. I have little idea what one would to in an Arazu, but this might explain why I haven't seen them used heavily.

Originally by: quik90

Originally by: Glen Morange

Again, the only useful case for the falcon (and rook) with these changes would be restricted to piracy, as it won't be tenable in larger fleet combat due to the enforced range problems.

You have no imagination. Anyway where is the problem, other than your personal problem of having to decide on another ship that is more suitable to a specific situation? Your desire to only fly the Falcon shouldn't be a reason for you to argue against the changes, you must be impartial enough to admit this.

I am dislike the change of a ship into a glorified paperweight (unless your goal was to head out a'gankin). I honestly want to see a massive change to the underlying mechanism of ECM, not the overzealous nerfing of an entire race's ships to compensate for poor design.

Blackwater USA Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.04.01 00:27:00 - [122]

I'm not overly thrilled by how some of these changes look... it seems like there's 2 options.

1... the currently chosen... nerf range and compensate by making stronger jams
2... nerf jam strength but keep the range tank

Can we look more at number 2 than at number 1?

As an example, the goal here is really centered around small fleet combat to prevent the falcon from being overpowered. Why not keep things mostly as they are, but make the strength of the jams a fleet bonus. Single or double squad would have a much weaker falcon... up through full on fleet combat where the falcon would be the current falcon that we have a love hate relationship with.

The falcon's tank is really all about range... taking that away is going to nerf the falcon in more ways than just the desired ones. Make the falcon's jam strength lower in small gangs, and some balance returns... yet the falcon can be flown in the same fashion as now. If, as is the current plan, the falcons tank is going to be it's jams... all you'll do is increase frustration on both sides. Ships will be MORE likely to be permajammed by a falcon than ever before due to the stronger jam strength, while at the same time, the moment the number of ships exceeds the number of fitted jammers, the falcon will be dead due to being close enough to engage. The falcon becomes more of a primaried suicide ship than ever. This seems like it actually exacerbates the complaints on both sides of the question rather than helping anyone. If we look at working with balancing jam strength rather than range, the situation becomes a LOT more workeable.

Lucky Willfind
Posted - 2009.04.01 01:20:00 - [123]

Do you think by simply lowering the range/increasing the strength of the ECM or messing up the SDA will make whiners stop crying about "being permajammed"? No.
Will this nerf solve the problem of limited use of other recons? No.

This "cut a piece from here - add a little there - change this - turn upside-down that" is just destroying the game and creats upsets after every patch. In short term it might seem to be a solution but in long term you have to do the "rebalance" again and again and again.

Yes, the Scorp needs changes as it is underused compared to other tier 1 bs-es. And i suppose CCP wants to give options to the players.

Why dont you guys figure out how to make the other recons viable?
I feel nerfing the falcons/rooks would be like nerfing the drone abilities of a dominix because other t1 bs cant solo afk any lv4... or nerfing iteron V because it has too much cargospace.

So the question really is: why to change something which works well instead of changing those things which are not?

Aoa Lux
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.04.01 02:05:00 - [124]

At current changes: Why would I fly a rook?

Make rook the long range ship. Ex: Pilgrim and Curse.

SDA: Giving them a strength bonus means they are a "must fit 3" mod.
Isn't that what you are trying to avoid?

I liked the brawler torpion idea :(

Marco Ragnos
eXceed Inc.
Minor Threat.
Posted - 2009.04.01 02:58:00 - [125]

okay i have solved the problem


Okay the current battle is between the people that want the falcon to retain long range, and the ones that want to make it a.."jamming rapier" sort of ship.

The falcon isnt by any means a "dps" type ship, and it is made of paper, so people def dont want to get close.

WIth your 2nd round falcon ideas... lets say the falcon would be a ship that can jam err maybe up to 100km give or take? Okay that sounds like a very fair range concidering a hac set up for sniping can hit that no problem. This puts the falcon on par with the sniping cruiser/bc group. Very fair. The falcon can jam them at that range, and can also be fired upon by various vessels. IT WILL NOT BE SAFE AT THAT RANGE. Of course everyone that wants to fly around in a blasterthron might be buthurt because their blasters dont reach that far, but oh well.

There are also the folks that, we dont want to fly 1 setup falcons, we want them to get up close with other recons... while it sounds like it would be fair, it isnt. Compare the falcon to the rapier, the dps dif, the drones, having the mid slots freedup for LSEs..etc etc etc... falcon just cant do the low range thing...unless...

I think people mentioned in other threads about making scripts for ECM(or a dif mod all together)
1 script will have a weaker strength allowing it to jam at SNIPE HAC range (100ish km)

the other script will give it more jam strength but taking away its range (jamming at point range 20-45km)

This allows the falcon pilots to have different setups... having stronger shortrange jams will allow the pilot to use less ecm mods (probably even multispec tbh) and putting on a larger tank and possibly point.

giving the falcon pilots different options will vary the many ways the falcons would be used. and lets face it, no matter what yoNO matter what you do to the falcon, people are not going to be happy, ECM is annoying and the only way to make those people happy is to get rid of it all together which wont happen.

you people have to understand that ecm is annoying yes, but you cannot just nerf it to hell because of it.

Frigs should be able to jam at the max range of typical frig weaps (small rails,artys etc)

Falcon/rook should be able to contend with the max range of other cruiser size ships and also have the flexability to get up close.

The scorp should be able to jam at other BSs Snipe range (large artys, etc)

ECCM needs to be used as a counter to jams. allowing the falcon and rook to get stronger-smaller range jams means that ECCMs would be vital for people to have in small gangs (will allow at least one person to target/kill the falcon)

At long range, the falcons jams wont be as effective (But capable of course)
And to kill/scare away, all you need is 1 sniperhac with an eccm.

If everyone cant agree to somthing along these lines, i dont know what would be better.

This will make it fair to everyone including the falcon pilots.

If your going to mess with the falcon, at least give us options.

Posted - 2009.04.01 03:33:00 - [126]

I`m not sure what all of you are complaining about.

Those against falcons just saw the falcon and rook get their range massively reduced.

They can actually be engaged with drones now.


I`m not sure anyone of you have checked it, but if you add rigs, you can do some pretty interesting stuff.

If you are looking for strength, you can now use T1 rigs, which have same bonus as SDA. This will free up much of the lowslots.

If you go for range you can get T1 rigs which gives a 20% bonus.

You actually have to think a little how you wanna fly the ship now.

Same with scorp, fill all rig slots with strength rigs and you have the same jamming power as if you used 3xSDA II, and on top of that you have 4 lows to tank with.

Vasili Z
Cosmic Odyssey
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.04.01 05:21:00 - [127]

Edited by: Vasili Z on 01/04/2009 06:17:20
'bout time they nerfed the bloody range of those things. Still op against small gangs though. Nerf the strength as well, perma-jamming shouldn't be in the game at all.

Bellum Eternus
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.01 05:41:00 - [128]

The new changes change nothing for me.

I was really looking forward to being able to put away my Falcons for a bit and use something else for a change, but with the new peak strength numbers I'm not seeing much of a difference in the Falcons (or any other ECM ship's) performance. In fact, I think that for what ECM ships currently do (permajam stuff) they'll actually be better at it than ever before. That's bad.

ECM is overpowered and needs to have it's capacity reduced by a significant amount, say, like damps were. Just reduce the strength of them by about 50% and you're all set. One ship needs to be able to disable another single ship, and that's about it. Very similar to what damps are capable of doing now.

With the suggested changes, I'll still be operating outside drone range, outside most medium to long-ish range guns and missiles, and will have more strength with maxed out rigs and SDAIIs than I currently have.

I was looking forward to doing something else than having half my gang be composed of Falcons, but I guess not.

Sekundar Burnes
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.04.01 05:42:00 - [129]

Originally by: TZeer
I`m not sure what all of you are complaining about.

Those against falcons just saw the falcon and rook get their range massively reduced.

They can actually be engaged with drones now.

Yeah, this is kind of a problem. Once any of the ECM ships have drones on them they are in deep trouble. Unlike other weapons systems, once the drone is locked on it doesn't break when the controlling ship is jammed. (And for a while at least drones continue to attack even if the controlling ship has warped off or blown up. That's a feature, right??)

So if you warp into range of a group of ships you will pretty much have to lock and jam them before they lock and send drones against you.

This is another example of the binary results that ECM seems to have, and few other weapons systems. In this case, you are either safe from drones or you're aligning to warp out.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2009.04.01 06:06:00 - [130]

Liking these changes. Short, sweet and effective. Although I was looking forward to an uber torpedo perma-jamming scorpion of doom.

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.04.01 06:24:00 - [131]

Right this is aproximatly what i feel it should look like

max skills no aditional mods/rigs
racial jammer

ship | ecm optimal | targeting range | strength (1=best)

bbird | 80km optimal | dont care | 3
rook | 120km optimal | 160km | 1
falcon | 80km optimal | 160km | 3
scorp | 160km optimal | 125km | 2

and for giggles hers the widow (our new ecm overlord)
widow | 160km optimal | 125km | 1

propper calculations available when you offer me a job Rolling Eyes

Posted - 2009.04.01 07:42:00 - [132]

Edited by: KissedByDeath on 01/04/2009 08:16:34
Originally by: Roemy Schneider
* SDAs - have them boost all EW
* jammers in-line with other EW optimals+falloff: 30+60. will accept racial base jam strengths of 5 for t2/best named in return
-- alternatively, will accept 48+40 for all EW, once SDAs help
* if you must add drones.... 20m max - no web drone for these guys!
* yes, long range scorp for fleets plz. i have no idea what people were going to do with their meds up close and a virtual 5 launchers... one of those horrible caldari tanks w/o damage? no change there -.-

I kinda like the sda bonus for all ewar types idea. It'll get some of that armor tank taken care of same way as ecms have eliminated caldari tanks. I bet you didn't think about that did you?Shocked

lol all other race recons have 40+m3 drone space except caldari have none
1) missiles are nerfed so they're useless and there's no missile damage bonus on the caldari recons except for that pathetic 5% kinetic damage on rook
2) ecm is chance based which is the reason they should be operating at longer range. If ccp wants to nerf the range of ecms they better make all other ewar chance based. Having chance based sensor damps sounds good. :)
3) 20m3 drone space is pathetic (tho better than nothing) compared to other race recons. 25 or 30m3 sounds more reasonable (careful not to make the caldari pvp viable :) )

4) and plz do keep in mind. Caldari ships are the slowest of the bunch which is another reason why they should be operating at a range.

Judging from the first ecm proposal thread i see absolutely no change in ccp stance to upcoming ecm nerf even tho they've looked carefully at posted comments. Bottom line, scream and cry all you want, they do what they want to.

What i propose. If they absolutely have to nerf ecms. Reduce ecm optimal & falloff to what the multispectrals have right now and be done with it. Don't touch ship ecm bonuses. but plz do add the drone space and some damage bonus for the rook. I see it as the closer range brawler of the two. Falcon's job is to be stealthy and stuff not get up close and personal. I mean seriously what's it gonna get personal with? it's cloak 2 missile and 1 turrent slot? it'll have laughable dps.

ccp loves to f**k with caldari so much just to pretend they're doing their job / a job. They've already reduced caldari close to nothing in pvp.

If you absolutely want something to tweak with, something just to pretend you're trying to make eve a game that continues to develop, why not make ecm script based.

Going from multi(no script) to racial scripts. But keeping ecm strength when used against the wrong race same as it is now. Why? because with sensor damps you only have to think about using 2 scripts and you don't have to worry about race. With with ecm scripts you'll be wasting valuable seconds trying to load the right script if you're having trouble jamming.

Also if they wanna change SDAs, a 5% bonus to ecm range for each sda sounds good.

Cpt Cosmic
Posted - 2009.04.01 08:07:00 - [133]

1.fix ranges on the jammers, less optimal, more falloff
2.remove SDAs and increase the ship bonuses
3.give rook and falcon a proper drone bay
4.increase scorpions bay/bandwith make rook more viable, increase its bonuses over the falcon, make it sturdier

few easy changes to make everyone happy :>

Virgo I'Platonicus
Posted - 2009.04.01 08:35:00 - [134]

Edited by: Virgo I''Platonicus on 01/04/2009 08:36:57
Edited by: Virgo I''Platonicus on 01/04/2009 08:36:18
I dont get it.

You want widow to remain close range boat, but her ECM strength SUX for close range? To elaborate : It is now same as rook / falcon, but after changes it will be smaller? (actually remain unchanged, but rook's and falcon's get love, while widow's don't if i understand correctly)

I better sell widow now.


PS: the change to SDA IIs will kill widow as well. They boost ECM to help long range ecm boats, while widow remains short range vessel and doesn't get helped by such bonuses.

The Alchemyst
Posted - 2009.04.01 08:35:00 - [135]

Change ECM function :

Instead of reducing targets number to 0, each succesfull ECM module cycle unlock 2 targets

example :
I lock 6 targets and fire at one of them.
Falcon jam me with 3 modules.
1st jam succes, I lose 2 random targets, have 4 left
2nd jam succes, I lose 2 more random targets, have 2 left
3rd jam succes, I lose 2 more random targets, none left
each time I can try to lock new targets and fire at them but Falcon still jamming me...

Very efficient agains frigates size because they have few max locked targets even if they lock fast.
Efficient agains BS size because they lock slowly.

This will make all modules increasing max targets and multitasking skill more usefull.

Fallout Project
Posted - 2009.04.01 08:45:00 - [136]

Good point about dampeners and scorpion. They indeed seem to be more effective than ECM now at fleet ranges on paper. I would also like to add, that if one is going to fit dampeners anyway for e-war then one is better off in dampener Rokh in fleet than in Scorpion with dampeners. It's not like Rokh needs all those tracking computers to reach fleet ranges.

Fallout Project
Posted - 2009.04.01 09:08:00 - [137]

Ok - some numbers also

Current Fleet Scorpion
180 km (plus gang bonuses) range, up to 200 km ECM optimal (with rigs and max skills) around 8 (with DD buffer) to 12 ECM strenght at optimal.
New Fleet Scorpion
180 km (plus gang bonuses) range, up to ~ 85 km ECM optimal + 90 km falloff (with rigs and skills) around 4 (with DD buffer) to 4.5 ECM strenght at fleet range (~25% sucsess rate)
Dampener Scorpion
180 km (plus gang bonuses) range, up to 71 km damp optimal (with rigs and skills) + 90 km falloff. Around 50 - 33 % sucsess rate at fleet ranges.
Dampener Rokh
180 km range, same dampener max stats, altho has 2 less midslots.

So - looking at those numbers currently - if you want to do e-war in fleet it makes perfect sense to bring Scorpion. After the changes the Scorpion effectivity at fleet ranges will drop around 3x and dampener Scorpion will be roughly 50% 'better' at fleet range than ECM Scorpion. Hell, even Dampener Rokh will be approx as 'good' at e-war at fleet ranges as ECM Scorpion.

So at first glance the proposed changes seemed not too bad, but after thinking about it - I think those changes will still kill the fleet scorpion role. If that is all that can be reached then I would take that short range brawler instead. It at least might be able to do something elsewhere .. perhaps ... and I could always fit Damps if I want to do fleet stuff. Or bring better ship.

Spartan dax
Posted - 2009.04.01 10:02:00 - [138]

Originally by: The Alchemyst
Change ECM function :

Instead of reducing targets number to 0, each succesfull ECM module cycle unlock 2 targets .......and more stuff

Something along these lines then. Lock disrupting mechanic

Spartan dax
Posted - 2009.04.01 10:11:00 - [139]

Originally by: Carniflex

So at first glance the proposed changes seemed not too bad, but after thinking about it - I think those changes will still kill the fleet scorpion role. If that is all that can be reached then I would take that short range brawler instead. It at least might be able to do something elsewhere .. perhaps ... and I could always fit Damps if I want to do fleet stuff. Or bring better ship.

Yeah well, if CCP developers decides to make a ship better with unbonused ewar than it's supposed bonused ewar.... Well, I doubt that's gonna happen tbh. They're probably thinking up something else right now. The current situation is just too hilarious and it'll never hit TQ. (only talking scorpion and fleets here)

Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2009.04.01 10:38:00 - [140]

A lot of the comments about bringing ECM ships closer to the battle all seem to be complaining about 'paper thin' tanks.

Surely the answer then is to simply improve the overall tank of those ships that need to operate at 'close' range?

Improving resists and / or Shield HPs would achieve this without needing to change the slot lay out of these ships.


Lord Eremet
Posted - 2009.04.01 11:34:00 - [141]

From CCP Chronotis first ECM ships thread...

Originally by:

The falcon is the "sniper" of the two ECM roles having less ECM strength and more ECM range.

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

The rook operates at shorter ranges, able to launch a stronger ECM attack and whilst having shorter ECM range can lay some real damage on its target gaining a heavy/heavy assault and standard missile velocity bonus in addition to a small drone bay for additional utility.

Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus:
10% Bonus to Light & Heavy, Heavy assault Missile Velocity per level
10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use per Level

Recon Ships Skill Bonus:
25% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength per level
5% bonus to heavy, heavy assualt and light missile kinetic damage per level

Attribute Changes:
+25m3 drone bay
+25mbit drone bandwidth

CCP Chronotis, beats me why you are not using the ideas for Falcon/Rook you had first, they were clearly better. Did all those falcon alt's tears threaten to drown you? I was looking forward to the new Rook but now it looks like it will still feel ashamed over not being a falcon :P

Scrapping SDA's completely or let them only affect all races electronic warfare optimal range would also be best. If they give both range and ECM strenght bonus then no one will fit anything else in their falcon's lows and Rook will still not be used any more then it is today, read=hardly at all.

If not really changed Falcons will still remain the most used recon everywhere. Those newly proposed changes in your new thread are a joke. Disappointing really.

Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.04.01 12:33:00 - [142]

The Scorpions best use is for long range sniping support, not that big of a cost, not too many SP needed and you too can help out in a fleet battle.

Why would you want to waste an awesome ECM range bonus (the main reason why there were 100's of nerf Falcon threads on the forums) for a 5% ROF bonus.. +25% ROF of crap DPS is still crap DPS, if you want a close range ECM brawler, just load up your Raven with Multispecs, and enjoy losing your ship just as fast as a close range Scorpion.

Sherylin Fenn
Posted - 2009.04.01 12:52:00 - [143]

As a falcon pilot I agreed with these changes. Bringing caldari recons to a line with other races recons are good. One I wish to add. Reduce jammer's cycle to 10 sec, as dampers & trackdiz's. If you wish to long range ECM to operate from falloff - reduce the cycle, coz with 20 sec cycle it is pointless to jam from falloff range, chances are lacking.

But in overall - good work!

Royal Crimson Lancers
Posted - 2009.04.01 13:06:00 - [144]

CCP is going way of the grid here..

Post regarding my standing on ECM/Falcons

For a med to large sized gang- there is no problem countering Falcons, and the solution doesn`t even include falcons or ECM. I`m not telling you though. As stated under the link i posted- damp range should be increased though.

Falcon with damage and drones? Who comes up with this crap. Falcon is paper thin- it`s like the stealth bomber- if someone targets it- it`s dead. Making the falcon a close range should is tantamount to burying the ship. At short to medium range it will have no damage to contribute with, no tank at all to sustain damage with (as it needs mids for ECM and lows for SDAs) and pits the falcon against combat ships using a chance based module.. This is silly..

Reducing jamming range from 200km to 100km is more than enough. Ad an increase to dampening range and you`re fine- at least mid to large gangs will be golden. Solo players will still be screwed, but that is just how the game is designed.

What you`re talking about here is a completely different ship. Improve the rooks combat effectiveness- give it an extra high slot and maybe even an extra low-slot. Then move all these other ideas to the tech III ships- so people can make short range jammers with good resists and some combat abilities out of tech III.

ECM changes, BO changes, stealth bomber changes and tech III seem to me to be crashing and suffering from a lack of cohesive thinking. You need to sit down and breath slowly, before making some huge mistakes, because it seems to me that right now, with the current flow of ideas, things are just getting messy..

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2009.04.01 13:18:00 - [145]

Originally by: Baudolino
Falcon with damage and drones? Who comes up with this crap. Falcon is paper thin- it`s like the stealth bomber- if someone targets it- it`s dead.

Current Falcons are paper-thin because they have no tank fitted. It's quite straightforward to get over 30k EHP on a Falcon (while retaining 5x ECM), putting it at similar EHP levels to any another tanked force recon.

You can do it on a Rook as well, although you'll have no PG to fit any weapons afterwards. PG boost needed there.

Sherylin Fenn
Posted - 2009.04.01 13:29:00 - [146]

Edited by: Sherylin Fenn on 01/04/2009 13:30:59
WoW people you are blind or somth? Stop crying )
With these changes Falcon/Rook will be very good as solo or small gang ship - after SDA giving only 10% of ECM strengh, you can get it with 2 rigs, and you have low slots for DC, damage mods, tanking or anything. In small gang 48 optimal are good enough. So, it will be as other recons anyway.

If you want a long range - use SDA (+10%), fit rigs for anything else and jam it from falloff.
Even with SDA or optimal rigs (they do have stacking penalty, btw) ECM optimal will be somth around 65-70. No "UBER" falcon/rook jam from 150+ anymore.
The only thing I wish to add, as I sad before - ECM cycle must be reduced to 10 sec as other EWAR - coz 20 sec cycle on a chance based EWAR on falloff (again reduced chance) will be useless.

Posted - 2009.04.01 13:58:00 - [147]

Originally by: something somethingdark
Right this is aproximatly what i feel it should look like

max skills no aditional mods/rigs
racial jammer

ship | ecm optimal | targeting range | strength (1=best)

bbird | 80km optimal | dont care | 3
rook | 120km optimal | 160km | 1
falcon | 80km optimal | 160km | 3
scorp | 160km optimal | 125km | 2

and for giggles hers the widow (our new ecm overlord)
widow | 160km optimal | 125km | 1

propper calculations available when you offer me a job Rolling Eyes

Widow dosent have a optimal ECM range bonus.... it's a close range BS without the ability to proper fit Torp launcher T2 (if u wanna use torp you can use Faction launchers or no tank at all).

Scorpion has same hull and its a long range BS (cannot be a short range due to its bad agility, and very large size -> quotation from CCP) Widow is just a suicidal short range BS.

Eigof Tahr
Dirt Nap Squad
Posted - 2009.04.01 14:55:00 - [148]

1. Caldari recons used range and ecm as tank. CCP has clearly stated caldari's thematic bonuses are extra range, but now they are being removed. A battleship can alpha a falcon/rook because it is so paper thin.

2. Ecm isn't like any of the other ewar. It can be overheated. It has lowslot modules that change its strength. It is percentage based effectiveness. Some ewar has scripts, some can be overheated, some can be bonuses, some just sit there (tp). By turning ecm into everything else, you are saying you don't want a diverse play environment that forces people to think.

3. Where is the other bonus system for caldari recons? Amarr have neut/nos bonus, minmatar have webs, gallente have scram/disruptor bonus. Caldari have.....nothing anymore. We had range, that made sense, Caldari have never been "short range brawlers" because that didn't fit their model. Lol add drone bay to a caldari recon, methinks, you confuse gallente and caldari ships.

4. 72km is not long range CCP. A battleship needs to hit effectively to twice that to be considered long range. When was the last time anyone saw a battleship that was long range that had a range of 72+80? Maybe 150+60. Falloff kills ecm, and a strength of 7.875 with max skills is lol.

If someone where coming to a bs sniper fight with one of those scorpions I would shoot them myself and tell them to get in a raven. At least it would be able to hit far enough with a cruise missile and have someone resembling a tank. That scorpion isn't going to do anything because he will constantly be out of range and no strength.

5. Why not back the whole train up and just reduce the insanely good strength bonus the falcon and rook get. Drop it from 20% per level to 10% per level.

6. Falcon whiners will exist until the falcon is useless and then they will move on to their next flavor and ruin someone else's fun because they can't figure out how to work the situation. I predict it will be either a weapons system or a tanking system. Clearly CCP only believe in tank and gank anymore so, it has to be one of those two to get the next cry.

Beasts of Burden
D3f3ctiv3 Coll3ctiv3 Allianc3
Posted - 2009.04.01 15:20:00 - [149]

My biggest problem with ECM is that a frig can come in at 150km and perma-jam my BS with 1 module and completely take it out of the fight. I would like there to be a limit on what class for ships that a certain type of ship can jam and if it goes out of it's class it loses strength of it's jams(something like frigs can jam frigs and cruisers with the cruiser jam having less strength, the recons jamming cruisers, BC and BS losing strength on the BC and BS jams,and BS being able to jam BS with loss of strength on cap ships, also allowing each to jam below it's class), also moving the falcons and stuff into gun range is nice but not really helpful when a ECCM can't stop them from jamming me now so I will just get a better look at them while they do it. If that isn't possible how about a extended cool down counter on the jammers themselves so as to give the ship being jammed a chance to get a few shots off or his drones on the jamming ship at least. Make the falcon pilots sweat with the rest of us in a fire fight.Twisted Evil

Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.04.01 16:04:00 - [150]

Originally by: Nipplator
My biggest problem with ECM is that a frig can come in at 150km and perma-jam my BS with 1 module and completely take it out of the fight.

Which frig does this with just 1 module ?

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

These forums are archived and read-only