Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:11:00 -
[1]
I can't understand how ppl think its ok that everyone has to change their tactics, fleet setups, fits, because of ONE ship. Ok if more ships had this impact. But we are talking about one ship that changes how everyone plays this game. It doesn't matter if its all it can do, or if all other ships of that race sucks, or if its pink and has flowers painted on it. One ship shouldn't have that affect over the game play.
It doesn't matter if you CAN counter it somehow. When that means everyone has to adapt and change their play style because of this ONE ship something is just not right.
Got Cooch?, solo PvP movie
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente The Aduro Protocol
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:27:00 -
[2]
Originally by: General Coochie I can't understand how ppl think its ok that everyone has to change their tactics, fleet setups, fits, because of ONE ship.
Because it removes you from the fight.
|
TimMc
Gallente The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:29:00 -
[3]
Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:36:00 -
[4]
Edited by: maralt on 25/03/2009 10:36:37
Originally by: General Coochie I can't understand how ppl think its ok that everyone has to change their tactics, fleet setups, fits, because of ONE ship. Ok if more ships had this impact. But we are talking about one ship that changes how everyone plays this game. It doesn't matter if its all it can do, or if all other ships of that race sucks, or if its pink and has flowers painted on it. One ship shouldn't have that affect over the game play.
It doesn't matter if you CAN counter it somehow. When that means everyone has to adapt and change their play style because of this ONE ship something is just not right.
While that is a very good point if it was entirely accurate it is a bit of a streach to claim that everybody needs to change their play style, tactics, fleet setups, fits.
PLAY STYLE. The only play style that is really effected is the style that involves 2 gangs sitting oposite each other plugging away until one side runs out of ships as ECM means they must manouver/reposition and adapt their style and even the fits on a few of their ships.
TACTICS. Its more diffiocult to beat a gang with the currant ECM in it than one without ECM in it and as such ECM adds the need for more tactical approaches than it removes.
Nerfing the falcon will most cetainly not add more tactics to the game, but it will most certainly remove the need for currant gangs to use the tactics now needed to deal with them.
FLEET SETUPS. Im not sure how having a few ships with good base sig str and the ability to hit the falcon at range in your gamng fittedc with a single ECCM alters a entire fleet setup.
Yes falcons seem very powerful when used against a single ship getting ganked but he was gonna die any way and they can also tip the balance in very small gang combat against pure dmg dealing teams.
I do not buy the idea that they alter entire fleet setups sorry.
FITS. Ithink fits is pretty much covered in the other points, but i will add that a slot or two on a limited few ships (relative to the size of the gang) is not exactly what i would call a big deal comnpared to the other side having to use a entire account fully trained in a T2 ship that uses all its slots to achieve the effect.
|
Parsival
Minmatar The Avalon Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:41:00 -
[5]
Here we go again.
OP's argument is pretty much identical to all those trotted out about nano-ships. What it really boils down to is at any point in time there is going to be an optimum universal tactic for PvP, if we keep nerfing all those tactics and we are eventually left with BS sitting 10km off each other testing each others tanks what are we going to nerf then? High slots?
|
Tolsimir Wolfblood
Esto Perpetua
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:46:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Parsival Here we go again.
OP's argument is pretty much identical to all those trotted out about nano-ships. What it really boils down to is at any point in time there is going to be an optimum universal tactic for PvP, if we keep nerfing all those tactics and we are eventually left with BS sitting 10km off each other testing each others tanks what are we going to nerf then? High slots?
Thank you. Finally some one who sees it more clear then CCP. After they nerf the falcon I hope tracking dissruptors go next b/c thats the only thing left to nerf really.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:48:00 -
[7]
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 10:49:04
Originally by: Parsival Here we go again.
OP's argument is pretty much identical to all those trotted out about nano-ships. What it really boils down to is at any point in time there is going to be an optimum universal tactic for PvP, if we keep nerfing all those tactics and we are eventually left with BS sitting 10km off each other testing each others tanks what are we going to nerf then? High slots?
Yea.
It looks like the "rock", "paper", "sissors" that ppl preach about is once again getting gimped and eventually all we will be left with are rocks sitting oposite each other at close range beating each other over the head with them.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 10:54:00 -
[8]
There are effective counters to the long range ECM (LRE) but it is pretty much only available to 0.0 fleets where you have the lock/fire range already in place.
The LRE applied anywhere outside of the fleet scenario is game breaking in the extreme now that speeds have been normalized. If you stock up on ECCM you are often gimping your set up to such an extent that any newbie FC can wipe you out - and the gimpage doesn't even guarantee that you are not jammed.
CCP's proposal doesn't change this, all it does is make the LRE visible. If you scan a Rook you know LRE is incoming and can disengage if need be. If you want to prevent this you use the Fail-con but run the risk of losing it .. the alt-tab crowd will likely have to improve their hand-eye coordination to compensate.
I still wish CCP would redesign the entire ECM mechanic, twiddling thumbs watching a timer bar decrease makes for poor gameplay, but the proposal is a decent stop-gap measure.
|
Tolsimir Wolfblood
Esto Perpetua
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:02:00 -
[9]
If CCP dose nerf the falcon the way the intend to do it i will lean long range jamming to 5, still use 3x Signal Distortion Amplifier II, and 2x Particle Dispersion Projector I(20% increase to ecm optimal), sit at 120km and jam people to oblivion all while orbiting the fight at 250 km so turrets will still have a hard time hitting me.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:05:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Tolsimir Wolfblood If CCP dose nerf the falcon the way the intend to do it i will lean long range jamming to 5, still use 3x Signal Distortion Amplifier II, and 2x Particle Dispersion Projector I(20% increase to ecm optimal), sit at 120km and jam people to oblivion all while orbiting the fight at 250 km so turrets will still have a hard time hitting me.
How can you be sitting at 120km while "jamming ppl to oblivion" and orbiting at 250km at the same time?.
|
|
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:07:00 -
[11]
The thing is we now have a bunch of scissors and not a rock but a ****ing huge mountain. And a few paper towels.
If it was so that all other recons and some other ships in this game had the same impact as the falcon I would be overjoyed. I'm all for diversity on the battle field. The current state of the falcon, is against diversity. One ship used as alternate tactic to counter everything else.
I'd love if CCP buffed all other recons instead, and I made heaps of threads to buff the gallente recons. But they don't . And therefor I think the falcon has get nurfed a bit to. Not to uselessness but to promote the other recons use and make the game less predictable. Now if there is one hostile not accounted for 99% he is in falcon.
I was also propsing long ago a nerf to webs and to make ABs more useful. And here we have it. Current state of MWD,AB,Scrams,Webs are the most awesome thing in eve in a long time. Diversity! A nerf to something actually improved the game a lot. So not all nerfs are bad. (I do believe minmatar recons maybe should get compensated a bit).
Got Cooch?, solo PvP movie
|
Parsival
Minmatar The Avalon Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:11:00 -
[12]
Originally by: General Coochie Diversity!
Webs are almost not worth fitting, soon ECM will be pretty marginal and eventually noone will want to fly recons.
Sounds great for diversity.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:18:00 -
[13]
Originally by: General Coochie
If it was so that all other recons and some other ships in this game had the same impact as the falcon I would be overjoyed.
A lot of ships do have as much impact in combat as the falcon does they just have it in other types of combat than gangs. The curse/pilgrim is a awsome ship for solo work and has a vast available target selection if it is flown correctly.
The rokh and apoc are the only snipers that can hit at max range and the only reason most sniper gangs do not take advantage of this is because of the other sniper ships needing to be closer or the rokh and apoc would be invulnerable to all but themselves.
This nerf removes a lot of things gangs need to do to be successful and while we are seeing a lot of posts from ppl claiming it will "make falcons ect harder to fly" the real truth is that they mean "it will make my pvp easier to do" or "they will stop being used in gang combat just like the others when they got nerfed".
And thats just a poor direction to take a game.
|
Rordan D'Kherr
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:21:00 -
[14]
Originally by: General Coochie I can't understand how ppl think its ok that everyone has to change their tactics, fleet setups, fits, because of ONE ship.
If you have a good tactic, good fittings and a good setup, you do not need to change anything. If your fits / tactics are weak, well then...
|
Tolsimir Wolfblood
Esto Perpetua
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 11:45:00 -
[15]
I know the answer to falcons!!!!!!
Another falcon. LOL
|
Warrio
Southern Cross Incorporated Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 12:11:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Warrio on 25/03/2009 12:11:40 Range nerf getting your down? Do your three falcon pilots feel like they can't contribute anymore?
We have a solution!! More Falcon alts!
Why not? They are closer range sure but that just means you'll need more of the little fellas to ensure that every enemy ship is jammed so they can't fight back at all! \o/
Forget the ship bonii, it's the mechanic that needs to change. sXe |
Haalanii
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 12:41:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Tolsimir Wolfblood After they nerf the falcon I hope tracking dissruptors go next b/c thats the only thing left to nerf really.
-Execept that TD's are already scripted (same nerf that hit sensor damps). -Plus they don't impact every ship, only turret boats. And even then they don't completely remove the ship, they reduce effectiveness. -Unlike ECM, one TD alone isn't nearly as significant and you often have to use 2 on the same ship. -Finally, TD's don't have the range to work where ECM does on bonused ships.
Falcons/Rooks are just completely outside the boundaries of every other recon and the falcon in particular is so powerful that it is unarguably the single most decisive sub-capital ship you can bring to a battle in ANY size engagement. In some cases, the presence of a falcon is actually preferable to a mothership or titan. What else fits that description?
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 12:56:00 -
[18]
Originally by: TimMc Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
opticians, rejoice! - putting the gist back into logistics |
Easley Thames
The Maverick Navy PuPPet MasTers
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 12:59:00 -
[19]
Originally by: TimMc Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
The falcon will still operate at greater range than other recons and it's getting MORE JAM STRENGTH. Not every fight is 500 v 500 with snipers on both sides and dozens of tacklers. The falcon could end up more dangerous in small fights and the only real loss is the sentry-gun avoidance which was what allowed it to kill many good fights anyway. This ship needs dramatic changes to be equal with other ECM boats (as well as other recons for that matter) and ECM would require dramatic changes to be equal with other forms of e-war. CCP is still clearly working out exactly what it should be made into so the best thing to offer is constructive analysis.
The rook will have a use now with the long-range jamming role still un-touched. I think this is a nice decision. It lacks a cov-ops cloak but this made the falcon stupidly good in conjunction with its rook-level jamming power and range. Rook is also getting the missile range to contribute anti-support fire instead of being a one-trick pony. The drone bay addition is also nice and it opens up more solo options as well as a strong counter to frigs (further augmenting its anti-support capability).
The scorpion under current changes will be a MONSTER in small gang warfare. It will lose its long-range jamming role in big fleets though. If they go this way the scorp may join the phoon and domi in the "not ideal for fleet battles" / "just bring remote reps or something" club. Still, those two ships are awesome in their own right so I have to wonder if it would be so terrible. Ultimately though, I think with current game trends going more and more towards ever bigger blobs and long-ranged warfare they may want to re-work the scorp changes to throw it into the "sniper" category with the rook. Leave the kitsune and falcon in the mid-range engagement caregory IMO.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:24:00 -
[20]
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 13:24:51
Originally by: Easley Thames
Originally by: TimMc Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
The falcon will still operate at greater range than other recons and it's getting MORE JAM STRENGTH.
Wake up to reality!!!!.
+25% to jam str at level 5 vs -20% x 3 signal distortion amps (less stacking penalty) = LESS JAM STR.
And yes it has slightly more range than the other recons, BUT THEY ARE NO LONGER USED IN GANG COMBAT BECAUSE OF THAT RANGE CONSTRAINT.
|
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:36:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Easley Thames
Originally by: TimMc Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
The falcon will still operate at greater range than other recons and it's getting MORE JAM STRENGTH.
It will be well within range of typical gangs, and it will get less strenght as the SDA's are getting changed. In other words unless its a 2 man gang your falcon will die within seconds or be forced to warp.
Quote:
Not every fight is 500 v 500 with snipers on both sides and dozens of tacklers. The falcon could end up more dangerous in small fights and the only real loss is the sentry-gun avoidance which was what allowed it to kill many good fights anyway.
Ironically noone ever complained about falcons in fleet fights, and now they will be 100% useless in them along with the other ecm boats. As for small fights it will only allow one side to use falcons as they will get all the sentry gun fire. Its ******ed to only allow defenders to use ecm.
Quote:
This ship needs dramatic changes to be equal with other ECM boats (as well as other recons for that matter) and ECM would require dramatic changes to be equal with other forms of e-war. CCP is still clearly working out exactly what it should be made into so the best thing to offer is constructive analysis.
Yes its a shame there was one ship doing something other than tank+spank. Way too complex for eve players to figure out.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:50:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Warrio Edited by: Warrio on 25/03/2009 12:11:40 Range nerf getting your down? Do your three falcon pilots feel like they can't contribute anymore?
We have a solution!! More Falcon alts!
Why not? They are closer range sure but that just means you'll need more of the little fellas to ensure that every enemy ship is jammed so they can't fight back at all! \o/
Forget the ship bonii, it's the mechanic that needs to change.
Correct in every respect, but you said "bonii" so I am forced to hate you.
THE PLURAL OF BONUS IS BONUSES.
|
CaldeteisX
Caldari Celestial Apocalypse death from above..
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:59:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Warrio Edited by: Warrio on 25/03/2009 12:11:40 Range nerf getting your down? Do your three falcon pilots feel like they can't contribute anymore?
We have a solution!! More Falcon alts!
Why not? They are closer range sure but that just means you'll need more of the little fellas to ensure that every enemy ship is jammed so they can't fight back at all! \o/
Forget the ship bonii, it's the mechanic that needs to change.
Hi warrio! :)
Falcon doesnt need a massive nerf, just change some things with the strength of ecm, drop it down a bit, and make ECCM modules more effective. And be good if people read through these forums more instead of just crying, i've seen lots of good counters for falcons that work. Its all about to get changed anyway, and it does look like the changes will be ok for the rook. Falcon should really keep its range of 150-200km, but just put a nice dent in its ECM strength.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:21:00 -
[24]
Originally by: GTC seller72 +25% to jam str at level 5 vs -20% x 3 signal distortion amps (less stacking penalty) = LESS JAM STR.
And yes it has slightly more range than the other recons, BUT THEY ARE NO LONGER USED IN GANG COMBAT BECAUSE OF THAT RANGE CONSTRAINT.
You are assuming that the relative loss of jam strength after the change will be less effective than it is now and I say it will have the same effect. Just because a stat is lowered doesn't mean its going to lose the expected performance. As it stand now even with an eccm a properly setup falcon or rook will get enough jams in to seriously disrupt rr and overall gang dps. After the changes eccm will be very effective vs long range ecm and probably about as useful as it is now vs the new close range falcon. But hard numbers on the proposed changes when applied to chance based jamming can be misleading along with educated guesses and so are useless until we get to actually see the result of the changes. CCP plz port this to the test server as soon as humanly (or alienly as it applys) as possible.
Yay! Got meh sig back! ♥ Weatherman |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:55:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Zeba
Originally by: GTC seller72 +25% to jam str at level 5 vs -20% x 3 signal distortion amps (less stacking penalty) = LESS JAM STR.
And yes it has slightly more range than the other recons, BUT THEY ARE NO LONGER USED IN GANG COMBAT BECAUSE OF THAT RANGE CONSTRAINT.
You are assuming that the relative loss of jam strength after the change will be less effective than it is now and I say it will have the same effect.
Less jam str = less effect, its simple math really...
Originally by: Zeba As it stand now even with an eccm a properly setup falcon or rook will get enough jams in to seriously disrupt rr and overall gang dps.
That is because a single eccm is not supposed to give immunity to a rack of jammers.
Originally by: Zeba After the changes eccm will be very effective vs long range ecm and probably about as useful as it is now vs the new close range falcon.
It will not matter for close range jamming as nobody will be doing that anyway just like nobody uses arazu's or any of the other recons in med sized gang fighting any more......And even if it did matter the close range falcon is getting a jam str nerf as well as a range one compared to what str it uses/has now.
Long range jamming will be further gimped as it will be getting a ship jam str nerf as well as the SDA nerf.
Meaning that nobody will need to fit ECCM for either the falcon or the rook, but then you are kidding yourself if you think that is not what nerf hounds wanted from the start anyway...
|
Groknor
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:10:00 -
[26]
Falcons are easy to counter, double click nexzt to them, overheat mwd, launch drones. Easy.
|
Cletus Graeme
Caldari Duty.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:17:00 -
[27]
What's the problem with ECM ships?
|
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 19:12:00 -
[28]
Edited by: General Coochie on 25/03/2009 19:13:06
Originally by: GTC seller72
Originally by: General Coochie
If it was so that all other recons and some other ships in this game had the same impact as the falcon I would be overjoyed.
A lot of ships do have as much impact in combat as the falcon does they just have it in other types of combat than gangs. The curse/pilgrim is a awsome ship for solo work and has a vast available target selection if it is flown correctly.
I can list a few ships more that influence combat as much as falcons, carriers, moms, dreads and titans No but seriously in small gang warfare I probably be more happy to see one carrier then 1 or 2 falcons.
Also
Originally by: GTC seller72 Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 13:24:51
Originally by: Easley Thames
Originally by: TimMc Don't worry its getting nerfed... pretty much to the ground from the looks of it.
The falcon will still operate at greater range than other recons and it's getting MORE JAM STRENGTH.
Learn to read the benefits stated in the nerf thread
+25% to jam str at level 5 vs -20% x 3 signal distortion amps (less stacking penalty) = LESS JAM STR.
And yes it has slightly more range than the other recons, BUT THEY ARE NO LONGER USED IN GANG COMBAT BECAUSE OF THAT RANGE CONSTRAINT.
If you read the nerf thread you would know that ecm base strength in getting increased to balance the loss of the SDAs... So strength on a falcon is probably gonna be more then it is now.
Got Cooch?, solo PvP movie
|
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 19:14:00 -
[29]
I would also cry my heart out if I trained and paid for an alt falcon account
I think thats what this whining is all about really.
Got Cooch?, solo PvP movie
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |