These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fon Revedhort - CSM7

First post First post First post
Author
CanIHave YourStuff
In Praise Of Shadows
#101 - 2012-02-27 08:34:26 UTC
Taranis with no dc. Not that you needs specific example to know damage controls shouldn't be nerfed.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#102 - 2012-02-27 15:35:27 UTC
As far as I know mods are available at [email protected] (or w/e). I strongly suggest you mail them directly instead of cluttering this thread.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

VaL Iscariot
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#103 - 2012-03-01 16:36:19 UTC
The legendary Fon Revedhort is running for CSM?

Well, I read your posts.
I agree with some things.
Others, not so much.
However, its because of you that I've learned to scoff at people who say FoF missiles are useless.
Its because of you that I have a Nighthawk in my hanger.
Its because of you that I love small gang warfare and haven't joined some huge null alliance.
I've lost well over a dozen ships to you.
Heck, I've even used your own tactics against you to kill one of your Machs.
You've been an inspiration to me, and many others.

Good sir, you have done one thing no amount of campaigning or promises by the other CSM candidates can do: Earn my vote. Good luck to you.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#104 - 2012-03-01 17:54:57 UTC
Thanks, Val, though that very Mach was among my least successful ships and I don't see how any of 15 participants of that fight could have used any specific tactics to bring it down. It was all over in like 60 seconds at most Attention

Anyhow, you win some, you lose some, so see you around! Blink

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Kitt JT
True North.
#105 - 2012-03-01 22:04:30 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
6) Combat Recons vs. Force Recons

Some may think they are in close relation. I strongly object and state they're of about the same difference as covert-ops frigates and interceptors (or EAFs). I do think Combat and Force Recons are separate ship classes and should be treated as such. But the mind boggles seeing claims of Pilgrim not being a match to Curse. Why should it in the first place!? Pilgrim gets a covert-ops cloak - an extremely powerful module allowing it to sneak and perform sudden attacks. That costs a lot! And so it should. Take a look at Tech3 cruisers - covert-ops subsystem greatly reduces their combat capabilities. And that's great. That's exactly what makes it balanced. So, in contradistinction to what some say, Pilgrim is OK without neut range bonus. Moreover, Curse/Pilgrim pair is exactly how all the Recons are to be balanced - there should be a choice between range and cloak. Having both of the worlds should not be allowed, otherwise it brings us to such a situation where Rook is hardly used and we're forced to give him massive offensives, which is kind of stupid for a Recon ship. I'd even say that Rook will never be used as much as Falcon no matter what - as long as EW range is equal, things will stay the same.

The ultimate conclusion is: reduce range bonuses for tackling mods of both Rapier and Arazu (may be make them match corresponding tech3 hulls), give Rook an EW range bonus.


Rook is hardly used? I fly ecm quite often, and i have to say, i fly it a lot more than the falcon. Rook is a great ship, but for some reason people don't understand it. Its a great close range brawler.
Unlike the falcon, the rook is very able to deal decent damage (400 dps), fit a strong tank, a prop mod, and still have room for jamms.
Dez Affinity
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#106 - 2012-03-02 08:00:39 UTC
Although I respect you as a PvPer your ideas are atrocious, like really really bad.

No, I mean really.
Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#107 - 2012-03-02 09:22:08 UTC
For a guy I've never heard of you make a lot of good points.

Why aren't your videos linked in your intro since many others undoubtedly haven't heard of you either?
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#108 - 2012-03-02 10:02:13 UTC
Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
For a guy I've never heard of you make a lot of good points.

Why aren't your videos linked in your intro since many others undoubtedly haven't heard of you either?

Yeah, might be useful. Made a few links.

Kitt JT wrote:

Rook is hardly used? I fly ecm quite often, and i have to say, i fly it a lot more than the falcon. Rook is a great ship, but for some reason people don't understand it. Its a great close range brawler.
Unlike the falcon, the rook is very able to deal decent damage (400 dps), fit a strong tank, a prop mod, and still have room for jamms.

Alright, may be that was a bit of exaggeration, but the point remains. Falcons are seen more often, while it should be right the reverse - a niche cloaky ship versus a general combat-oriented non-cloaked one.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

DUBLYUR
Doomheim
#109 - 2012-03-02 13:16:51 UTC
+1like
Josef Stylin
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2012-03-03 16:06:28 UTC
+1
Omnicide Incarnate
Doomheim
#111 - 2012-03-03 20:59:42 UTC
Votin for this guy
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#112 - 2012-03-06 01:32:59 UTC
Alright, I've never been a fan of wasting my breath over multiple interviews to get as much coverage as possible etc. Having English as a second language doesn't help either.

So I'd better draw your attention to what I'm doing rather than saying.

Here it is, a new movie of mine.

You can not make a proper judgement without having it seen! P

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Laktos
Perkone
Caldari State
#113 - 2012-03-06 12:53:20 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Now, back on topic. Regardless of your own personal political ideologies, I agree with most of your proposals about EVE and I believe from watching your many videos and reading your comments on PvP, that you will be a force for good for the solo and small gang pvper should you get on the CSM.

So you've got my vote :)


Edit: Off topic part removed, CCP Phantom

Latest PVP Video: Perseverance

Sard Caid does not endorse this message.

Eugen Kidd
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#114 - 2012-03-07 08:12:19 UTC
+3 from me
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#115 - 2012-03-07 09:41:43 UTC
I know this is your candidacy thread, so won't argue your opinions too much, and let's first say this -
Every post I ever seen by you Fon, has been backed by solid argumentation, experience and constructive ideas. I personally happen to love the kind of warfare you usually do too, which is nice to see.

So in terms of the points you bring up:
1) Rigs, buffer vs active tanking, overused modules, electronic warfare, cruise missiles, low sec - couldn't agree more, spot on.

2) Cyno (and black ops, as you mentioned it) - originally you were invulnerable when you put up cyno, just fyi as you mentioned it hadn't been changed. But yeah, there's zero scaling on cyno as you mention. As for cov ops cyno, I agree it needs no buff, that it goes past cyno jams, isn't visible on overview unless on grid, 30sec duration etc.. it's all quite strong already. Black Ops themselves are also not bad, when you can deploy them. It's more an issue of actually getting there, which is range-/fuel-issues. That couldn't be buffed too much either as it'd make them, like you say, too powerful/overused. But it could use a slight tweak here, maybe just increase the fuel bay tbh. I think you're on the right track.

3) Combat vs Force Recons - Yah, they are differnt ships. No, don't reduce range on Rapier and Arazu, and yeah Rook needs some little edge over the Falcon (it is a decent solo multi-boat tho, while the Falcon is more racial and group boat, so I'm not completely agreeing with you that it's all that bad). Actually maybe give the Rook a bit ability to deal small amount of more damage? Rapiers and Arazu are made of paper tho, that range is the only survability they have. If you try to deploy 2-3 ships and one is an Arazu or Rapier, you usually need 20km+. Take away the range bonus on them both and what do they have going for them? Curse and Pilgrim comparison is good tho. They are both very potent ships, just used in different scenarios. I almost-agree with you on the recons.

4) Supers and capitals - I agree with more or less all you said here. I think the easy solution to avoid these kind of nightmare scenarios is simply to never ever add more capitals. At all. Just purely focus on subcaps (and new skills related to them). A bigger variety of tactic, more options for younger players while same time fielding similar size as older, etc. I can only see benefits with this.

5) Highsec - It's not 'fine' that some players sit hoarding tens of billions per month in highsec, never spend it and never puts at big risks. This skews the economy, and as someone who studied economy this is something I'm quite worried over. In fact, doomsday scenario: it might very well kill EVE, and real quick, when it does. People who have small risks should have small reward, if not from a PvP point of view, but if anything, this is crucial for the games survival.

6) You did not mention this, and I feel like a stuck tape recorder, posting it everywhere but - cloaks. What is your opinion on them? Fine as is? AFK-cloaking, fuel, submarine, etc? Here's why I ask: I play in null, have no blobs, either alone or I bring a friend vs.. well everyone that is around. In lowsec I would never fit a cloak, but in null, sometimes I stay for extended periods, and I very, very VERY often get camped by dictor blobs on gates, with combat probers in local. The cloak is my bread and butter to be able to survive. And while I'd be happy to purely fly ships with cov ops cloaks, 250 dps x1-2 is not enough to break most ratters. Generally we use 1 cov ops ship with 1 non-cov ops, but cloaked. Defenders have everything at their disposal: local, probers, numbers, intel, stations, POS/infrastructure, jumpbridges, dscan, etc. Our only real edge, now that nano days are gone (and consider we stick around) is cloaks. Our targets generally die to igno- or arrogance. If we try log we get combat probed and die while offline, so many times, we are forced to 'sit out' hostiles, occationally for days. We don't mind, but considering all negatives already with the cloaks (lock time, sensor strength, -1 high, visible when warping/logging/moving etc), all potential changes from the AFK-cloak whiners will unfortunately completely break the game for us. Thoughts?

All in all I barely see much negatives at all with your candidacy, bar the Rapier (especially) and Arazu range nerf wishes.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#116 - 2012-03-07 10:00:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
Thanks for the post.
Misanth wrote:

6) You did not mention this, and I feel like a stuck tape recorder, posting it everywhere but - cloaks. What is your opinion on them? Fine as is? AFK-cloaking, fuel, submarine, etc? Here's why I ask: I play in null, have no blobs, either alone or I bring a friend vs.. well everyone that is around. In lowsec I would never fit a cloak, but in null, sometimes I stay for extended periods, and I very, very VERY often get camped by dictor blobs on gates, with combat probers in local. The cloak is my bread and butter to be able to survive. And while I'd be happy to purely fly ships with cov ops cloaks, 250 dps x1-2 is not enough to break most ratters. Generally we use 1 cov ops ship with 1 non-cov ops, but cloaked. Defenders have everything at their disposal: local, probers, numbers, intel, stations, POS/infrastructure, jumpbridges, dscan, etc. Our only real edge, now that nano days are gone (and consider we stick around) is cloaks. Our targets generally die to igno- or arrogance. If we try log we get combat probed and die while offline, so many times, we are forced to 'sit out' hostiles, occationally for days. We don't mind, but considering all negatives already with the cloaks (lock time, sensor strength, -1 high, visible when warping/logging/moving etc), all potential changes from the AFK-cloak whiners will unfortunately completely break the game for us. Thoughts?

All in all I barely see much negatives at all with your candidacy, bar the Rapier (especially) and Arazu range nerf wishes.


I'll start with Rapier/Arazu. It's desirable to reduce their range bonuses instead of removing them altogether, which is something I didn't really propose in the first place. Even with half a bonus their web/scram range will still be insane or at least will provide them an edge in this regard.

As for cloaking mechanics - that's a very tough call. You stated valid arguments. On top of that, cloaks are the reason why I, for instance, literally hate w-space PvP - there's just no way to figure out whether something is there.

Instead - yet again, merely an idea - how about cloaking providing just a "physical" cover, leaving the others an intel that something is hiding in the grid, the vicinity or even the system?
Also, I'm pretty sure the entire cloaking problem is closely tied up with local chat. Which in turn is said to be addressed. So I'd rather wait and see how they gonna change it. And then we'll adjust accordingly, both in terms of tactics and opinions on further required steps.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#117 - 2012-03-07 15:22:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Misanth
Fon Revedhort wrote:
I'll start with Rapier/Arazu. It's desirable to reduce their range bonuses instead of removing them altogether, which is something I didn't really propose in the first place. Even with half a bonus their web/scram range will still be insane or at least will provide them an edge in this regard.

As for cloaking mechanics - that's a very tough call. You stated valid arguments. On top of that, cloaks are the reason why I, for instance, literally hate w-space PvP - there's just no way to figure out whether something is there.

Instead - yet again, merely an idea - how about cloaking providing just a "physical" cover, leaving the others an intel that something is hiding in the grid, the vicinity or even the system?
Also, I'm pretty sure the entire cloaking problem is closely tied up with local chat. Which in turn is said to be addressed. So I'd rather wait and see how they gonna change it. And then we'll adjust accordingly, both in terms of tactics and opinions on further required steps.


Cheers for reply;

Not sure I agree with you on the recons, but judging by your vids for example, they do cause alot more issues in that scale fighting then I ever have to worry about. Twisted Generally I'd use them defensively, rather than in a blob-offense. In those situations, I want range! Haha. I'm more inclined to agree with Arazu having their range reduced, they still have the damps going for them, Rapier with "short" range webs will be 'meh' at most. Bit sad, I think that's the ship I have most kills in bar Sabre, but if it'd lose as much as 50% range I'd stop fly it completely. Might as well go overheated faction web on any-ship then. I bet we both view them from different sides of the field tho. And bear in mind I don't do 5man+ fleets even.

I can see your point regarding WH space, even tho personally I feel it's actually the most "true" EVE PvP nowadays. It's more tactics involved, no risk of cyno hotdrops/bridges, limited amount of pilots, etc. But yes, it's very much about controlling the space pre-fight even, perhaps staying in system for a good while. For fast-paced PvP this isn't ideal. But we could/should/would leave that for low-, and roaming non-spaceholding null, don't you think? And the interesting follow-up question, especially with your local comment: then, what if local was gone? Obviously, having no local might risk ruining alot of the kind of PvP you want to do now?

Oh and; damn you for the armor Mach/shield Vindi/Bhaal.. I been wanting to do them for so long, been playing with those fits in EFT for ages, even started to fit the ships but hadn't had the "time" (balls) to try it yet. Jeleous! Haha. Am surprised we don't see more armor Machs or shield Bhaals tho, it's not like it's never been done before, and they're both begging to be fit that way imho.
Possibly tossing some votes your direction, good luck.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

VaL Iscariot
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#118 - 2012-03-07 19:14:31 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Thanks, Val, though that very Mach was among my least successful ships and I don't see how any of 15 participants of that fight could have used any specific tactics to bring it down. It was all over in like 60 seconds at most Attention

Anyhow, you win some, you lose some, so see you around! Blink



i'll just say I know a guy who knows a guy that might have a booster loki that's fit a lot like how a certain butler that follows you around fits his. That long point scrambler was the only way we could think to bring you down. Anyway, votes in. Good luck. Pirate
Arbiter Reformed
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#119 - 2012-03-07 19:37:02 UTC
sent an alliance mail out but there all lazy

but ive already voted for you anyway,


NIGHTHAWK BUFF NAOW
Josef Stylin
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2012-03-07 23:23:28 UTC
Nighthawk BUFF? You know that the nighthawk can currently pretty much 1-shot frigates with HMs due to its explosion radius?