Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:05:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Clone 1
Multiple Chance Probability
The problem with ECM drones is they you have multiples of them each with their own chance of working or failing.
Given a Geddon, Radar Strength 17
EC-900 Jam strength 2
Probability of a single EC-900 jamming a geddon =2/17 = 0.1176
Probability of 5 EC-900's jamming a geddon =2/17 + 2/17 + 2/17 + 2/17 + 2/17 = 0.588
Nearly 60% chance you get jammed with 5 EC-900's
That's what's wrong.
Yes, your math, that is what is wrong.
The answer is actually 1-(15/17 x 15/17 x 15/17 x 15/17 x 15/17)= Probability of a jam per cycle or, about 46.5% per cycle.
The Geddon also has an abysmally low sensor strength for a battleship.
|
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:21:00 -
[122]
Actually, the maths are a bit more difficult. See here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=962906&page=1#1
Proud member of RZR - Decadence. |
Nikuno
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:22:00 -
[123]
The main bone of contention with ecm is the way it isolates you from a fight for such an inordinately long period of time. 20 seconds in most fights is death. Have you never considered shortening the cycle time so that the random element becomes more a part of the game mechanism? If the cycle time was say 8 seconds then the jammer has the satisfaction of getting another bite at the cherry sooner, whilst the target is out of action for a much less crippling period of time. It may end up making little difference in game play, but at the very least it might alter the perception of being out of the game totally which is how it feels right now with ecm.
|
Zackalwe
Gallente Thundercats RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:26:00 -
[124]
Originally by: CCP Nozh The heavy Wasp EC-900's have 2 points of strength to all sensor types and a 20 second duration, equivalent to un-bonused Tech 1 multispectral jammers. Unlike the capacitor thirsty multispectral jammers they do not require any energy. Further more due to their small signature radius, once their victims gain the ability to target again, it takes quite a long time to acquire a lock in order to neutralize them. Most of the time you're facing multiple ECM Drones, which can be quite tricky to target and destroy, it becomes quite annoying. Electronic warfare doesn't really work properly against them, nor does small amounts of damage as the pilot is always able to scoop the drones and redeploy them. In some ways the drones are superior to targeted ECM jammers, as the drones operate even though you yourself are being target jammed. Smartbombs are able to counter them quite well, however this tactic only works while piloting larger ships that can field large smartbombs.
To be honest you have listed the good points about these drones but not mentioned any of the down-sides. For instance:
1. EC-900's require 125Mb drone bandwidth to deploy. Which means it can only be used from certain battleships and the Ishtar. The Ishtar would rarely ever use these drones because it would sacrifice its main damage output. Same goes for the Domi really.
2. EC-900's are slow and can only really effectively engage BS class enemies, which means your counter of smartbombs is actually quite reasonable against them.
3. Deploying EC-900's means you are not taking advantage of those 125Mbits to deploy ogres or sentries.
4. EC-900's are only effective at short range because of their travel time.
5. Unlike dedicated ECM boats you can only jam one target with a reasonable chance of success, and it needs to be slow and right on top of you.
To be honest I rarely see this class of drone ever being used. I see EC-600s a lot more, as they can be used on a lot more non-drone bonused ships. And even then you are sacrificing 150 dps from using hammerhead 2s. Sometimes you will opt for damage, other times the chance of a jam. Seems fairly balanced to me tbh.
What I would like to see is the boosting of the other EWAR drones. At the moment ECM drones is the only viable option if you decide not to use dps drones.
tldr: Boost the alternatives for once instead of nerfing something that works and actually gets used sometimes as an alternative to the normal dps config.
|
Clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:26:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Colonel Xaven Actually, the maths are a bit more difficult. See here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=962906&page=1#1
Cheers, could you work it out for 5 EC-900 drones with strength 2 ?
I would have thought the chances are added since they are an 'OR' case? -------------------------------------------------- The Angels Have the Phone Box |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:29:00 -
[126]
For easiest calculation: multiply the chances NOT_to_get_jammed and then change it into "chance to get jammed".
So 2/10 to jam = 8/10 not to get jammed. Then make 8/10*8/10*8/10 (3 drones) = 0.52 not to get jammed ==> 0.48 chance to get jammed (per cycle).
|
Ral K'Daro
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:30:00 -
[127]
If this topic was #9 on the list, why are we even discussing it? There are clearly 8 other topics that the playerbase sees as more important and pressing.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:32:00 -
[128]
Maybe because its not only ECM drones but also whole ECM system?
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:34:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Goumindong on 23/04/2009 09:34:59
Originally by: Colonel Xaven Actually, the maths are a bit more difficult. See here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=962906&page=1#1
Not in this case, we don't need to figure out the independent chances for each number of successes since we can just figure out the chance that we will have zero successes and subtract that from the whole.
The chance of zero successes is
Chance of 0 hits with 5 attempts is 5!/(0!(5-0)!) x ([2/17]^0) x ([15/17]^5) = Chance we will not get any jams off.
And 5!/0!5! = 1 and anything ^0=1 so you're just left with the (15/17)^5. So the chance to jam is 1-[15/17]^5
edit: which is exactly what I did.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:34:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Zackalwe
Originally by: CCP Nozh The heavy Wasp EC-900's have 2 points of strength to all sensor types and a 20 second duration, equivalent to un-bonused Tech 1 multispectral jammers. Unlike the capacitor thirsty multispectral jammers they do not require any energy. Further more due to their small signature radius, once their victims gain the ability to target again, it takes quite a long time to acquire a lock in order to neutralize them. Most of the time you're facing multiple ECM Drones, which can be quite tricky to target and destroy, it becomes quite annoying. Electronic warfare doesn't really work properly against them, nor does small amounts of damage as the pilot is always able to scoop the drones and redeploy them. In some ways the drones are superior to targeted ECM jammers, as the drones operate even though you yourself are being target jammed. Smartbombs are able to counter them quite well, however this tactic only works while piloting larger ships that can field large smartbombs.
To be honest you have listed the good points about these drones but not mentioned any of the down-sides. For instance:
1. EC-900's require 125Mb drone bandwidth to deploy. Which means it can only be used from certain battleships and the Ishtar. The Ishtar would rarely ever use these drones because it would sacrifice its main damage output. Same goes for the Domi really.
2. EC-900's are slow and can only really effectively engage BS class enemies, which means your counter of smartbombs is actually quite reasonable against them.
3. Deploying EC-900's means you are not taking advantage of those 125Mbits to deploy ogres or sentries.
4. EC-900's are only effective at short range because of their travel time.
5. Unlike dedicated ECM boats you can only jam one target with a reasonable chance of success, and it needs to be slow and right on top of you.
To be honest I rarely see this class of drone ever being used. I see EC-600s a lot more, as they can be used on a lot more non-drone bonused ships. And even then you are sacrificing 150 dps from using hammerhead 2s. Sometimes you will opt for damage, other times the chance of a jam. Seems fairly balanced to me tbh.
What I would like to see is the boosting of the other EWAR drones. At the moment ECM drones is the only viable option if you decide not to use dps drones.
tldr: Boost the alternatives for once instead of nerfing something that works and actually gets used sometimes as an alternative to the normal dps config.
/thread And yea this is my sig. Real PVP'ers only use f1. |
|
Clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 09:39:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 23/04/2009 09:34:59
Originally by: Colonel Xaven Actually, the maths are a bit more difficult. See here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=962906&page=1#1
Not in this case, we don't need to figure out the independent chances for each number of successes since we can just figure out the chance that we will have zero successes and subtract that from the whole.
The chance of zero successes is
Chance of 0 hits with 5 attempts is 5!/(0!(5-0)!) x ([2/17]^0) x ([15/17]^5) = Chance we will not get any jams off.
And 5!/0!5! = 1 and anything ^0=1 so you're just left with the (15/17)^5. So the chance to jam is 1-[15/17]^5
edit: which is exactly what I did.
I understand now. -------------------------------------------------- The Angels Have the Phone Box |
Vrikshaka
Transmental Unicorn Business Associates
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:05:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Goumindong There is another option which would both resolve the "stacking" issues from multiple ships as well as resolve the "you can't do anything while you're jammed" problems.
Instead of ECM breaking your lock, it adds to an new attribute on your ship. When you attempt to activate any targeted module [or send drones to a target], you make a roll against this value divided by your sensor strength. If you fail(I.E. the jam works), the module is not activated but cycles as if it was. [it can either turn off at the end of its cycle, or auto cycle and try again, depending on implementation goals].
What this does is makes it so that ECM does not totally shut a ship down for 20 seconds 50% of the time, but shuts 50% of the ships targeted capabilities down on average all the time. As well, since it does not prevent ships from locking, there is no problem with relocking. Since it adds/subtracts to a value on the ship, stacking penalties can be applied like any other value.
ECCM can be a flat minus to this value[making you immune to low strength ECM and reducing the chance of jam from high strength ECM]. It could also be a flat + to sensor strength which would probably be better.
There are three problems, two it shares with yours[you have to rewrite all the bonuses and abilities, and you can create perma-jam situations more easily] and one new one[lag]. Then again, the more i think about lag, the less i think it would have an effect. Since the module is going to cycle anyway, each player only has to know the result of the activation and not that he was jammed. So the same information is going back and forth each way. What happened, and who is jamming you. This will still increase the amount of calculation that the server needs to do[another random die per targeted module].
I love this idea.
ECM needs to be less one-dimensional. With the current mechanics, there's always this feeling of hopelessness when being jammed. With this suggestion, one would always have that thin sliver of hope that would keep the fight interesting, even when one's being permajammed. Being the one doing the jamming would be more fun too.
And, it does remedy the imo biggest problem with ECM drones right now - having to target them over and over again which given their tiny sig radius is a bit like them having damps as well on top of their jamming capability.
Yes, it makes sense. The current ECM mechanics do not.
|
Kalica Kahn
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:12:00 -
[133]
Meh I don't see a problem with ECM drones, as any ship fielding them is giving up a decent chunk of dps, and realistically a ship with ECM drones is only going to jam 1 target, while a blackbird/scorpion/falcon can take multiple ships out of the fight.
However I did like the idea mentioned at the very start of this thread. Why do smaller smartbombs have to have less range than a large? Why not just have all smartbomb sizes reach the same range (except for faction/officer)? That would make the smaller smartbombs actually useful for something other than ninja aggressing titans etc.
Better still you could focus on the rest of the combat utility drones, so they're actually useful. Then we might see people using webdrones, neut drones and lol targetpainter drones instead of just ECM and combat drones. Heck even make combat drones smarter, instead of just "passive" and "aggressive" options, why not give then an option to attack whatever's jamming you or a hierarchy of targets. Eg "Dear drones, pls attack anything jamming me, then anything scramming me, then any battleships, thx little buddies <3"
Overall I think you guys do a decent job balancing things, but I think to often you look to nerf the FOTM, rather than making other things more appealing. I mean how many people use nos now? RSD's? Don't take away the best option, just make the other options better.
tia hugs and kisses~
|
Kalica Kahn
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:13:00 -
[134]
also no Goumindongs
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar M. Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:17:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
You missed it pretty hard for someone that likes so much doign calculations.
But with this system youahve EXACLTY same chance to make enemy loose lock on you ( considerign a hypothical 1v1) than current system. So the system is still very effective. But the target stil ahs chance to have something locked.. even if its only 1 or more of your drones or the other guy inyour gang.
Actually, it doesn't. And each time you add another module on, you reduce the chance that he has those people locked again. And add another module and you reduce the chance that he has the people that survived the second jam locked.
And, on top of that, it either does almost nothing because they can relock and your cycle time is high, or new cycles break more locks as fast or as fast as you can relock making it even harder to keep targets locked.
and that is exact same effectiveness agaisnt a specific signle target as current one (disregarding cycle times values that surely need to be revisited to keep a good gameplay) Don't even dream on tryign to arguee on me about chances.... I had crippling 4 years of stupid statistics on my degree that form time to time at least allow me to understand computer game mechanics. The chance of a total lock down is different because its a composition but the chance of a single target being under effect is exaclty same as current system. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
honey bunchetta
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:42:00 -
[136]
Edited by: honey bunchetta on 23/04/2009 10:44:00
Originally by: Murashu
Balance all forms of EWAR then see if the drones are still unbalanced.
If carlsberg posted on eve forums they would probably post like this.
Why is it that every time a system is actually effective and others are not the first inclination is to make the system that works as bloody awful as the ones that do not work?.
|
honey bunchetta
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 10:53:00 -
[137]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Ok,
I'm sitting at home reading over this thread. Brainstorming about new ECM mechanics, help me out:
Instead of the current mechanic where a successful ECM cycle breaks your lock for the given time of the ECM module. Your lock breaks, but you automatically start locking your target again. The duration would rely on your ability to target back your enemy, ECCM modules would essentially be sensor boosters. Could even add a fun twist to sensor dampening...
1. What cycle time would you give these "new ecm" units?. 2. Would they still be chance based in optimal or would they be more like damps?. 3. Would they still be racial or would you just remove racial jammers and boost multi specs?.
4. Along with the range nerf do you not think that this new nerf will remove ECM even more than the range nerf already has from actual combat?.
5. If 4 is YES (AND LETS BE HONEST IT IS) why not just design a totally new mechanic and ewar system it will be less painful tbh...
|
Gallente Citizen1
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:10:00 -
[138]
Edited by: Gallente Citizen1 on 23/04/2009 11:13:29 buff the other crap ewar drones. tracking disruptors should disrupt tracking enough, not tracking and optimal by an amount that allmost makes no use. Add small and medium webbing drones, with offcourse very minor effects...
Another idea i had was to make the drones stronger but there wouldn't be any point using more than one ewar drone( or one of each type? ). Would be kinda inconsistent with game design but would work good. This would mean, players could eliminate the annoying drone fast with one locking+volley if they wanted.
|
Nikuno
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:13:00 -
[139]
Yes, that's the sort of thing, but remove the chance based element. Instead of a chance to break your lock, make it so that the lock will break always (subject to otpimal and falloff), but the time to be able reacquire a new lock depends on the difference between the ecm applied and the sensor strength of the target. That way eccm still has a role to play, and the whole thing becomes more definite. Stronger eccm means much quicker for sensors to come back online.
|
SSgt Sniper
Gallente legion of qui Southern Connection
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:15:00 -
[140]
Seriously backwards logic by CCP.
If I carry drones, three quarters of the time I'll be carrying either explosive or thermal damage drones. EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, I might carry ECM drones.
I will not carry neut drones. They don't neut enough to be any impediment to the opponent.
I will not carry web drones. First they are way too slow to catch even a cold, and Second, no smaller size versions make it not worth considration.
Target painting drones? Seriously? You even bothered to have these?
I mean seriously? Moving on.
Damp drones are stack- no wait, seriously? Target painting drones? That don't even manage to do any real target painting? I mean really the only way to fixing target painting drones is to remove them from the database entirely. There was never really any point to them at all.
Damp drones, as I was saying, are stacking nerfed to hell. Which means in the end they do jack all. Unless you're trying to force an enemy to not be able to engage at his optimal when his optimal is like, 200km, then damp drones are not going to help you. Need moar boost desperately on these.
Is there a tracking disrupt drone? You know there should be if there isn't. Honestly I don't recall if there is or not, but assuming there is, the fact I'm not aware of them probably makes them underpowered. Which is probably more that tracking disruption only recently began to be anywhere near effective as an ewar than the drones just generally suck, but if they work anywhere close to the way the damp drones do then yeah they'd suck. Bad.
In closing- If I'ma givin' up a nice slice of dps, I want to get something for it. Currently ECM drones will marginally give you something as they are somewhat effective from time to time. However none of the others are anywhere near effective enough at what they are supposed to do to be a viable alternative to the dps given up. Maint. bots are effective enough for the sacrifice if I'm working with a gang, but not any ewar drone past the ecm ones.
Solution? Make the others viable, not remove viability of the only marginally functional class. ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.Poor PR in progress!
|
|
JadeMako
Industrial Mite
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:34:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Merdaneth
I agree that the problem is with ECM mechanic.
I. Break locks to target ships rather than breaking lock of target ship (protect the primary etc.)
I also agree the problem is with the ECM mechanic, and the majority of posters have been on the right track as to why and also why ECM drones are not OP but other EWAR is underpowered.
I hope this balancing process will lead to more core developments of the game like ECM overall, and the tracking formula overall, rather than just 'Blasters' and 'Autocannons' changes creating imbalances in 6 months.
I like the idea quoted above (break locks to target ships rather than lock of target ship), I am not a big ECM user so please tell me why it should not be considered.
It would add a great element (Protect the Primary!) to gang and fleet engagements. ECM would be a very useful EWAR but would require a lot of player skill and co-ordination. 1 v 1 perhaps the ECM user could turn the effect onto their own ship (break all locks on me - I am protected but small ships will re-lock me fast, and my ECM ships damage is not staggering so I better get out fast...
Please feel free to tll me why this sucks, I'm just spitballing... |
JadeMako
Industrial Mite
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:37:00 -
[142]
PS, the idea above could possibly mess with RR gangs abilities, and would also create another projected defensive module... is that a good idea?
|
Tob Seayours
Minmatar Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 11:49:00 -
[143]
I think the best solution is the simple one. Just make jamming for a certain duration be privy to ships. Let the drones break the lock, and rename them to LB-900's or whatever (for 'LOCKBREAKER'). No need to revamp an entire mechanic.
|
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 12:26:00 -
[144]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Ok,
I'm sitting at home reading over this thread. Brainstorming about new ECM mechanics, help me out:
Instead of the current mechanic where a successful ECM cycle breaks your lock for the given time of the ECM module. Your lock breaks, but you automatically start locking your target again. The duration would rely on your ability to target back your enemy, ECCM modules would essentially be sensor boosters. Could even add a fun twist to sensor dampening...
The class values would of course have to be tweaked a bit...
Dear Nozh, Stupid forums ate forty minutes of carefully crafted proposal. This version will be crankier... just imagine it was nice.
Good plan, above, but fails to account for a few things. ECM is primary tank for dedicated ships and they need more defense (solo) than can be provided by just breaking locks briefly. Suggest modifying ECM as follows:
1) Scripts for ECM to switch between two primary effect detailed below.
2) ECM reduces target ship's "max locked targets" by an amount that should be around 8-9 for four scripted modules with max skills. Consider this to be "overwhelming the target with EM noise". Each unbonused mod could reduce max locked targets by a fractional amount--just round down for the actual number permitted. This is direct boost to the Auto-Targeting System modules.
3) ECM mods retain their existing percent jam chance, but a jam only breaks lock and initiates a re-lock per Nozh's idea above. Think of this as hacking into the enemy sensor system to disable it (which RL military systems can do today).
4) Important by possibly tricky! -- being jammed imposes a penalty to base targeting speed of a few seconds (or fractions of a second, or could be stacking nerfed) per module to attempts by the affected ship to target the jammer ONLY. This represents the focused sensor disruption of the module, and is to give a dedicated jamming ship some defense from being insta-gibbed by HACs (time to throw on more mods, or warp out--if you're alert).
Multispectral jammers should provide the best unbonused max locked targets reduction values, and racial jammers the best unbonused jam strength and base targeting speed penalties.
Introduce a "secondary sensor system" module, possibly instead of the activated ECCM mods, that provides sensor strength in a non-stock mode. Have a jammer check against the most disadvantagous sensor strength for that jammer, if there are multiple non-zero sensor strengths on the target ship. This boosts the usefulness of multispectral jammers.
So, there you have it. Defense for jamming ships still, while if you're completely locked down as a target you can know you are taking quite a few jamming mods to do it--plus you could have fit mods to defend against that!
--Krum
--Krum |
Unzer
Mobile Alcohol Processing Units Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 12:30:00 -
[145]
I very much like the idea of having ECM drones and modules work like focused ECM burst (lock breaker).
The good thing about this is that scan resolution dampening / boosting will gain an extra use (gal recon boost?). Having a gallente recon with your ECM ship would make jamming more interesting. It requires teamwork and coordination to cycle targets with the gallente recon pilot and looks a lot more fun then perma jamming. Also it balances small ships to big ships as small vessels are easier to jam but will lock back faster where the opposite is true for larger ships. The duration and strength of the module would need some play testing to make sure they are not nerfed to oblivion (10sec duration or ECM rof bonus?).
One last thing I would be curious to see is that the ECM burst be modified so that not only BS bonus applies to them. They are a drain on cap but create a lovely confusion on the battlefield.
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 13:15:00 -
[146]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Ok,
I'm sitting at home reading over this thread. Brainstorming about new ECM mechanics, help me out:
Instead of the current mechanic where a successful ECM cycle breaks your lock for the given time of the ECM module. Your lock breaks, but you automatically start locking your target again. The duration would rely on your ability to target back your enemy, ECCM modules would essentially be sensor boosters. Could even add a fun twist to sensor dampening...
The class values would of course have to be tweaked a bit...
That's a fantastic idea in my opinion.
Maybe to compensate ecm for only breaking lock, you boost the strength again to some degree? While at the same time, leaving a good cooldown and never allowing permajam.
Little bit worried about the nerf mentality though, can we get a little boost for other types of ewar/utility drones?
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
Rordan D'Kherr
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 13:17:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Yon Krum 1) Scripts for ECM to switch between two primary effect detailed below.
Better: Racial scripts for ECM jammers, so ECM ships actually can fit tank mods.
But this is for ECM, not ECM drones.
|
Hellcore
Minmatar Ex-Nihilo Fate Weavers
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 13:21:00 -
[148]
The drones are just a symptom of an awful ECM mechanic that was made even worse by chance based mathematics. Being totally jammed out of your ability to even lock your target or fleet is a horrible mechanic that breaks the golden gameplay rule of removing player interactivity. A vast majority of the time currently spent target jammed could be spent making coffee, when you should be playing a game.
As hinted at in some other posts, a much better system would be for ECM to cripple a certain amount of module or targeting effects. Removing x% of locked targets or activated module effects. This would bring ECM in line with the other, non-binary, EWAR types and remove a lot of the frustrations.
For the record, yes I agree ECM should be frustrating, but no more than any other EWAR and certainly not in such a binary manner as it is currently presented.
--
|
XLR Eight
Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 13:49:00 -
[149]
How about simply bring in line the other e-war drones from their useless state instead of making the ecm drones trash as well? I suggest to try balance without nerfing, for a chance.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 14:18:00 -
[150]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Ok,
I'm sitting at home reading over this thread. Brainstorming about new ECM mechanics, help me out:
Instead of the current mechanic where a successful ECM cycle breaks your lock for the given time of the ECM module. Your lock breaks, but you automatically start locking your target again. The duration would rely on your ability to target back your enemy, ECCM modules would essentially be sensor boosters. Could even add a fun twist to sensor dampening...
The class values would of course have to be tweaked a bit...
Honestly if you guys think its such a mistake to have ewar be a part of combat why dont you just remove it altogether rather than slowly nerf it into the ground so that even ewar specific ships are not worth it compared to the standard dps machine.
Spend some time and rethink where you want ewar as a whole instead of this idiotic way you nerf one module after another with little thought to how it affects other ships, modules and tactics. Currently you are pushing ewar into a novelty item thats only of use in small gangs, and even then you question the use of most of these effects.
The question you should be asking is why are noone using target painter drones in pvp? (or anywhere else for that matter). Rinse repeat for the other ewar drones and effects.
You really need to start looking at the bigger picture. And yea this is my sig. Real PVP'ers only use f1. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |