|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 20:33:00 -
[1]
Good lord, this is the second time this has Happened. prodalt is me
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 21:29:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
To Goum et al-
In addition to stacking penalties,
And what do you say about the fact that the stacking penalties are dumb and won't work?
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 21:59:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Endless Subversion
3) Currently if a target resists a jam, and you have extra jammers there is no penalty to adding more and more jammers until he doesn't resist a jam. That's not true of any other ewar system. Let's bring that in line, it's a way of helping to balance jamming vs small gangs without ruining it for larger fleets.
Look, no its not there is always a penalty to add extra jammers.
Off racial jammers
Q.E.D.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:13:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Endless Subversion
Only in that you don't have that jammer somewhere else.
Each jammer has the same independent chance to jam a ship, regardless of how many other jammers are being used. No other ewar system works this way
No, because you use the racial jammer first and not second... It has the highest strength and so could not ever be penalized. At least according to current stacking doctrine... oh wait stacking this stuff is impossible because of how time interacts with the system. Wooo!
But really what you are saying is that there is no stacking penalty if you are an idiot and purposefully gimp yourself and/or take a 1/4 chance that you won't have the right jammers for your targets.
Got ya. Clearly the lack of stacking for gimped ships is hurting the game.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:38:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Goumindong on 25/11/2008 22:43:05 Edited by: Goumindong on 25/11/2008 22:42:48
Originally by: Endless Subversion
Forget how the specific jam ship is fit.
As it stands the 4th, the 8th or the 15th same-type jammer applied to a ship has the same chance to jam it as the first.
And that matters because?
A: it only matters if you're using all the same type of jammers in which case you're gimped against everything else.
B: it still doesn't matter because the chance of you not being jammed at that point is irrelevant
C: it still doesn't work because jamming is an instantaneous effect and not an ongoing effect. Its determined by a single instance of time at activation and all stacking mechanics break when under such situations[since you cannot determine whether or not something should be penalized if a higher jam is applied after it is]
Its not broken, there are problems with ECM, but its not this
edit:
D: And it still doesn't work because stacking penalties on modules which has an unbound chance based system produces wildly different final results when used on people with different skills
E.G.
here and here
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 01:41:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus And to Goum- the above is simple and concise. There won't be any random results as far as weird chance based math happening. There will be a clear degradation of jamming strength for each additional module applied, with the best case module having the best chance to jam.
incorrect my math challenged friend.
Lets take a target with a sensor strength of 20 and a jammer with a strength of 15.
Chance to be shooting = 25%
Now lets make that a strength of 15 x .87.
Chance to be shooting = 34%. Almost a 50% decrease in effectiveness...
Now lets make that a strength of 15 x .57
Chance to be shooting = 57.25%, Over a 100% increase in chance to be shooting...
Now, damps and TD's don't work like that, because once you get below the treshold, the other target does zero damage. Such their chance to reduce damage can be clearly and easily maximized.
Quote: Also note that for everyone arguing that ECM is 'balanced', they're pulling numbers with the target's sensor strength equivalent to a Tier3 BS, Recon, or some other ship with way above average sensor strength. Frigs, Cruisers, BCs are all FAR behind in comparison with respect to sensor strength. Even Command Ships (Astarte) have a paltry 18 sensor strength.
BULL****. Not that any of that matters because those targets are going to be perma jammed by the first freaking jammer that lands on them anyway so any more jammers are freaking irrelevant, stacking penalty or no
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 06:39:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Derek Sigres
Perhaps the BETTER solution is to REMOVE the stacking penalty of ECCM currently. Afterall, if you're willing to give up 3 slots to ECCM you might as well become extremely well insulated to the system you protecting against, right?
Better to make ECCM a flat bonus.
E.G. if ECCM gave you +20 strength for the tech 2 module then that is about the same as using ECCM on a battleship[a bit stronger for some, weaker for others]. But on a smaller ship it would mean you could actually resist being jammed rather than just using an ECCM and still being perma jammed.
Stacking ECCM and ECCM on a carrier would be less strong, but I am less worried about that than having a counter that you could actually fit to a cruiser or frigate.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 07:34:00 -
[8]
Originally by: fuxinos why not making it like you can only use 1 of your ECM against a ship and not 2-3 or more.
would solve the problem without nerfing ECM at all...
because there actually isn't a problem with stacking ECM, players aren't likely to be fitting a full rack of the same racial jammers and such, more than 1 doesn't have much of an effect.
As well, you get the problem of "counter ECM" where one side, uses a single light ECM drone on each of its members to "block" subsequent ECM activation.
|
|
|
|