| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
   |
Posted - 2009.03.10 17:15:00 -
[1]
Against ECM, damps + ECCM work and that is what the Fed prescribes. Rails + tracking links should be good too.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.10 18:11:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: daisy dook
Originally by: Misaki Yuuko
Solution to falcon "problem" (disclaimer: I do not either agree or disagree with the notion that actually a problem exist):
- Scripted ECM mods: script for range/strength
There you got your fix.
I'm not sure what the Falcon problem is, but the answer is really ECCM.
ECCM plus some sort of active countermeasure brings the jamming chances down to negligible levels.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 08:36:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 14/03/2009 08:40:14
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Liang Nuren
You also have the role of the Arazu wrong. It is designed to force things to close with you by eliminating range as an option. It can't even get close to affecting a true "long range ship". Damps are a failure right now.
This is the real problem, as I see it. Range dampening is an obvious aggressive counter-measure to long-range ships (including the falcon's ECM), but that role is completely nullified by the short range at wich dampening works.
A rigged Lachesis or Arazu has 31% dampening chance for each dampener at 180km, 38% if it is supported by warfare links. 2 damps without support are 47%, with support 60%. A Lachesis putting 4 damps on a ship at 210km still has a chance of 50% every 10 seconds (where a Falcon would need 3 sensor boosters to target the Lach directly while damped). Damps are not that clearly useless at longer ranges.
At 160km (unsupported/supported):
1 damp: ~45/54%
2 damps: ~70/78%
4 damps: ~90/96%
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 16:52:00 -
[4]
Originally by: marakor
Edited by: marakor on 14/03/2009 16:29:19
Originally by: Zaraki KenpachiSan
Originally by: But Sects
ECCM
DON'T WORK NOOB
ECCM works, and while it needs a secondary effect and maybe a adjustment here and there its still effective as it is.
ECCM works, but to truly neuter an ECM ship you need something to actively counter that ship, for example ECM (Caldari method) or damps (Gallente method).
Chanced based offensive ECM / ECCM / chance based defensive ECM or damps = very good chance to neutralize offensive ECM. If you have nothing that can shoot far.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 17:08:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 14/03/2009 17:12:54
Amarr is not only the capacitor neuting rance, but also the capacitor transfer race, which makes a purely Amarr fleet generally invulnerable against neuts. Cap warfare is very difficult to win against the Amarr, they have so much of it.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 20:14:00 -
[6]
Did you know...
that a Falcon putting a racial ECM on an ECCM'd Megathron at 225km has a jamming chance of about 34%?
that there exists a tech 2 Celestis setup that has a 34% chance of breaking the lock of the Falcon at 225km?
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 01:49:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 15/03/2009 01:49:52
Originally by: EFT Warrior
I can EFT.
Then it is no wonder that you missed the significance these (btw mostly non-EFT) numbers have for the pvp business on TQ. Damps are much better than most people here give them credit for.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 09:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Sigh. If you put all 4 damps on a falcon you have a 57% chance to have it (single) damped at 230km. As I said earlier in another thread, this is very misleading, and is at best an mild inconvenience to the Falcon pilot and at worst a total non-issue.
I think there are many people here who wouldn't have hoped in their dreams that you can fit to have such high chances at 230km. And what is 57% at 230km is 85% at 200km and 95% at 180km, with a linked ship that uses equal or fewer slots for EW. This is no mild inconvenience.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
| |
|