EVE Search - Could ECCM use a boost?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Could ECCM use a boost?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.17 17:09:00 - [1] This isn't a Falcon whine. In fact, my request has not much to do with ECM, although a boost to ECCM in general would help protect against ECM. ECCM has a secondary effect which I feel is overlooked and underplayed by the developers. ECCM is a wonderful module that helps me, a dedicated mission runner, survive in low security space. I'm referring to ECCM's ability to "mask" my ship from combat cloaks in space. Except it doesn't. Well, it doesn't effectively. It's almost a waste on battleships. What I ask CCP is to make ECCM a module worth fitting on battleships. I don't want or ask to be invisible when out there in the middle of nowhere. But it would be nice if by me fitting this module on a battleship it would actually make combat probe scanners put in a little extra effort in detecting my signal. ECCM works well on smaller ships. And by making it worthwhile on battleships and marauders it could actually improve the population of low security space. Discuss/Flame. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.05.17 17:39:00 - [2] It actually does. Sensor strength means more than you think it does. It cuts the effect of your size in half. An ECCM II will double your scanning strength. Speaking as someone who probes down BS and marauders regularly...a Marauder is much easier to scan down than a battleship, and has a little less than 3/4 the sensor strength. with one ECCM II, the easily scanned marauder becomes significantly harder than a battleship.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.17 18:00:00 - [3] Read the OP, he knows that. However being twice as hard to scan in your battlship means it is still easy to scan you.
Luviera Silverwave Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.17 21:44:00 - [4] I'm some what confused, but also very excited. Do I understand this correctly, ECCM modules are able to make you harder to find with combat probe scans?
Mikael Mechka	Posted - 2009.05.17 21:57:00 - [5] Originally by: Luviera Silverwave I'm some what confused, but also very excited. Do I understand this correctly, ECCM modules are able to make you harder to find with combat probe scans? Yes. At least they did before the changes, not sure if they still do. Your sensor strength was part of the calculations when a scanner ship was trying to probe you out (as was your sig radius), high sensor strength and low sig radius made you very hard to get a good warp in point on. While a large sig radius and low sensor strength made it much easier. ------------------------------------------------- Originally by: Lana Torrin I just reported you for being informative in a troll thread. Please leave.
Luviera Silverwave Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.17 22:21:00 - [6] Originally by: Mikael Mechka Yes. At least they did before the changes, not sure if they still do. Your sensor strength was part of the calculations when a scanner ship was trying to probe you out (as was your sig radius), high sensor strength and low sig radius made you very hard to get a good warp in point on. While a large sig radius and low sensor strength made it much easier. Wonderful information! ...That is "If" any one could confirm ECCM still works that way. Now I doubt it will keep me save during mission running in low sec space. But every advantage I can get, to prevent being jumped by a player pirate is a good one I'd say.
Mikael Mechka	Posted - 2009.05.17 22:26:00 - [7] Originally by: Luviera Silverwave Originally by: Mikael Mechka Yes. At least they did before the changes, not sure if they still do. Your sensor strength was part of the calculations when a scanner ship was trying to probe you out (as was your sig radius), high sensor strength and low sig radius made you very hard to get a good warp in point on. While a large sig radius and low sensor strength made it much easier. Wonderful information! ...That is "If" any one could confirm ECCM still works that way. Now I doubt it will keep me save during mission running in low sec space. But every advantage I can get, to prevent being jumped by a player pirate is a good one I'd say. Then I probably shouldn't tell you that drones are sometimes easier to scan out then the mission runners themselves. Mission deadspaces were hard to scan down, but one trick people used was the fact that drones could still MWD around, causing their sig to bloom with relatively low sensor strength. I probably shouldn't also tell you that drakes and other ships that rely on passive shield recharge due to extenders were also very easy to scan out due to shield extenders adding to their sig radius. But like I said, don't know if these still hold true. ------------------------------------------------- Originally by: Lana Torrin I just reported you for being informative in a troll thread. Please leave.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.05.17 22:33:00 - [8] Quote: Read the OP, he knows that. However being twice as hard to scan in your battlship means it is still easy to scan you. So what? ECCM should make you immune to probing? It's a damn battleship. It's good enough that a single module can make it significantly harder to find you. It will cost the scanner precious time that you can use to notice him/his probes on scan and GTFO. Hell, you could already probably make yourself nigh-immune to scanning with 3 ECCMs or so.
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.17 22:38:00 - [9] ECCM makes you harder to be probed out. But the effect on battleships and Marauders is too weak to make a noticeable difference. How weak exactly I don't know. If someone could post some numbers I'd really appreciate it. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.05.18 00:56:00 - [10] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 18/05/2009 00:59:25 Originally by: Exlegion If someone could post some numbers I'd really appreciate it. Someone did already post numbers, it halves your signature if you fit 1x ECCM. If you want a TQ example, a HAC like the Ishtar, fitting 1x ECCM is impossible to probe with mediocre skills on a force recon without probing rigs. They will need a covert ops frigate to probe it most likely. Edit: Ishtar can easily fit 2-3 ECCM without gimping its fit, so that would make excellent ninja mission runner. Edit2: lets say BS without ECCM can be picked up at 2 au range with decent skill, with 1x ECCM you'd need to set probes to 1 au, with 2x ECCM you'd need to set em to .5 au. Pretty balanced as it is.
Warrio GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.18 02:18:00 - [11] No **** ay? I thought it worked the other way with higher sensor strength being easier to find. In that vein I always though that the low strength on the Marauders was meant to be a buff that made them harder to find. sXe
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.05.18 09:23:00 - [12] With the massive ecm nerfs, not really, it already has two great benefits.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.18 10:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Read the OP, he knows that. However being twice as hard to scan in your battlship means it is still easy to scan you. So what? ECCM should make you immune to probing? It's a damn battleship. It's good enough that a single module can make it significantly harder to find you. It will cost the scanner precious time that you can use to notice him/his probes on scan and GTFO. Hell, you could already probably make yourself nigh-immune to scanning with 3 ECCMs or so. No it should be a usefull effect. Who exactly can afford to fit 3 ECCMs on a mission ship? 1 ECCM allready will heavily gimp any mission setup. And no one will fit ECCM on pvp ships to be harder to scan down. One ECCM makes your setup allready suck, and you are still very easy to probe out. Then it should at least be hard to probe you down.
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.05.18 11:25:00 - [14] Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 18/05/2009 11:34:37 the threshold roughly seems to be 1 sensor for 2m of signature - throw in 10% for good measure and you will be unprobable by totally maximized cov ops pilots with virtues i can recommend faction BS for the extra sensor i CANNOT recommend marauders once you see the first combat probes appear on your dir scanner, scoop drones and bring in this toon: [Griffin, New Setup 1] Capacitor Power Relay I Conjunctive Gravimetric ECCM Scanning Array I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] alternatively, run missions in 2+ of these [Dominix, New Setup 1] Armor EM Hardener II Armor Thermic Hardener II Armor Kinetic Hardener II Armor Explosive Hardener II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II 100MN Afterburner II Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Phased Muon ECCM Caster I Large 'Solace' I Remote Bulwark Reconstruction Large 'Solace' I Remote Bulwark Reconstruction Large 'Solace' I Remote Bulwark Reconstruction Large Energy Transfer Array II Large Energy Transfer Array II Large Energy Transfer Array II Egress Port Maximizer I Egress Port Maximizer I Remote Repair Augmentor I apart from that, reducing your sig has the "same" effect: halo set comes to mind, as does the claymore (or any bc) with the evasive maneuvering link + skirmish mindlink - putting the gist back into logistics
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 17:17:00 - [15] I'm not looking for immunity from probes. But the moment I see a combat probe I have to dock or cloak because my marauder's signature is ridiculously high. I'd like to continue fitting an ECCM but it just doesn't seem to have a significan effect on marauders. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.05.18 17:52:00 - [16] Some of the smaller ships are unfindable (literally!) with enough of eccm. If you boost them it will be much too easy to put a eccm on a eas/recon/hac and be nearly (or possibly actually) unfindable. Not a good mechanic. Then there is the issue that you basically cannot find anyone who is watching his scanner. As soon as he sees probes on the scan he's gone - only chance is if he is unaware for 1-4 minutes. Its okay and basically has always been that way - but to skew this even more in favour of the mission runner? Unlike the prober he is in total control of the situation. I remember the time when there was deadspace protection for mission runners and it could very well take 15+ minutes to find a runner if he wasn't using drones and you did not have any specialized bookmark-nets to use exploration probes like quest. It was laughable. Mission was halfway done at that point (or more), runner usually in the second or third room away from the entrance gates so you don't even stand a chance without a vaga or arazu to tackle. Both of which would be visible on the directional scanner (at least partially when travelling the acceleration gate in case of the 'zu) in 50k km closerange scan. Another point is the fact that you would nerf ecm even further (as both mechanics rely on the sensor strength of your ship). Then again looking for mission runners is one thing - there is also probing on safespots and probing hostile gangs. This is very tedious with the new system. Consider that if i want to find a hostile rook i have to get down to 2-4au or something for the filters to apply (so i won't know if i am even looking for the right ship until my scan result is greater than some threshold). Imagine that rook near a couple of neutral ships and you have yourself a buttload of work in front of you involving both the directional scanner and a good portion of luck. I realize mission runners who fly mostly bs cannot really symapathize with that but to make it harder to probe bs/bc would make scanning for anything less a complete farce. But hacs/recons/t3 cruisers are combat ships worth finding too. Now that all said ofc i like to kill them runners. But i know very well how it looks from the other side. I've been an active explorer for a very long time and played hundreds of different radar/mag and complex sites in lowsec/0.0. Its not that hard to stay alive tbh. The radar/mag sites never even had deadspace protection. And the bigger combat sites (some of which i could only do with friends or dual-boxing) are most definitely as distracting and time consuming as a lvl4 could ever be. I've only ever been busted once and lost a raven for 150m or so. And you know why? Because i was lazy and thought i could get away with it this time. Thats the only reason why mission runners die. -- Originally by: Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.18 18:37:00 - [17] With a cloak they are even harder to scan down. The only ships who have to be long at one place in a safespot/mission location are pve ships. Pvp ships only when they are semi-afk, and then a cloak is better anyway, and if a fleet is hiding somewhere in a safespot then it wont matter if half of them has eccm or not, there will always be ships without. And they can just make an extra modifier which make you harder to scan when you got eccm fitted, besides the increase in sensor strength. It doesnt have to effect ecm at all.
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.05.18 18:41:00 - [18] Originally by: Furb Killer And no one will fit ECCM on pvp ships to be harder to scan down. No, they fit it to be less susceptible to ecm. And of top of that their hacs/recons/t3 cruisers shall be provided with near immunity to probes? No thanks. If you think pvp probing needs a nerf you definitely don't do enough of it. -- Originally by: Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 19:00:00 - [19] How about if ECCM was 'scaled up' so that it has a greater effect on battleships? Smaller ships would essentially remain with the same sensor strength while battleships gained a slightly higher sensor strength. From what I'm gathering making ECCM more effective could make smaller ships, including recons, overpowered. But ECCM as it stands is a bit useless on battleships. I just want to add that my problem isn't getting caught. Believe me, I keep my eye on local like a hawk. The problem is the interruptions while doing missions. I fit my marauder with one ECCM. But it has little effect in masking my signal. I'd be surprised if it saves me seconds in scan probe time. Whether I have ECCM fitted or not, as soon as I see a combat probe I absolutely have to dock (or cloak). So then what is the purpose of ECCM on battleships/marauders? Or maybe CCP could split ECCM according to ship class, making the current one for frigs and cruisers, and create a batteship-class ECCM, with a stronger effect and greater fitting requirements? I don't know... Just throwing ideas out here. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.05.18 19:17:00 - [20] Yes, there is probably no way to do it without ccp fiddling with the mechanics a bit. Either that would be a separate attribute that defines how hard to find you are - seperated from the sensor strength but still influenced by ecccm. That way battleships/marauders could be made a bit harder to find without screwing everything up. It would have to be so that even with 3 eccm a bs/cs is still findable in a reasonable time without a virtue set. Imagine i.e. unfindable cs on safespots giving gang bonuses etc. I am sure there are possibilities to even out the problems. However the question how long it should take to probe a runner isn't easy to answer and there is always the chance of wrecking some viable playstyles on the way if one isn't careful. -- Originally by: Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
Zanarkand Gallente Enterprise Estonia Cult of War	Posted - 2009.05.18 19:42:00 - [21] Falcon neeeds more nerfs.
Mikael Mechka	Posted - 2009.05.18 19:53:00 - [22] Originally by: Myra2007 Yes, there is probably no way to do it without ccp fiddling with the mechanics a bit. Either that would be a separate attribute that defines how hard to find you are - seperated from the sensor strength but still influenced by ecccm. That way battleships/marauders could be made a bit harder to find without screwing everything up. It would have to be so that even with 3 eccm a bs/cs is still findable in a reasonable time without a virtue set. Imagine i.e. unfindable cs on safespots giving gang bonuses etc. I am sure there are possibilities to even out the problems. However the question how long it should take to probe a runner isn't easy to answer and there is always the chance of wrecking some viable playstyles on the way if one isn't careful. How different is it having a CS with ECCM modules providing bonuses while being very difficult to probe down instead of a safespot hopping CS providing those bonuses and being impossible to probe down? Or a POS hugging CS? ECCM making probing harder isn't a huge issue as being probed out is not a huge concern as the main role of ECCM is countering ECM. Fitting ECCM requires valuable mid slots, mission running shield tankers lose tank and armour tankers lose cap mods/speed mods. ------------------------------------------------- Originally by: Lana Torrin I just reported you for being informative in a troll thread. Please leave.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:16:00 - [23] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edit: Ishtar can easily fit 2-3 ECCM without gimping its fit, so that would make excellent ninja mission runner. Except that your hard-to-probe Ishtar relies on very-easy-to-probe drones. As for the OP: no, ECCM does not need any kind of boost to battleships. They're frickin huge masses of stuff that emit a lot of energy, they should be easier to find than smaller ships. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:35:00 - [24] Edited by: Exlegion on 18/05/2009 20:38:45 Remember that the difference between a battleship/marauder on a mission and a recon/CS providing bonuses/support is that a mission-runner is bound to one location only. A CS/recon has the ability to freely move about while still performing its role. A marauder, a ship primarily designed for mission-running, cannot effectively perform its role in low security space. Again, I'm not asking for immunity or invisibility. I'm asking for a slight boost to the secondary attribute of an ECCM module; one that I feel is underpowered on battleships and marauders. Or perhaps there could be scripts added to the ECCM module that could either decrease signal strength or increase sensor strength. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:36:00 - [25] Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: Furb Killer And no one will fit ECCM on pvp ships to be harder to scan down. No, they fit it to be less susceptible to ecm. And of top of that their hacs/recons/t3 cruisers shall be provided with near immunity to probes? No thanks. If you think pvp probing needs a nerf you definitely don't do enough of it. Solo ships usually dont use eccm (sure some do, but by far most dont), and if you are probing for a fleet then it is easy enough anyway.
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:42:00 - [26] Edited by: Exlegion on 18/05/2009 20:45:38 What about scripted ECCM? One script to increase sensor strength. One script to decrease signal strength. But I think this would require CCP to redefine the formulas for sensor/signal strength since currently they are interrelated. I think the main problem here is that ECCM has split bonii. One bonus benefits PVE while the other benefits PVP almost exclusively in both cases. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:52:00 - [27] Edited by: Exlegion on 18/05/2009 20:52:38 Originally by: Bronson Hughes Originally by: Omara Otawan Edit: Ishtar can easily fit 2-3 ECCM without gimping its fit, so that would make excellent ninja mission runner. Except that your hard-to-probe Ishtar relies on very-easy-to-probe drones. As for the OP: no, ECCM does not need any kind of boost to battleships. They're frickin huge masses of stuff that emit a lot of energy, they should be easier to find than smaller ships. Emphasis on bold. You are correct and I agree with you on. I'm not proposing battleships be harder to find than frigs, cruisers, or even battlecruiser hulls. The problem is that ECCM has very minute effects on battleships and marauders. They should always be easier to find. But it should not be the case that fitting an ECCM on a battleship or marauder gives you a negligible benefit. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Constantine Arcanum IMPERIAL SENATE Initiative Associates	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:55:00 - [28] Originally by: Exlegion bonii. *bonuses, bonii sounds like the plural for boner.
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.05.18 21:06:00 - [29] Originally by: Constantine Arcanum Originally by: Exlegion bonii. bonuses, bonii sounds like the plural for boner. Hmmm, I always thought the plural of boner was sausages or sword fight. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us.* - Gang Starr
Zxenis Caldari M. Corp Engineering Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.18 21:38:00 - [30] at least give us some skills to improve eccm usage. look at all the skills available to improve ecm usage. If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 - 1527) The NEW M.Corp

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.