| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dr Fighter
   |
Posted - 2010.03.01 10:12:00 -
[1]
ECM has been overpowered as a single EW type since its creation. even with the low strengths of sensors back in the day and the stacking sensor pionts method of jamming the effect was too powerful, 20 seconds out of a fight and likly 20 seconds consecutively is too much for loo long.
ECM being chance based was a hugly poor idea however since chance has been applied to all EW with falloff ranges this is unlikly to change.
ECM needs a radical change, it simply isnt fun at all effecting so many systems in the all or nothing way it does currently. A player in a sub BS might as well warp off/back once it has a falcon's attention.
I dont play eve to make isk to pvp so my XXX isk ship is completly uless is every way when a fight with a falcon kicks off, and thats how many see it. If just one ecm ship shows up in any 10v10 sized battle it will RUIN the game for the 10 people who just had their gang reduced to 5 and alot less fun for the 10 who are whooping the 5 jammed guys. A falcon aside means if they fight it will suck and foten simply dont fight at all (thats IF they see each others cloaky falcon)
Its like putting baby mice into a bag and stomping on them its that easy, only they are fully grown tigers but you are just one man still. Its that unballenced.
The falcon nerfed helped HUGLY with the odds that any given fight will have a falcon in - this was a GOOD thing and NO ONE will say anything against that.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 12:58:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Dr Fighter on 01/03/2010 12:58:40
 Originally by: The Tzar
about nuets: Most people fit cap boosters on pvp ships just in case of neuting. Why don't people fit ECCM in the same way if ECM is that much of a problem?
because pushing the eccm button does not let you lock again - its a module that sits there doing nothing consuming (very little) cap and only *might* help you not get jammed but in all likly hood you will be.
Cap boosters as a counter to neuts work way way better.
sensor boosters work as a counter to damps plus they get additional affect from stacking wiht the damps (this one reason why damps are rarly used) and dont forget they give you a nice actual primary effect
tracking enhancers/comps help agianst TDs and are also helped by the stacking - not to mention TDs dont affect drones or missiles -at all- and ofc they have a very worth while primary affact.
Also the piont a guy a few posts back made about the fact that 99% of stuff in eve is about precision, calcuations and accuracy yet THE most powerful and widspread EW machanic is chance based (the reasons why this is completly stupid in the first place - take a look at ecm drones, these explain how broken the ecm concept is better than any rant of mine)
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 17:05:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Pan Zhu'Liang
if ECM does get changed I think the only direction to take it is more reliable but less crippling. perhaps make sensor strength reduce jam time instead of reducing jam chance. that would make ECCM more appealing as well. Every time a player got jammed he'd say, "good thing i have that eccm so i can lock sometime soon," as opposed to never really knowing if your eccm did anything at all.
holy crap this is actually a really nice idea.
More strength means a cycle reduction of upto say 50% in the cycle time, i dodnt know how the maths would work.
Of course im still majorly in favour of a different effect entirely
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 18:41:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Sokratesz
How stupid does this idea sound:
Make ECM decrease the max. # of locked targets of a ship.
I thought of this a few times now.
Could be a side effect combined with somthing else, generally 1 target is all thats needed for all but logistics/other ew ships.
So, on its own its a bit weak imo
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 12:02:00 -
[5]
Remeber that in small engaugements ecm gets a sneak bonus due to multiple tries, unlike dmaps with just stack.
half the chance to jam a target that already has a failed jammer on it, and half the half on the next failed jammer etc.
this would make fitting eccm more worth while, makes surviving the first jam the most important, and since hes already taken a full hit on the first roll of the dice the second roll is automaticly reduced.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 12:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: TraininVain
Originally by: kessah
I actually agree, now to some people they see only from one solitary perspective on this and that is from fleet warfare. Large numbers, so ECM to them seem justifiably fine.
However there are a significant number of players that enjoy small sized engagements, in this area ECM is ultimately too strong.
Once you are jammed by something you are officially screwed for 20 solid seconds, you are unable to do anything, you cannot assign drones, you cannot blind fire etc.
I would like to see it changed again, people enjoy saying fit ECCM, but a solo pilot and small gang combat pilot, it wont make a difference as the jammer has normally 6-8 jamming modules, and it will jam you.
I just wish there was a nice balance.
Yeah. Any e-war gets way less effective in a big fleet because it's often badly coordinated.
In a small gang however that is not so much of an issue.
Mmm. I think the range nerf was good because we now kill falcons and rooks rather than them just being "LOL" and warping off because they're 100km + out.
ECM as it now stands it's hard to say. I don't really like it because it removes any kind of "fight" from the fight.
Things that strike me about it:
It's really binary. Once you're jammed you cannot use any module that needs a lock. The other day I put an arbie TD on a cynabal with an optimal script and he burned in close so I had to switch scripts and start orbiting him. He still had the use of his neut and drones too.
It works on everything. A missile boat can chase my Curse off. If I were in a Rook, not so much.
There's no obvious way to counter it on a single-ship or small gang basis. ECCM works up to a point but vs. a full rack it's really only increasing the number of jammers out of a full rack of double bonused ECM that will be required to jam you so you're basically just helping out the rest of the gang.
It's not stack nerfed. Past a certain point an extra web or TD or RSD isn't doing that much.
Caldari recons only come with one kind of E-war so generally you can focus almost entirely on fitting for that. I suppose people do now fit the rook for a bit of missile DPS but mostly they're very focused.
I don't know which one of those things is The Thing with ECM but I do know I'm not a big fan.
Id say EW is slightly more powerful in large fleets, the EW pilots can use their EW on the best available or most tactical targets getting the best effitiancy out of every cycle. Safty Numbers playing the best role in a fleet for protection against ew, unlike a small gang domiated by EW both gangs are still activly killing each other as the lord intended.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 14:48:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Mr Australia
The sad part about this thread is it will probably get ecm nerfed before rockets get fixed.
rockets dont suck the fun out of smaller gang pvp.
They just suck for the people trained and willing to use rocket based ships, smaller demographic so, BACK OF THE LINE!
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 16:22:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Meeko Atari
Edited by: Meeko Atari on 02/03/2010 16:13:27
You guys do realize that Sensor Damps are a perfect counter to ECM right? and are usually fitter to ships with the highest sensor strength ( Lach, arazu ) they work every time you activate them and have been over nerfed.
Why not ask for a buff instead, I know the Gallente ships need it, and also a buff to Web strength wouldn't hurt the Minmatar either
I know a few Curse pilots that would like a better Vamp as well
I say we fix the other recons
*edit grammar*
i campained (whined) for a damp buff already, damps stacking on eachother and with sensor boosters, poor bonuses, weaksauce rigs etc.
however even perfect damps with great strength would allow a target to defence himself in other ways etc
ECMs primary and only effect is way too strong and its not fun for anyone, the number of people who use a falcon in a small gang and appologise in local after with "sorry i hate ecm too, but dont blame the player, blame the game"
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 09:38:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Dr Fighter on 03/03/2010 09:38:44
ECM was banned from several tournys in the past too, simply because its very dull to watch for everyone, same reason its banned from RvB its pre defined dull broken crap.
If ccp makes a decision to leave ecm out, that they must agree that it doesnt make good viewing .... how much less fun is it actually being the guy who cant do anything dieing slowly and painfully.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:03:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Tarhim
Originally by: Dr Fighter
how much less fun is it actually being the guy who cant do anything dieing slowly and painfully.
Ban scrams and webs now!
i mean he cant do anything, being webbed and scrammed doesnt stop you from doing the same back and blowing them to hell with all available weapon systems. 
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 14:41:00 -
[11]
The ecm effect can be compared to 4 modules of any other EW in terms of effect, one dmap wont do much unless the target is a good distance away but 4 will basicly lock them down - equivilant to a single ecm doing its thing.
so.
easy tweak for a huge difference, one active ecm module on any single target at a time.
One ship, one chance to jam, makes eccm live more upto its name too. Currently eccm is sort of undone by the multiply effect more than one ecm module, atm you have double your sensor strength wiht eccm but the jammer has X ecm modules ready to activate if the first fails.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 16:17:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Lugalzagezi666
Originally by: Dr Fighter
The ecm effect can be compared to 4 modules of any other EW in terms of effect
Lies...
When im 23k from target in my arbi, it takes 1 td to avoid almost all dps from scorch L...
Arazu can point from 48k - guess how much damps it take to get bc under 40k targeting range?
Originally by: Dr Fighter
but 4 will basicly lock them down - equivilant to a single ecm doing its thing
Ecm is chance based.
so what, a single light ecm drone gets one lucky hit and the target is fully jammed for 20 seconds.
Im talking about the effect of ecm, i know its chance based, but the chances are pretty good on most targets and if it does fail theres another full strength ECM to have a try and the odds that this one works where the last one didnt are better than the first.
Im comparing damps to the effect of ecm, 4 damps makes almost any ship unsable to a similar degree. i know that at max range one damp will be 'effective' because the target cant lock the attacker wiht the damp, but it cam lock anything else thats closer - unlike ecm.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 15:10:00 -
[13]
The Tzar's post was so bad i didnt even bother to quote it and slate it.
The chosen solution to this ECM issue is one that involves keeping ECM powerfull in all situations but not overpowered on smaller gangs/ships.
This is not easy at all this is why we revisit ECM every few months, some discussions going on for 10's of pages.
Main issues are - its super unfun to be jammed, and boring as hell doing the jamming.
No one likes ECM, but everyone aggres its the only counter to some tactics and thats why it shouldnt be removed or altered completely.
Thankfully there are new (decent) ideas popping up, and with any luck a ccp dev will combine a few into a workable fair and perhaps even fun package.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 15:11:00 -
[14]
for the sole purpose of providing direct EW in a decent size gang ANY fc will choose ECM first over all others unless they feel like they specificly need a super long piont/web/nuet.
TDs and damps are so rarly seen being used its not even funny, esp with siheld buffers on recons being the FOTM, why waste precious EHP slots on a subpar EW system
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 16:21:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Dr Fighter on 05/03/2010 16:22:36
Originally by: Lugalzagezi666
Subpar ew? Because you feel this way? Because you are incompetent to get together gang of hacs that operate at 50k where they can fully use advantage of damps or tds /or stealth bomers etc.
i run HAC gangs, and its either more dps or a falcon. Your a mug if you think a damp ship is better than more dps or a falcon.
Im a competent pilot, i only find damps and TDs on dead stuff, and thats because it didnt protect them or they're gang. I do not fit damps and TDs, even to bonused ships (curse for example) because i know that its too situation specific to bother watsing a slot on.
Yes a solo arazu might be able to kill somthing from 50km thats defenceless because it doesnt have the speed or the lock range. If that were a rook or falcon the exact same could be achived at any range you wish, in complete safty.
I used to fly a damp curse at one stage, before stacking got its teeth in and it was good because i could damp any sub cap ship to below my piont range, but that was pre stacking on damps and i still used 4!
|
| |
|