EVE Search - Possible Replacement for Jamming?

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Possible Replacement for Jamming?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.02.28 09:05:00 - [1] I expect a lot of resistance to this idea, but please make it verbose enough to be taken seriously. Change ECM from a targeting value reduction to a high slot module effectiveness value reduction. What this means is that being jammed no longer makes you helpless, what it does is disrupt all high slot module operation on the affected ship, deactivating them. They can still be reactivated, but one of the following negative effects will occur (if jamming attempt is successful): Module takes heat damage (double if overheated) Module takes more capacitor (not applicable if module is capless) Module duration is increased Module is offlined entirely Module is uneffected Each module would have a chance to take one of the above effects, and the effect is calculated individually. The effects do not stack with multiple jamming modules (one jam, one set of effects for the duration of the jam). For grouped weapons, the entire group would take the appropriate penalty for the ratio of modules grouped (8 turrets grouped with 2 of them affected with heat damage would mean the entire group takes the heat damage at 25% effect). In the case of a grouping suffering an offlined group member, the offline module would simply leave the group. This gives grouping both positive and negative connotations in regards to the effects of the new ECM. Now, would this change the dynamic of ECM in pvp? Absolutely. But that is the point. Right now ECM isn't even a little fun, for anyone. With this change the results are much less predictable and far more dynamic. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide
Feligast Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.28 10:12:00 - [2] ECM is fine.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.02.28 12:02:00 - [3] The biggest problem with ECM mechanics is that it's chance-based. Your idea doesn't change that; indeed, it makes blind chance even more important because now there's a chance of the module being offlined, which would normally permanently disable it for the duration of the fight. Awful idea.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.02.28 12:42:00 - [4] Originally by: Feligast ECM is fine. Not really no. I have to agree with Gypsio, adding even more randomization does more harm than good. Introduce two scripts, high/mid and upon successful jam the corresponding rack enters a 20s inactive cycle. Doesn't remove the chance based system but removes a lot of the gnashing of teeth caused by boring thumb-twiddling. Added benefit of making jamming more of a thinking man's game rather than just cycle jammers until successful.
The Offerer	Posted - 2011.02.28 15:03:00 - [5] Sure... A Curse should still be able to always suck you dry in a couple of seconds, but if you want to fly a Caldari e-war recon, then it should be double lottery based.
High Star	Posted - 2011.02.28 15:38:00 - [6] Sorry no ECM has been nerf'ed more than any other module in the game. The resolution to being jammed is to fit ECCM, and yes i know they are not a perfect solution, but then fitting stabs to a ship does not always result in the ship warping off if it is being scrambled Hey nothing is perfect and that's how it is supposed to be
Shoopa Whoopa	Posted - 2011.02.28 15:47:00 - [7] Edited by: Shoopa Whoopa on 28/02/2011 15:47:40 This could be interesting as some form of EW high slot weapon, but it shouldn't replace the current Jamming.
Corporal Punishment08 NosWaffle Nostradamus Effect	Posted - 2011.02.28 19:04:00 - [8] Sounds like a good idea, BUT it wouldn't really add or take away anything from the game. Also, would it be taking the racial aspect out of it all? If so, that would almost act as a buff to people who don't know much about ECM. Instead of having to learn the races and their sensors/proper jammers to use, you would just have one type of module, thus making it easier. I think ECM is the way to go. This idea is good, but ECM is better imo _____________________________________ Real men corpse tank.
Baaldor Igneus Auctorita Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.02.28 19:43:00 - [9] Edited by: Baaldor on 28/02/2011 19:44:04 Originally by: Corporal Punishment08 Instead of having to learn the races and their sensors/proper jammers to use, you would just have one type of module, thus making it easier. ....Really? Stack them : Amarr Caldari Gallante Minimitar. Left to right, how hard is that? And to the OP: Please show me where the bad man touched you....
Manalapan Dynasty Banking General Tso's Alliance	Posted - 2011.02.28 20:00:00 - [10] You are assuming ECM is over powered. I agree with most of the posts in this thread that it is not compared to the other EW. Let me express why: Your typical ECM ship in a fight is going to try to be 40-60km off the main engagement (or farther sometimes). This means they are really vulnerable to sensor dampening which has 100% chance to be effective and especially against larger ships ECCM can effectively neutralize an ECM ship as it might have to focus the entire rack to successfully jam some battleships. ECM is definitely not over powered and does not need any fix like the one you are proposing. Also, your concept with effecting only high slots does nothing to counter EW and Electronic Support. Your concept would leave say two rooks unable to shoot each other but able to maintain warp scram indefinitely. This kind of effect would destroy ECM as an element of the game. ECM does not need to be changed as it is the only EW to have a chance to fail and weakening its effects would be devastating. ------ Support Manalapan for CSM! Fixing EVE The Player That Makes EVE Stronger Manalapan Campaign
The Offerer	Posted - 2011.02.28 22:12:00 - [11] Originally by: Corporal Punishment08 If so, that would almost act as a buff to people who don't know much about ECM. Instead of having to learn the races and their sensors/proper jammers to use, you would just have one type of module, thus making it easier. If you are lazy enough to learn racial jammers, use Multispectrals - they are made for people who don't know how to play the game. For the rest, if you are not color blind, you can pair jammers with ships of a certain race. Just look at the picture of any ship: - Minmatar = Red - Amarr = Golden Yellow - Gallente = Light Blue - Caldari = Dark Blue You don't even have to know the names of modules. I sure don't know them.
Kalia Masaer Amarr Border Defense Consortium	Posted - 2011.03.01 01:33:00 - [12] In a small fight ecm is imbalanced as one ship can pretty much keep 2 ships out of the fight, but as the number of opponents increase ecm loses its edge because the ships are so fragile. The main problem with ECM is the fact fitting ECCM does not have as much effect as if you fit a sensor booster to counter a sensor damper. Remote sensor damper II on an arazu -26.56% targeting range/scan resolution. Sensor booster II +30% targeting range/scan resolution a 1-1 counter. Works great until the enemy gets to close or has lock, or has drones or FOF missiles A tracking disruptor II on a curse -31.41% Optimal/Fall-off/Tracking. Tracking Computer II +15% Fall-off/tracking +7.5% optimal. So about 2.5 to 1 counter, but only affects turrets. A single ecm - Multispectral jammer II on a falcon against an abaddon 40.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with ECCM - Radar II 20.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with 2 ECCM 11.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 3 ECCM 7.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 4 ECCM 5.8% chance of jam. So even with 4 ECCM mods the falcons single jammer has only been reduced to 14.2% effectiveness. Essentially there is no compete counter to ecm. ECM works at all ranges against everything but drones and FOF missiles. Now we will get into where ECM really gets messed up, it works more effectively against smaller ships in general because they have less sensor strength. And unlike other counters which are percentage against percentage, ECCM raising a percentage against a static number meaning the weaker the base sensor strength the less effective ECCM is. Also ECCM unlike all other counters to EW offers no benefit to the ship fitting them except for a few ships that can be made unprobable. It is less that ECM is messed up and more that ECCM is. More logical would be to give ECCM a static sensor strength bonus so it benefited ships with less sensor strength more and those with more less. Also it should give some other form of bonus as an incentive to fit it on ships, nothing spectacular but something instead of it just being a dead slot if you don't encounter ECM.
Goose99	Posted - 2011.03.01 04:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Kalia Masaer In a small fight ecm is imbalanced as one ship can pretty much keep 2 ships out of the fight, but as the number of opponents increase ecm loses its edge because the ships are so fragile. The main problem with ECM is the fact fitting ECCM does not have as much effect as if you fit a sensor booster to counter a sensor damper. Remote sensor damper II on an arazu -26.56% targeting range/scan resolution. Sensor booster II +30% targeting range/scan resolution a 1-1 counter. Works great until the enemy gets to close or has lock, or has drones or FOF missiles A tracking disruptor II on a curse -31.41% Optimal/Fall-off/Tracking. Tracking Computer II +15% Fall-off/tracking +7.5% optimal. So about 2.5 to 1 counter, but only affects turrets. A single ecm - Multispectral jammer II on a falcon against an abaddon 40.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with ECCM - Radar II 20.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with 2 ECCM 11.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 3 ECCM 7.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 4 ECCM 5.8% chance of jam. So even with 4 ECCM mods the falcons single jammer has only been reduced to 14.2% effectiveness. Essentially there is no compete counter to ecm. ECM works at all ranges against everything but drones and FOF missiles. Now we will get into where ECM really gets messed up, it works more effectively against smaller ships in general because they have less sensor strength. And unlike other counters which are percentage against percentage, ECCM raising a percentage against a static number meaning the weaker the base sensor strength the less effective ECCM is. Also ECCM unlike all other counters to EW offers no benefit to the ship fitting them except for a few ships that can be made unprobable. It is less that ECM is messed up and more that ECCM is. More logical would be to give ECCM a static sensor strength bonus so it benefited ships with less sensor strength more and those with more less. Also it should give some other form of bonus as an incentive to fit it on ships, nothing spectacular but something instead of it just being a dead slot if you don't encounter ECM. This whine is weak. You want complete protection against ECM? 5.8% jam chance isn't low enough for you? Since when do you get 100% protection against anything? And ECM more effective against smaller ships? What about neut? If anything, ECM is gimped too much and need to be buffed. How is it that everyone fit a cap booster for cap drain? If you refuse to fit ECCM, that's an indication you're not jammed hard though. Once ECM is made more effective, you'll fit ECCMs, there we go, balance.
High Star	Posted - 2011.03.01 06:57:00 - [14] Originally by: Kalia Masaer A single ecm - Multispectral jammer II on a falcon against an abaddon 40.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with ECCM - Radar II 20.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with 2 ECCM 11.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 3 ECCM 7.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 4 ECCM 5.8% chance of jam. So even with 4 ECCM mods the falcons single jammer has only been reduced to 14.2% effectiveness. Essentially there is no compete counter to ecm. ECM works at all ranges against everything but drones and FOF missiles. . Here we go again. IT's not fair that a specially designed tech 2 ship can jam my tech 1 battleship even if i fit 4 ECCM's. Get a life that's what the Falcon was designed to do. What's next the HIC is overpowered cause i can not warp away even if i have 8 stabs fitted to my abaddon
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Men Who Stare At Gates	Posted - 2011.03.01 11:33:00 - [15] Quote: This whine is weak. You want complete protection against ECM? 5.8% jam chance isn't low enough for you? Since when do you get 100% protection against anything? And ECM more effective against smaller ships? What about neut? If anything, ECM is gimped too much and need to be buffed. How is it that everyone fit a cap booster for cap drain? If you refuse to fit ECCM, that's an indication you're not jammed hard though. Once ECM is made more effective, you'll fit ECCMs, there we go, balance. Cap Boosters are usually fitted to maintain a cap eating Tank, continue to run MWDs and not fitted for the sole purpose to counter a Curse. Neutralizers exist in Small, Med and Heavy and drain a lot of cap even on your ship. Even if ECM has a strength value a frig can boost it to jam a BS easily, ever tried neuting a BS in a frig? No idea why you bring up the neuts though, the Tracking disruptors are the thing you should compare to. Have you ever heard someone moaning about a Razu, Pilgrim, Rapier decloaking? One of those ships wont prevent anyone from fighting 1vsX. The problem is, even if you are outnumbered, you still get jammed. No other recon can turn the tide to your favout like the falcon can. Another thing is, you can use ECM as your tank. If that fails, falcon pilots usually moan saying, its a weak ship relying totally on luck. If people would fit those ships like the other races would fit theirs, MWD/Extender/Hardener and maybe 2 ECMs the ship would be way more balanced but since you can just dump 6-7 jammers on it, sit on distance at no danger at all as long as there arent too many targets. Additionally every Recon except the falcon has one non EWar offensive mod Rapier - Webs/Painter - Forced to stay withing 40-50 km to use webs, effective against a single target. Painters rarely of any use. Arazu - Disruptor/Damp - Can point to (i think) 50-60km, damps are ralrely used. This ship is usually used as tackler with shield buffer. Damp nerf killed it, only effective against 1 single target if damps are used. Pilgrim - Cap(lol)/TD - Usually 2 TDs fitted, TDs can be anoying for turret ships but you still can hit. Neuts are forcing you to a range of ~10km unlike the Curse. Falcon - ECM/ECM - Usually has MWD + 6 ECMs. Either no tank or armor tank. Invented the "ECM Tank". All boni are for ECM, no other system which would be of any use and force you to stay <50km. Now i would say the Falcon would need to lose a ECM Bonus and gain a bonus for a new offensive system. While weapons need a target lock, why do need Drones need one aswell? They have their own targeting systems, let us command them to engage without needing a lock. And finally, remove the drain amount bonus of the pilgrim and replace it with the curses range bonus. Thats it i think, i'm done.
High Star	Posted - 2011.03.01 12:25:00 - [16] Originally by: Naomi Wildfire Falcon - ECM/ECM - Usually has MWD + 6 ECMs. Either no tank or armor tank. Invented the "ECM Tank". All boni are for ECM, no other system which would be of any use and force you to stay <50km. Now i would say the Falcon would need to lose a ECM Bonus and gain a bonus for a new offensive system. By doing this you effectively make the whole point of the Falcon redundant. Falcon is an EWAR ship that's is whole purpose for being in the game. Sorry but that's like saying remove the ship maintenance bay out of a carrier or remove the clocking ability from a stealth bomber. NO live with it and fit ECCM if you want to reduce the chance of getting jammed
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Men Who Stare At Gates	Posted - 2011.03.01 12:38:00 - [17] Originally by: High Star Originally by: Naomi Wildfire Falcon - ECM/ECM - Usually has MWD + 6 ECMs. Either no tank or armor tank. Invented the "ECM Tank". All boni are for ECM, no other system which would be of any use and force you to stay <50km. Now i would say the Falcon would need to lose a ECM Bonus and gain a bonus for a new offensive system. By doing this you effectively make the whole point of the Falcon redundant. Falcon is an EWAR ship that's is whole purpose for being in the game. Sorry but that's like saying remove the ship maintenance bay out of a carrier or remove the clocking ability from a stealth bomber. NO live with it and fit ECCM if you want to reduce the chance of getting jammed LOL It still remains an EWAR boat, just like the other EWAR boats. Your answer would fit to the request to remove its jamming capabilities which noone proposed.
High Star	Posted - 2011.03.01 13:11:00 - [18] sorry wrong. The Falcon gets a 30% bonus to the strength of ECM which as we all know is a chance weapon. The Arazu gets a 20% to warp disruption range which is not a chance weapon. Therefore these two recon ships have the same bonus as the warp disruptor will stop you from warping ever time. Unlike ECM were the pilot may have to use all their ECM modules before they jam the ship. So if you took the Falcons bonus away you would make the ship redundant. Therefore leave the Falcon and ECM as a whole alone and stop whining when you get jammed.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.03.01 13:47:00 - [19] Originally by: High Star ..NO live with it and fit ECCM if you want to reduce the chance of getting jammed Sounds perfectly reasonable .. now if you'll just add slots and base sensor strength too all sub-BC hulls so that fitting the useless crap actually has an effect The ECM mechanic of forcing a 20s cinematic onto a person is the main issue, I'd wager that most people wouldn't mind ECM being even more powerful were it not so mind-numbingly boring to be hit with it. Secondary issue is the complete waste of a slot that ECCM represents for sub-BC hulls making ECM outright OP against them.
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Men Who Stare At Gates	Posted - 2011.03.01 14:07:00 - [20] Originally by: High Star sorry wrong. The Falcon gets a 30% bonus to the strength of ECM which as we all know is a chance weapon. The Arazu gets a 20% to warp disruption range which is not a chance weapon. Therefore these two recon ships have the same bonus as the warp disruptor will stop you from warping ever time. Unlike ECM were the pilot may have to use all their ECM modules before they jam the ship. So if you took the Falcons bonus away you would make the ship redundant. Therefore leave the Falcon and ECM as a whole alone and stop whining when you get jammed. Dude, stop being a fanboi and look at it more objective, but you seem to not have the slightest clue about what you are saying since you put a warp disruptor in relation to a target jammer. ECM: Target Jammer, Target Painter, Sensor Dampener, Tracking Disruptor Other Recon Capabilities: Webifiers, Disruptors, Neutralizers, ? A sensor Dampener is in most of the cases useless and can at max only dampen 1 ship effectively. Counter would be, approach the ship. A Tracking Disruptor might have a little more use but still it remains to effect 1-2 ships max. Counter: Approach the ship or align with it A Target Painter has no counter and doesnt need one because they are only of use in very rare cases. A Target Jammer is chance based which is often used as its excuse, but how would it look if its not chance based? While the 3 other Recons often fit none of their EWAR systems, the Falcons fit as much as they can, usually ending with 6, able to permanently neutralize 1-3 Targets. Its counter? (Notice i used counter measures that dont need a fitted module) Sit and wait/hope. While in small groups or solo, ECM ships are the only ones that prevent any possibilities to fight back, at least for turret based ships. Quote: So if you took the Falcons bonus away you would make the ship redundant. I was a little wrong, i thought the falcon would get Strength/Range but it gets Strength/Cap. So, Recon ships: Racial Cruiser Damage Bonus 5-7.5% EWAR Bonus Racial Recon Ship Offensive Module Bonus Cloaking Mod CPU Bonus Falcon: Caldari Cruiser Damage Bonus 10% Cap Bonus Caldari Recon 30% ECM Strength Bonus Cloaking Mod CPU Bonus You really need to be one falcon fanboi to think everything is fine. Let me redo this a bit: Falcon: Caldari Cruiser Damage Bonus 7.5-10% ECM Strength Caldari Recon 60% to Smartbomb Range per level (maybe damage instead, or range and damage. its really difficult to find a mod) Cloaking Mod CPU Bonus ( notice the smartbomb bonus is just some replacement and might not fit ) Recons other than the falcon have not the sole purpose of just using their EWAR capabilities and i like that, there is more the falcon should be capable of and Jamming should be one option to cripple 1-2 targets, just like the other recons do. You dont need to answer me, i know how it looks like Falcon is EWAR Falcon only jams to exist and survive Falcon is great, dont touch it Falcon is best Battleship All hail Falcon
Kalia Masaer Amarr Border Defense Consortium	Posted - 2011.03.01 16:03:00 - [21] Originally by: Goose99 Originally by: Kalia Masaer In a small fight ecm is imbalanced as one ship can pretty much keep 2 ships out of the fight, but as the number of opponents increase ecm loses its edge because the ships are so fragile. The main problem with ECM is the fact fitting ECCM does not have as much effect as if you fit a sensor booster to counter a sensor damper. Remote sensor damper II on an arazu -26.56% targeting range/scan resolution. Sensor booster II +30% targeting range/scan resolution a 1-1 counter. Works great until the enemy gets to close or has lock, or has drones or FOF missiles A tracking disruptor II on a curse -31.41% Optimal/Fall-off/Tracking. Tracking Computer II +15% Fall-off/tracking +7.5% optimal. So about 2.5 to 1 counter, but only affects turrets. A single ecm - Multispectral jammer II on a falcon against an abaddon 40.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with ECCM - Radar II 20.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with 2 ECCM 11.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 3 ECCM 7.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 4 ECCM 5.8% chance of jam. So even with 4 ECCM mods the falcons single jammer has only been reduced to 14.2% effectiveness. Essentially there is no compete counter to ecm. ECM works at all ranges against everything but drones and FOF missiles. Now we will get into where ECM really gets messed up, it works more effectively against smaller ships in general because they have less sensor strength. And unlike other counters which are percentage against percentage, ECCM raising a percentage against a static number meaning the weaker the base sensor strength the less effective ECCM is. Also ECCM unlike all other counters to EW offers no benefit to the ship fitting them except for a few ships that can be made unprobable. It is less that ECM is messed up and more that ECCM is. More logical would be to give ECCM a static sensor strength bonus so it benefited ships with less sensor strength more and those with more less. Also it should give some other form of bonus as an incentive to fit it on ships, nothing spectacular but something instead of it just being a dead slot if you don't encounter ECM. This whine is weak. You want complete protection against ECM? 5.8% jam chance isn't low enough for you? Since when do you get 100% protection against anything? And ECM more effective against smaller ships? What about neut? If anything, ECM is gimped too much and need to be buffed. How is it that everyone fit a cap booster for cap drain? If you refuse to fit ECCM, that's an indication you're not jammed hard though. Once ECM is made more effective, you'll fit ECCMs, there we go, balance. What I am saying is that, ECCM is proportionately less effective the weaker the sensor strength of the ship, fitting ECCM on a ship with a sensor strength of one would be pointless. So hence why I am suggesting it give a static amount to sensor strength. Secondly ECCM gives no bonus unlike the other mods used to counter other forms of EW, it is essentially a wasted slot if you fail to encounter ECM. You seem to have missed the point. ECCM offers no benefit at anything other than against ECM and is very ineffective at that on ships that start with a low sensor strength. Why would you even think about fitting ECCM to a T1 frigate or T1 cruiser? That is the problem with ECM. Also when you fit ECCM to a carrier it is far to effective in proportion.
Goose99	Posted - 2011.03.01 16:15:00 - [22] Originally by: Kalia Masaer Originally by: Goose99 Originally by: Kalia Masaer In a small fight ecm is imbalanced as one ship can pretty much keep 2 ships out of the fight, but as the number of opponents increase ecm loses its edge because the ships are so fragile. The main problem with ECM is the fact fitting ECCM does not have as much effect as if you fit a sensor booster to counter a sensor damper. Remote sensor damper II on an arazu -26.56% targeting range/scan resolution. Sensor booster II +30% targeting range/scan resolution a 1-1 counter. Works great until the enemy gets to close or has lock, or has drones or FOF missiles A tracking disruptor II on a curse -31.41% Optimal/Fall-off/Tracking. Tracking Computer II +15% Fall-off/tracking +7.5% optimal. So about 2.5 to 1 counter, but only affects turrets. A single ecm - Multispectral jammer II on a falcon against an abaddon 40.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with ECCM - Radar II 20.8% chance of jam. Abaddon with 2 ECCM 11.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 3 ECCM 7.3% chance of jam. Abaddon with 4 ECCM 5.8% chance of jam. So even with 4 ECCM mods the falcons single jammer has only been reduced to 14.2% effectiveness. Essentially there is no compete counter to ecm. ECM works at all ranges against everything but drones and FOF missiles. Now we will get into where ECM really gets messed up, it works more effectively against smaller ships in general because they have less sensor strength. And unlike other counters which are percentage against percentage, ECCM raising a percentage against a static number meaning the weaker the base sensor strength the less effective ECCM is. Also ECCM unlike all other counters to EW offers no benefit to the ship fitting them except for a few ships that can be made unprobable. It is less that ECM is messed up and more that ECCM is. More logical would be to give ECCM a static sensor strength bonus so it benefited ships with less sensor strength more and those with more less. Also it should give some other form of bonus as an incentive to fit it on ships, nothing spectacular but something instead of it just being a dead slot if you don't encounter ECM. This whine is weak. You want complete protection against ECM? 5.8% jam chance isn't low enough for you? Since when do you get 100% protection against anything? And ECM more effective against smaller ships? What about neut? If anything, ECM is gimped too much and need to be buffed. How is it that everyone fit a cap booster for cap drain? If you refuse to fit ECCM, that's an indication you're not jammed hard though. Once ECM is made more effective, you'll fit ECCMs, there we go, balance. What I am saying is that, ECCM is proportionately less effective the weaker the sensor strength of the ship, fitting ECCM on a ship with a sensor strength of one would be pointless. So hence why I am suggesting it give a static amount to sensor strength. Secondly ECCM gives no bonus unlike the other mods used to counter other forms of EW, it is essentially a wasted slot if you fail to encounter ECM. You seem to have missed the point. ECCM offers no benefit at anything other than against ECM and is very ineffective at that on ships that start with a low sensor strength. Why would you even think about fitting ECCM to a T1 frigate or T1 cruiser? That is the problem with ECM. Also when you fit ECCM to a carrier it is far to effective in proportion. Can't be done, that would produce unscannable by default in small ships. ECCM boost your sensor strength, decrease chance of jam and increase scan time/difficulty, that's what it does. Not sure what you mean by "gives no bonus unlike the other mods used to counter other forms of EW."
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.03.01 16:33:00 - [23] Originally by: The Offerer Gallente = Light Blue More like Cyan tbh. There is definitely green in there. Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it. Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.
Gavjack Bunk Gallente Genos Occidere Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.03.01 17:02:00 - [24] Seeing as nobody can agree on what they want ECM to do, perhaps it should always "hit", but the effect is randomly chosen from a pool of every stupid idea that ever hit the forums.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.03.01 18:16:00 - [25] Originally by: Gavjack Bunk Seeing as nobody can agree on what they want ECM to do, perhaps it should always "hit", but the effect is randomly chosen from a pool of every stupid idea that ever hit the forums. Now we're talking. Upon successful jam, roll one dice: 1. ECM boat explodes. 2. Local is disabled until DT. 3. A cyno lights and the closest 10 capitals in the region are forcibly hotdropped on top of the target ship. 4. Target ship is transformed into a T1-fit Nyx. 5. A wormhole forms and transports everyone within 15 km into a random wormhole space system. Then it closes. 6. Concord arrives and nukes everyone on grid.
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Men Who Stare At Gates	Posted - 2011.03.01 19:33:00 - [26] Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Gavjack Bunk Seeing as nobody can agree on what they want ECM to do, perhaps it should always "hit", but the effect is randomly chosen from a pool of every stupid idea that ever hit the forums. Now we're talking. Upon successful jam, roll one dice: 1. ECM boat explodes. 2. Local is disabled until DT. 3. A cyno lights and the closest 10 capitals in the region are forcibly hotdropped on top of the target ship. 4. Target ship is transformed into a T1-fit Nyx. 5. A wormhole forms and transports everyone within 15 km into a random wormhole space system. Then it closes. 6. Concord arrives and nukes everyone on grid. Win =) Hilariously awesome
The Offerer	Posted - 2011.03.01 19:48:00 - [27] Edited by: The Offerer on 01/03/2011 19:48:31 Originally by: Mag's Originally by: The Offerer Gallente = Light Blue More like Cyan tbh. There is definitely green in there. Yeah, yeah... curse my Engrish... couldn't remember the correct word
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.03.01 20:27:00 - [28] Originally by: The Offerer Sure... A Curse should still be able to always suck you dry in a couple of seconds, but if you want to fly a Caldari e-war recon, then it should be double lottery based. I still think cap batteries should offer some cap immunity. Originally by: Manalapan You are assuming ECM is over powered. I am assuming nothing, it is just not fun for anyone to be permanently jammed from start to finish. Which is why the chance based ECM came about in the first place. Quote: Your typical ECM ship in a fight is going to try to be 40-60km off the main engagement (or farther sometimes). This means they are really vulnerable to sensor dampening which has 100% chance to be effective and especially against larger ships ECCM can effectively neutralize an ECM ship as it might have to focus the entire rack to successfully jam some battleships. If sensor damps were 100% effective, people would fly those EW ships over ECM ships 100% of the time. They aren't always effective, because most ships worth dampening are using sensor boosters which stacking penalize dampeners. Quote: ECM is definitely not over powered and does not need any fix like the one you are proposing. I would prefer it be removed rather than no change at all. I think all EW is too bland to be honest. It is either useless most of the time, too predictable, or just reduces the fun factor significantly. But I don't mind changing EW to be more aggressive, as long as it never makes a fight too one sided. Quote: Also, your concept with effecting only high slots does nothing to counter EW and Electronic Support. Your concept would leave say two rooks unable to shoot each other but able to maintain warp scram indefinitely. I don't see the problem? Quote: This kind of effect would destroy ECM as an element of the game. ECM does not need to be changed as it is the only EW to have a chance to fail and weakening its effects would be devastating. All EW should be less predictable. And less ECM ships would be win for everyone. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide

Pages: [1] :: 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.