ECM does work on NPCs.

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

It does? I've never tried it, it was just something I'd heard.

Its because when I've locked and pointed something no other ECM can get that point off till I'm dead.

ECM can, and it can do it to 4 others if the ecm is from a falcon. It also now has me ****** because I'm pointed and now unable to control range because my web stops functioning.

In small gang ECM shuts everything down, other forms of EW do not. Sensor damps could do it but its hard to get a lock range down to within inside point range.

You forgot the part where ECM counters all other forms of EWar as they all require lock (unless you're using drones).

Key observation. Maybe we should think about using those.

Because the only way to counter ECM is to fit to counter ECM.

Key observation. Maybe we should think about using those.

Its because when I've locked and pointed something no other ECM can get that point off till I'm dead.

ECM can, and it can do it to 4 others if the ecm is from a falcon. It also now has me ****** because I'm pointed and now unable to control range because my web stops functioning.

In small gang ECM shuts everything down, other forms of EW do not. Sensor damps could do it but its hard to get a lock range down to within inside point range.

Because the only way to counter ECM is to fit to counter ECM. This completely gimps your fit

FoF

Is it gimped as bad when your jammed and unable to do anything? Oh right it isn't. So you want protection from a contingency, but you don't want to have to sacrifice for that protection.

ECM does work on NPCs.

ECM makes your ship completely useless, which is bad
the counter to ECM is ECCM which is useless unless you are against ECM.
give ECM another benefit and it won't be so bad.

Turrets

Or ECCM.

Nothing like watching a Tier 3 BC hit a Falcon because it couldn't get its jam off in time - they soon leave the field.

Is it gimped as bad when your jammed and unable to do anything? Oh right it isn't. So you want protection from a contingency, but you don't want to have to sacrifice for that protection. Which is bullshit. You want to fly without "gimping your fit", then you have to pay the price. You can choose to have your high DPS, or you can choose to be prepared for a contingency. CCP says you don't get both. Deal with it.

Things

The much bigger issue are ECM-drones. Nearly anyone is using them and tbh you don't need a Falcon in this case. You face a small fleet of Hurricanes. They suck your cap to death and perma-jam your ship with EC-300's out of the fight easily. Bring a Falcon and you get smacked by these guys for sure.

The Falcon is dead. Long live the Falcon. Welcom to EVIL-Online.

^^ This.

ECM ships are fine. ECM drones are not. Remove ECM drones. Buff Sensor Boosters / Signal Amps to also increase Signature Strength with specialized scripts ala Range or Targeting Speed. Remove ECCM modules as they're terrible and far too specialized.

so to summarize that, eccm is too specialized because it just makes you harder to probe and harder to jam and you don't want to use a module slot for that?

oh that is so cute, how about "no" and also "too damn bad"
make a decision, commit to a fit, if you think you can fly without eccm, do not whine around, if you think you need it, do not complain if no one tries to jam you.

this is just .. really dumb, you want essentially that caldari ecm is nerfed by the means of implementing the counter function into something else so you can fit it without remorse


yea, so if its that good, bring it yourself, not like you have to reroll from mage to warlock and level to 80

this entire ecm discussion is a great example of "nerf sissors, rock is fine", although the drone thing ~ might be worth a second look ... maybe

People whine about ECM because people think EVE is balanced around 1v1 and 2v2 and 5v5. I agree, in those situations it is probably quite overpowered. In EVE, no, it's fine.

What I learned from this thread: the people defending the current ECM mechanics are drooling imbeciles who can't assemble a coherent rebuttal to any of the arguments against ECM and resort to spewing out the same handful of replies ad nauseam.

What I learned from this thread: the people defending the current ECM mechanics are drooling imbeciles who can't assemble a coherent rebuttal to any of the arguments against ECM and resort to spewing out the same handful of replies ad nauseam.

This is only an argument for buffing or adding an effect to ECCM, not an argument for nerfing ECM.

What I learned from your post: you have provided no logical arguments or counterpoints that would benefit this discourse or lend any weight to the Anti-ECM whinefest; all the while resorting to ad hominem and personal attacks. You, sir, are a master debater.

ECCM increases your sensor strength and affects how easy you can be probed (signature radius / sensor strength = probe indicator size, wasn't it ?)
ECM is chance based, that has advantages and disadvantages for both sides. You can never be sure to jam a target, just increase the chance, you can never be sure to not get jammed,

ECM is meant to deal with numbers or logistics.

We should nerf after burners and MWD's, and Stasis webs. There is nothing like getting locked out of a fight because you are unable to control range. You just have to sit there and twiddle your thumbs while the other player beats on you. It's the definition of anti-fun; it's such a broken mechanic.

We should nerf after burners and MWD's, and Stasis webs. There is nothing like getting locked out of a fight because you are unable to control range. You just have to sit there and twiddle your thumbs while the other player beats on you. It's the definition of anti-fun; it's such a broken mechanic.

What makes it worse, is that none of my corp mates fit afterburners, or mwd, or webs, because it gimps our tank. How is it fair that one player with an afterburner can effectively remove 4 of us from a fight?

/sarcasm

If only there were some way to prevent ECM ships from locking in the first place. Some kind of counter-measure to their electronics.

If only there were some way to prevent ECM ships from locking in the first place. Some kind of counter-measure to their electronics.

I normally have a lot of respect for your opinion, but please stop doing harm to reasonable discourse with nonsense phrases like this.

so let me see, perfect dps fit junkies come to forum to whine and cry, saying ecm is too tough, i dont wanna gimp my uber fit in order to do well, or survive.

Which of the two words do you have a problem with?

It is easy to counter use drones / FOF missile's / sensor damps and possibly some others its not the best EW its a good one i admit that but can be countered if you work around countering it.

Each EW weapon as such is used for debuffing a enamy ship if used right most people are going to call OP about it but why so much on ECM?

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

There's no such thing as "quintessential proof" -- or even regular proof -- in Eve theory crafting.

GǪbut this isn't theory-crafting. It's not even about EVE. This is basic game design, and something being its own only counter is the quintessential proof that it's not balanced properly. If we look at how it has been applied to EVE, it's the fundamental reason why nano got nuked and it's the continuing reason supercaps are reeling close to the chopping block whenever they're not actually on it.

The moment you hear Gǣbring some of your ownGǥ as an argument, you know it's a problem. The funny part is that the ones demonstrating the problem are the ones who wish to claim that it doesn't exist by using that argumentGǪ

something being its own only counter is the quintessential proof that it's not balanced properly.

But it's not its only counter, is it?

It was argued as such. I'm merely pointing out that this argument only ever serves to prove that it needs to be fixed, which is often the opposite of what the person is trying to say.

No, it wasn't. Saying ECM is susceptible to ECM is not the same as saying ECM is the only counter for ECM.

GǪand it still amounts to Gǣbring some of your ownGǥ, which is still a bad argument against a change because it only ever shows that there is a problem.

No, it doesn't amount to that, and even if it did, the burden is on you to demonstrate how not being able to bring a knife to a gun fight actually breaks the game.

No, it doesn't amount to that

and even if it did, the burden is on you to demonstrate how not being able to bring a knife to a gun fight actually breaks the game.

GǪaside from him saying that you should bring ECM to beat the ECM, which does indeed mean you should bring some of your own. So it's the same argument, and it's still as counter-productive as when people tried it with nanos and supercaps.

As luck would have it, if someone else makes an argument, the burden of proof is not on me.

If webs were like ECM, they would completely 0 your speed instantly and for 20 seconds
If damps were like ECM, they would 0 your liking range for 20 Seconds
If Nuets were like ECM, they would zero you cap and it can't recharge for 20 seconds

That's why ECM is dumb

Not so dumb version would be for ECM to straight up lower the number of lockable targets by 1 point (2 if in a recon ship)

You are the one making the claim that ECM needs to be changed.

So, what you're saying is, because ECM is different then other forms of EWAR, it's dumb? Well... that's just dumb.

Speaking of dumb, I hate to break it to you, but your idea is the epitome of dumb. "Oh no, I can only lock 4 targets now instead of 8! Whatever shall I do?"

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

What a great word.

Since when does afterburners/MWD's prevent someone from using target painters, sensor dampeners, shooting from afar etc. ect?

You can stop looking, we've found the person with the hurt bottom.

Gosh the counter to you is so joyfully simple. But I'll take my time and draw out your misery

Logistics ships are primary targets of ECM

Guess how many ships logistics ships can lock at one time?

Wonder why it's so many? We can quite imagine that your mind just melted.

If only 2 targets per module isn't high enough, let's go to 3? That's 12 ships you can't lock.

Hammer away at your keyboard, viens popping from your forehead *thunk* *mash* *hammer*

You can stop looking, we've found the person with the hurt bottom.

Gosh the counter to you is so joyfully simple. But I'll take my time and draw out your misery

Logistics ships are primary targets of ECM

Guess how many ships logistics ships can lock at one time?

Wonder why it's so many? We can quite imagine that your mind just melted.

If only 2 targets per module isn't high enough, let's go to 3? That's 12 ships you can't lock.

Hammer away at your keyboard, viens popping from your forehead *thunk* *mash* *hammer*

ROFL

This is your solution to the ECM question? And you thought blobs were bad before? imagine the goons showing up with a alpha fleet and 200 scorps to back it cause now they can just make it so your 200-250 man gang just can't lock anything thanks to guaranteed jams that lower the number of ships you can lock.

Great plan bro.

Its because when I've locked and pointed something no other ECM can get that point off till I'm dead.

ECM can, and it can do it to 4 others if the ecm is from a falcon. It also now has me ****** because I'm pointed and now unable to control range because my web stops functioning.

In small gang ECM shuts everything down, other forms of EW do not. Sensor damps could do it but its hard to get a lock range down to within inside point range.

Er, range? Range can prevent someone from doing anything. Also, my sarcasm is just fine, thanks. Also, I laugh at the people who are stating that 'chance based' ECM is game breaking. The joke is that back in the 'ol days, ECM was *not* chance based. It was simply who had the higher sensor strength. If you sensor strength was higher than the target you where trying to jam, then you perma-jammed them. End of story. Clearly non-chance based is the way to go!

If you do something to ECM, then you'll have to do something to logistic ships as well. By current mechanics, other than blobbing the only true way to counter logistic ships is ECM. Sensor Damps are gimped and are usually not worth using for the purpose. Logistic ships are a force multiplier like ECM and can usually repair far more dps than an equal number of ships can bring. Logistic ships like Guardians are very hard to neut and stop the chain unless you have all the logistic ships in neut range, which is most of the time unlikely.

As a recon 5 falcon pilot, I don't think many of the suggestions in this thread are worthy of serious consideration. But they should be addressed.

First, ECM is chance based, but only to a certain extent. If your jam strength is higher than the target's sensor strength, they are permajammed, and that is the only way. Chance to jam is jam str / sensor str per cycle. The maximum attainable jam strength on a Falcon is in the neighborhood of 15. BCs have sensor strengths in the range of 17-19. Logistics, recons, and T1 BS in the low 20s.

Most ECM ships do NOT focus jams on one ship, thus negating the whole multiple jammers issue because getting caught with no available jammers when enemy reinforcements arrive usually gets you or someone else popped. They cycle jammers until one hits, leaving the rest off. So let's not talk about focusing 4 jammers on one target.

ECM ships are notoriously easy to kill once you get dps on them. Get rid of their ECM defense and they would be pretty useless except as dps decoys.

Reducing the max lockable targets would be pointless. Even 1 lockable target is enough to put dps on the ecm ship. With the maximum lockable targets available to some players in certain ships, they would be completely immune to ECM. Frigates with only a couple targets would still get completely locked out. It wouldn't change anything that neesd to be changed while making certain ships immune to ECM. That would be bad game design.

Splitting scan res and range damping between Gallente and Caldari. There is a reason you don't see Arazu/Lachesis/Keres very much. Range damps are easily countered by speed fits, which are prolific due to speed mechanics reducing dps. Scan res damps are useless vs anything that is smaller than a BS. Also, damps are easily countered by the fairly common sebo, though that is not it's primary use.

Tippia made some interesting comparisons between RL ECM and Eve. Not bragging, but I work on ECM and ECCM for a living. We should be glad that eve ECM does not do some of the things that real ECM does. Otherwise we would have to dock for repairs everytime a strong ECM ship blasted our sensors at close range, thus completely burning them out.

As for how well eve ECM does replicate some RL effects, one method of jamming relies on overwhelming the target's sensors with sensor noise. This relies on knowing which type and frequency of noise to produce. Racial jammers simulate this well. There are lso broadband jammers that broadcast on many frequencies. Multifreqs do this well.

ECCM is an able approximation of boosting one's sensor strength. But if the opposing noise is greater than your ability to discern your signal from the noise, you're still screwed. And you can only broadcast with so much strength, and receive a certain level of signal before your transmitter or receiver burns out.

Another method focuses on providing an EWAR suite with false information. The simplest way of doing this would be a decoy system. Flares and/or chaff can confuse sensors and make you miss. They last for only a limited time. I'd be on board for that. But such systems rely on ammo, and are strictly defensive.

...

The easiest way to put a bit of nerf on ECM would be to make a skill that increases one's sensor strength. So easy, yet so effective. Call it "Sensor Integrity"

However, knowing what ECM and ECCM are capable of and why they do the thgns they do, I have to set myself in the HTFU section. ECM is supposed to be unfair. It is supposed to make ti so you cannot function while your enemies bend you over the barrel and ride your ass like a little *****. You are trying to kill your enemy. Why should combat be fair? There is no e-honoure in combat. Why should a simulation be any different? Fit your ECCM. Be glad you have anything at all.

But it's not its only counter, is it? I know you are smart enough to know that, so you are probably just being dishonest, here.

ECM is a great way for lower SP players to pee in the Cheerios of higher SP players, and that's what these gripe threads are all about, end of story.

Yes, but not for the reasons you claim, and my reasons and demonstration of why it's a problem have already been presented. If you want to argue them, do so, or I can only conclude that you agree.

If only there were some way to prevent ECM ships from locking in the first place. Some kind of counter-measure to their electronics.

The maximum attainable jam strength on a Falcon is in the neighborhood of 15.

But, but... the higher SP players put all that time in, they should be able to beat and wail on the newer players without fear of reprisal, because, because... WELL JUST BECAUSE DAMMIT!

The old Tip is being absolutely dishonest here, there is more then one way to counter, Tippia knows this, and is misrepresenting the situation.

It has been presented and we have rejected your claim that it is a problem.

Tippia made some interesting comparisons between RL ECM and Eve. Not bragging, but I work on ECM and ECCM for a living. We should be glad that eve ECM does not do some of the things that real ECM does. Otherwise we would have to dock for repairs everytime a strong ECM ship blasted our sensors at close range, thus completely burning them out.

[GǪ]

Another method focuses on providing an EWAR suite with false information. The simplest way of doing this would be a decoy system. Flares and/or chaff can confuse sensors and make you miss. They last for only a limited time. I'd be on board for that. But such systems rely on ammo, and are strictly defensive.

Electronically, there are countermeasures suites that do this as well. One need not burn out or even blind a receiver to make it miss or lose lock. Give it multiple targets and confuse it. This could be simulated by screwing with the overview as suggested. I wouldn't like to see things removed from the overview. That would be too much like cloaking. But adding things... that sounds interesting. Could create a lot of confusion.

DOH HO HO THAT SLAPS ME ON ZE KNEE. That was a silly thing to say - you can get much stronger falcons.

It's because the basic effect of ECM is simply bad gameplay. Getting killed is never exactly enjoyable, but getting killed while you can just twidle your thumbs and pray for the goddess of RNG to smile on you is just terrible. It just takes too much control and options away from the victim. It doesn't exactly help when the counters, outside of having more people, aren't exactly great against anything else.

This isn't just a problem with EVE though. Similar effects are in many games and in most of them there are game mechanics in place to prevent it from working longer then a few seconds at a time with a temporary immunity provided to the victims afterwards. Even in pen and paper games veteran managers avoid using certain enemies, because a bad roll of dice can make it so, that the players can only sit and watch as they are slowly beaten to death and they can only pray for a good dice roll to be able to do something, as in actually play the game. It has never been a good mechanic in any game and only seems to be workable when you put severe limitations on it's use. Something EVE currently doesn't do, so people will complain until the day such restrictions are put in place or ECM is finally changed to something else.

Any mechanic that is c hance based is flawed because the skills and knowledge of the affected parties becomes irrelevant, that is the problem with ECM.

Not the worst idea for a solution:

ECCM Burst - Breaks any current active (and working) ECM on your ship, maybe an "X" second immunity on top of that? Give it a reasonable cycle time , maybe 1/2 to the same of a standard ECM module. A good ECM pilot can counter by staggering or carefully applying each ECM module. You can still get perma jammed but it requires the ECM pilot to work for it. Plus if there is an immunity attached to it a ship with sufficient mids could potentially make themselves unjammable.

You can still get perma jammed

becouse eve has become cry online

All ppl seem to do is cry nurf this nurf that instead of thinking of counters to a situation

ecm ships are specialised there are other specialised ships to counter them but its easyer to cry to ccp and get spoon fed nurfs

RL comparison to ECM

I strongly recommend you never make this comparison again. I work on that stuff for a living. Any modern jamming system will do its best to literaly burn out your entire sensor suite, thus requiring you to retire from battle entirely and pay a visit to your local friendly maintenance battalion before you can do more than fire a gun straight forward.

Each EW weapon as such is used for debuffing a enemy ship if used right most people are going to call OP about it but why so much on ECM?

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

It is easy to counter(:) use drones / FOF missiles / sensor damps and possibly some others(.) its not the best EW(.) its a good one(,) i admit that(,) but can be countered if you work around countering it.

I like these nerf ECM threads. It is like ECM whiners has been touched inappropriately and they were defenseless against it.

I love stunlock (general MMO term for what ECM does) threads, watching all the people who abuse it make snarky comments about those they kill with it because they're too chicken**** to try a head on fight.

Note, I have nothing against stuns, but stunlock-until-dead-with-no-realistic-counter is ALWAYS a bad idea.

Try again. I like to win and I rather win through dastardly tactics than lose with elegance.

To those that cling to that silly notion of honor in fights, you are as much of a relic as the ideals that you desperately cling to.

Read again, I have no problems with stuns, they're a great tactic... but stunlock until death? Yes, it is part of the game a present, but it shouldn't be, it shouldn't be part of ANY game.

Stunning a target and taking advantage of that to put them in a position they can't win is tactics. Stunlocking a target until they're dead and unable to do a single thing about it is just a cheep shot.

ECM doesn't immobilize (propulsion jamming does that) which stun locking is about, ECM is more like a blind.

Perhaps you confused the two. Whiners tend to confuse things, you see.

Stunlocks = being unable to do anything, take any action. And while yes indeed you can still move while ECMed (ohh my aren't we lucky?) You can still do nothing to fight back against your opponent.

And am I whining? I guess from the point of view of someone who routinely exploits and exploitable mechanic I am.

I'm not against ECM, I'm against ECM rendering a target helpless from the start to the end of a fight with no realistic recourse once it starts.

False.

FoF missiles. Smartbombs. Drones (especially sentries).

These are a few of the things you can still utilize if jammed.

Also, not unironically, ECM Burst.

You can also warp away. We're talking ECM here, not a combo of ECM + Point.

Think about it.

Ohh yes, a 6KM ECM burst is SOOOOO useful when you're ECMed from 50+ KM away (not, last figure pulled from my ass, don't know the range of ECM unites but I'm sure it's a LOT further away than n ECM burst)

well unless you're up against a scorpian I don't see a battleship being about to chance down an EWAR ship to get it in ECM blast range... and I can't imagine most would be stupid enough to initiate an ECM attack within ECM blast range of a battleship.

All other ewar modules attack a specific ship function - either tracking, warp, speed, CAP etc etc. Jammers take out every offensive module permanently all at once. No other module or weapon comes close to doing so much to an opponent. Of course it's overpowered, imbalanced, broken.

It's simply an "I win" button, and those who defend it so much know it.

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

For all the complainers, I advice you to fly ECM ships and see how it performs. It's not as gamechanging as it seems & due to ECM's reputation, almost any NON-jammed ship will be charging for you, so you better get ready to flee the moment you enter the battlefield.

Lets say that in ajn optimal case, I manage to jam 4 at once (very unlikely, but assume I use racial & manage to jam one of each) I can be assured that next cycle, at least 1 perhaps even up to 3 (4 if unlucky) will break the ecm. If they're smart, they started moving towards me, (or getting ready to jump)

ECM boats are amongst the most fragile as wel, as they need to sacrifice alot of tank to be effective.

These days, I fly my Curse, more effective & less visible effect, meaning players don't charge after me so easely.

It is easy to counter use drones / FOF missile's / sensor damps and possibly some others its not the best EW its a good one i admit that but can be countered if you work around countering it.

Each EW weapon as such is used for debuffing a enamy ship if used right most people are going to call OP about it but why so much on ECM?

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

ECCM - Midslot
Sensor Backup Array - Lowslot

Would you fit TEs/TCs if they had no effect on your turrets?

It is easy to counter use drones / FOF missile's / sensor damps and possibly some others its not the best EW its a good one i admit that but can be countered if you work around countering it.

Each EW weapon as such is used for debuffing a enamy ship if used right most people are going to call OP about it but why so much on ECM?

So i ask again why are people so butt hurt about it?

please stop with your weak arguments and just fit F.O.F missiles to your deimos and HTFU.

please stop with your weak arguments and just fit F.O.F missiles to your deimos and HTFU.

Anyway, the question remains: would you fit TEs/TCs on your ship if they didn't affect your turrets?

Because they need excuses for being bad at pvp.

Would you fit TEs/TCs if they had no effect on your turrets?

Because people don't want to sacrifice raw offensive DPS for utility. This game is awash in over specialized ship fits built with a single purpose in mind. ECM requires them to drop some offensive capability on the possibility that they might encounter something that completely nullifies their DPS output. Rather than accept that and fit for more than one purpose they come here to whine about it.

everyone hates ecm [...]

I don't.