Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Phoebus ApolloX
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 01:14:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Phoebus ApolloX on 14/06/2011 01:22:42 I really think the answer to ECM lies in the fact that it's the most effective form of Ewar and it's one of the best to apply at extreme range, which makes it really imbalanced. Something as effective as ECM simply should not have that sort of range. Forcing people to come closer to get those jams puts them at bigger risk and makes the fights more interesting and committed. Eve combat is too non-committal, people just set up engagements in a way that allows them to run away, long range ECM is extremely popular for this reason.
The only ewar which should be extreme long range should be sensor dampening, which it should only be long range because it's a means to counter long range, or target painting, which might make sniper fit large weapon-based setups more effective at hitting smaller targets.
I'd love to see a buff to the close range effectiveness of ECM-specific ships, but cut that ECM ranges down to sub-50km. I'd use ECM more if this was the case and I'd have more fun fighting ECM-heavy setups, that's for sure. If you want to throw a bone to people for nerfing the range of ECM then make it so ECM-specialized ships have bonuses to capacitor use of ECM that makes ECM virtually cap free on a ECM-bonused ship. Then you lose neuting as a potential counter to ECM but you lose extreme range as a potential protection.
The only gripe I'd have in such a change is ECM at long ranges is another counter to long-range setups, but buffing sensor damp optimal and targeting range damp potential would be a great way to ensure it's the go-to form of ewar to counter long range combat.
|
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 02:45:00 -
[62]
How about it takes away one max target effective at current chances, double the duration of the effect but keep current cycle times, then allow a script to knock two tarets off at a time but slightly weaken the jam stregnth. Allows one jammer to possibly knock two to four targets off, but specialized ships will benifit the most as they can easily take advantage of the script. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 3APR11
|
cyclobs
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:30:00 -
[63]
also we could put in an 'effectiveness of range' that is the further away from the target you are jamming the less effective your jamming is.
so say something like anything < 5KM will 100% chance of lock (not including skills and ECCM reducing that mark) then at 50 - 60KM the effect chance of jamming is 5 - 10%
this will force ECM boats to get closer into the battle if the want to be really effective
|
Sarina Rhoda
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 07:07:00 -
[64]
I think my favourite idea so far is to bring back the old school jamming where you get jammed as soon as total jam strength on you is > than your sensor strength but then combine this with a mechanic that once you have been jammed you can't be re-jammed for 30 seconds (can be increased or decreased to promote balance).
The stacking numeric ecm method means that jamming is no longer chance based and that ecm boats would only need to fit 2-4 jammers to be effective and they could use their remaining slots to fit a tank. It also stops all perma jamming ***gatry whilst still leaving ecms ability to destroy logi chains as well as cause huge disruption in normal fights.
There are some very good balance friends on FHC if anyone is interested btw.
Either way though still waiting to hear what CCP's official stance on this is !!!
|
Ned Black
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 08:14:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Sarina Rhoda I think my favourite idea so far is to bring back the old school jamming where you get jammed as soon as total jam strength on you is > than your sensor strength but then combine this with a mechanic that once you have been jammed you can't be re-jammed for 30 seconds (can be increased or decreased to promote balance).
The stacking numeric ecm method means that jamming is no longer chance based and that ecm boats would only need to fit 2-4 jammers to be effective and they could use their remaining slots to fit a tank. It also stops all perma jamming ***gatry whilst still leaving ecms ability to destroy logi chains as well as cause huge disruption in normal fights.
There are some very good balance friends on FHC if anyone is interested btw.
Either way though still waiting to hear what CCP's official stance on this is !!!
Good luck jamming out enemy logistics in that case. Them having 60 points of strength is not exactly uncommon. On a falcon that would mean that you would need ALL jammers racial to jam that single target out... and then being unable to jam it for a time after that making ECM more or less useless.
I would like the ECM to change to removing lock and then making targeting "wonkey". Meaning that you initially lose lock, but then when you target again you get a more or less random results. You try to target the enemy but end up losing lock, or locking on to your wingman instead of the target, or locking on to a wreak, or that veldspar rock, or an enemy (but not the one you targeted), or the inteded target. Basicly your sensors go haywire and dont really know what they are targeting.
That could make som fairly funky fights where friendly fire suddely becomes a real threat to both sides :D
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 08:27:00 -
[66]
I like the suggestions of making ECM a lock breaker as opposed to a targeting nullifier.
I also like the suggestion of ECM making the targeting system "wonky" :) You can still target stuff, but you don't know what you've targeted until you shoot it and realise you're actually shooting your friend. Or an asteroid.
Making ECM a shorter-cycle lock breaker seems to me to be the better option though: reduce cycle time to 10 seconds, number of locks broken will depends on ECM strength vs sensor strength, modified by optimal and falloff of the ECM module. Ships with more targets locked, and higher sensor strength, will be more useful in any fight. Use passive targeters instead of ECCM, so utility highs become valuable.
-- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Miilla
Minmatar Hulkageddon Orphanage
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 08:50:00 -
[67]
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=380
ECM already got an overhaul.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 08:54:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Miilla ECM already got an overhaul.
No, that is not an overhaul but a balance tweak, kind of a big difference.
An overhaul will radically change the way a thing is used/approached and not just make one use it on main instead of alt
|
Sarina Rhoda
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:22:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Ned Black
Originally by: Sarina Rhoda I think my favorite idea so far is to bring back the old school jamming where you get jammed as soon as total jam strength on you is > than your sensor strength but then combine this with a mechanic that once you have been jammed you can't be re-jammed for 30 seconds (can be increased or decreased to promote balance).
The stacking numeric ecm method means that jamming is no longer chance based and that ecm boats would only need to fit 2-4 jammers to be effective and they could use their remaining slots to fit a tank. It also stops all perma jamming ***gatry whilst still leaving ecms ability to destroy logi chains as well as cause huge disruption in normal fights.
There are some very good balance friends on FHC if anyone is interested btw.
Either way though still waiting to hear what CCP's official stance on this is !!!
Good luck jamming out enemy logistics in that case. Them having 60 points of strength is not exactly uncommon. On a falcon that would mean that you would need ALL jammers racial to jam that single target out... and then being unable to jam it for a time after that making ECM more or less useless.
Then you just update the existing numbers for balance ???? ie increase jam strengths and reduce eccm effects to get the balance correct I was just proposing a mechanic not 100% dead set change.
Your wonky idea is ok but doesnÆt address the scalability issues of ecm. They are currently ridiculously op in solo/small gangs, pretty balanced in 10-20 man gangs and very underpowered in blob flights (well ecm isnÆt but the ecm ships are due to having FÆall tank.)
|
Skippermonkey
Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 09:36:00 -
[70]
Originally by: cyclobs also we could put in an 'effectiveness of range' that is the further away from the target you are jamming the less effective your jamming is.
so say something like anything < 5KM will 100% chance of lock (not including skills and ECCM reducing that mark) then at 50 - 60KM the effect chance of jamming is 5 - 10%
this will force ECM boats to get closer into the battle if the want to be really effective
How about we call anything within that 100% chance range OPTIMAL and anything after that where the chance falls below 100% FALLOFF? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OLD FORUM I ♥ YOU, NEVER LEAVE ME AGAIN! |
|
Fabster
Gallente Spacerats
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:28:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Ned Black
I would like the ECM to change to removing lock and then making targeting "wonkey". Meaning that you initially lose lock, but then when you target again you get a more or less random results. You try to target the enemy but end up losing lock, or locking on to your wingman instead of the target, or locking on to a wreak, or that veldspar rock, or an enemy (but not the one you targeted), or the inteded target. Basicly your sensors go haywire and dont really know what they are targeting.
That could make som fairly funky fights where friendly fire suddely becomes a real threat to both sides :D
Can I hear a concor'dokken?!
|
Karl Planck
Inglorious-Basterds
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:44:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha What Eve seriously lacks is tactical gameplay and that is where it alienates your PvP people. There is no option other than blob and damage because there almost quite literally is no other option other than blob and damage and see which spreadsheet wins, and macro fleet movement.
Lots of stuff in that long quote, but the whole argument hinges on this statement. In large scale pvp INDIVIDUAL tactics matter less and less. Blobbing is all about the initial fleet setup and intel, which is fine for most people as they just want to watch sh*t explode.
But you are DEAD WRONG about there not being tactics beyond the setup. If you don't think that there are movement tactics and that they are complex then you either don't have the skill to do it in eve or haven't put yourself in a situation that requires it. You are correct that the CC mechanics are much different in other games and your familiarity with them makes it understandable why you don't understand the field tactics present in EVE.
TL;DR most players complain about eve and skill simply because they have none. This attitude is only spread further because this one of the few games where you CAN BE successful without skill. -------------------------------------------------
Don't debate with morons. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience. |
Cpt Fina
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:46:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Cpt Fina on 14/06/2011 11:46:41 I personally don't feel like it's ECM that is being too powerful but the other racial e-wars that could use a boost.
An ECM boat needs to be able to neutralize 2 or more ships equal (or greater) its size, otherwise there wouldn't be a point in fielding an ecm ship over another damagedealer. Maybe the countermeasures could need a little tweaking, let's say introduce a weak high-slot countermeasure. Or an area of effect countermeasure that increases the sensorstrength of all nearby ships for a period of time.
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:14:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Cpt Fina Edited by: Cpt Fina on 14/06/2011 11:46:41 An ECM boat needs to be able to neutralize 2 or more ships equal (or greater) its size, otherwise there wouldn't be a point in fielding an ecm ship over another damagedealer.
You are kidding right? Why should ONE (comparable price and size) ship be able to neutralize 2+ ships of the same or greater size? Frigsize ships are designed to counter big ships like battleships because they cant be hit if in close combat. But still, one frig cant beat a BS in a normal situation (drones). 2 BSs and the frig is dead in under 20 seconds. Just because the ship does no damage is not an excuse to make it imbalanced. Also i think no one here has a problem with giving falcons and other recons more EHP, but the problem is that they cant be countered in an acceptable way. If you prepare yourself with a lot of ECCMs, you still will be jammed (maybe not 90% but 40%) and for all other combat situations you are useless.
The other point of ECM is, that pvp with ECM is boring and annoying like ****. The whole game mechanic is stupid. To me thats even more important than the balance question. Its no fun to watch or be part of an ECM fight. If you are on the ECM side, its like shooting structures, if you are on the other side, its like you have a disconnect until you sit in station in your pod.
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:28:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Originally by: Cpt Fina Edited by: Cpt Fina on 14/06/2011 11:46:41 An ECM boat needs to be able to neutralize 2 or more ships equal (or greater) its size, otherwise there wouldn't be a point in fielding an ecm ship over another damagedealer.
You are kidding right? Why should ONE (comparable price and size) ship be able to neutralize 2+ ships of the same or greater size? Frigsize ships are designed to counter big ships like battleships because they cant be hit if in close combat. But still, one frig cant beat a BS in a normal situation (drones). 2 BSs and the frig is dead in under 20 seconds. Just because the ship does no damage is not an excuse to make it imbalanced. Also i think no one here has a problem with giving falcons and other recons more EHP, but the problem is that they cant be countered in an acceptable way. If you prepare yourself with a lot of ECCMs, you still will be jammed (maybe not 90% but 40%) and for all other combat situations you are useless.
The other point of ECM is, that pvp with ECM is boring and annoying like ****. The whole game mechanic is stupid. To me thats even more important than the balance question. Its no fun to watch or be part of an ECM fight. If you are on the ECM side, its like shooting structures, if you are on the other side, its like you have a disconnect until you sit in station in your pod.
so you're saying remove ECM and let's go back to where whoever brings a bigger rock wins.
hell, great job killing small gang pvp even harder than ECM does. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Misunderstood Genius
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:28:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Misunderstood Genius on 14/06/2011 12:31:30
Originally by: OverlordY Dont forget damps too tbh.
ECM and damps. Select those database entries and hit delete = instantly better eve.
Then fleets with logistics are pure win. I see big whine threads comming: "nerf, remove logistics. It's unfair."
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:32:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Grimpak so you're saying remove ECM and let's go back to where whoever brings a bigger rock wins.
hell, great job killing small gang pvp even harder than ECM does.
No i dont say this. The actual way ECM works is just bad. A complete redesign is needed here. Or maybe add some kind of disruptor guns for a special ship class... 5 minutes reload, but when it hits, a ship will be disabled (no active modules will be disabled) for 30 sec or so. This would also be a good counter to RR and spider reps. Just something more fun in pvp for both sides.
|
Sarina Rhoda
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:40:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Sarina Rhoda on 14/06/2011 12:41:45 Another idea I heard from FHC that I liked is to remove ecm and replace with an ewar mod that directly counters other ewar. Say a scriptable module that reduces range and effectiveness of other ewar mods.
Say for example when scripted it can reduce either 50% of ewar range or 50% of ewar effect (stacking penalties apply).
Ewars that are effected could include : Disruptors, scrams, tds, tps, webs, neuts, RR (not strictly ewar but needs to be included anyway) damps, remote cap transfer,
(possibly remove the disruptors and scrams from this list depending on balance issues)
Yes it would be an extremely powerful module but it wouldnÆt be the current horrendous RNG ecm jamming mechanics that ruins solo pvp and removes a huge sense of fun from the game. The effects would be calculable and scalable
P.S still waiting for ccp's postition on this ....
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:54:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Grimpak on 14/06/2011 12:55:21
Originally by: Captain Futur3 there is much diversity in your pure "rock pvp" that it makes me sad that you dont see it.
yes there is so much diversity in getting moar -> pressing butan -> recieve bacon, or in this case, explosion.
ECM is here as a negation mechanism that is built in the concept of factor removal. sure it's "not fun", but in this game I thought we got fun at the expense of others. So yeah, sure it's bad if you're the side recieving it, but ECM ships have quite a number of limitations that make them more balanced than you think, such as exploding as soon as someone manages to sneeze on them, specially considering the fact that they can't jam much if you shoot them beyond 80km or so, which is actually not that hard to do with, let's say, a pulsepoc or some high alpha ship. hell, even a measly cerb is good to remove a falcon or a rook out of the battlefield temporarily, which considering the nature of the gangs where these ships are deployed, the time lost between warpout->warp back in -> re-acquire target is actually a big deal.
your roaming gang is a unidimensional BC gang with dps ships? too bad, you should've prepared beforehand. you didn't and that's all your fault.
either way, harsh words aside, it doesn't mean I can't compromise. the lock-break one seems "okay" as long as cycle time gets cut down too. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Cpt Fina
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:15:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Cpt Fina on 14/06/2011 13:16:11
Originally by: Captain Futur3
You are kidding right? Why should ONE (comparable price and size) ship be able to neutralize 2+ ships of the same or greater size? Frigsize ships are designed to counter big ships like battleships because they cant be hit if in close combat. But still, one frig cant beat a BS in a normal situation (drones). 2 BSs and the frig is dead in under 20 seconds.
No, i'm not kidding. I think it's an important balancing act that every gang should have to deal with when deciding upon fleet composition. I think that E-war ships should work as an "X-factor" that have the potential to turn the tide of a battle and a factor that must be taken into account when engaging the enemy. I feel that this brings diversity to the game but also volatility in the range of possibilities of warfare.
Originally by: Captain Futur3 Just because the ship does no damage is not an excuse to make it imbalanced. Also i think no one here has a problem with giving falcons and other recons more EHP, but the problem is that they cant be countered in an acceptable way. If you prepare yourself with a lot of ECCMs, you still will be jammed (maybe not 90% but 40%) and for all other combat situations you are useless.
Two equal sized gangs, one are ECM heavy and the other field ECCM. Allbeit it was a while since I was actively PvPing but as far as i know ECM hasn't been changes since 08 û so I would say that the ECCM team has the upper hand. But yes, it might be worth looking into introducing more eccm modules.
Originally by: Captain Futur3 The other point of ECM is, that pvp with ECM is boring and annoying like ****. The whole game mechanic is stupid. To me thats even more important than the balance question. Its no fun to watch or be part of an ECM fight. If you are on the ECM side, its like shooting structures, if you are on the other side, its like you have a disconnect until you sit in station in your pod.
That's your personal opinion, which i don't share.
|
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:51:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Cpt Fina
Originally by: Captain Futur3 The other point of ECM is, that pvp with ECM is boring and annoying like ****. The whole game mechanic is stupid. To me thats even more important than the balance question. Its no fun to watch or be part of an ECM fight. If you are on the ECM side, its like shooting structures, if you are on the other side, its like you have a disconnect until you sit in station in your pod.
That's your personal opinion, which i don't share.
Maybe you have noticed but its not only my opinion, but also the opinion of thousand others including all the tournament commentators (inkluding CCP itself).
|
Cpt Fina
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:59:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Originally by: Cpt Fina
Originally by: Captain Futur3 The other point of ECM is, that pvp with ECM is boring and annoying like ****. The whole game mechanic is stupid. To me thats even more important than the balance question. Its no fun to watch or be part of an ECM fight. If you are on the ECM side, its like shooting structures, if you are on the other side, its like you have a disconnect until you sit in station in your pod.
That's your personal opinion, which i don't share.
Maybe you have noticed but its not only my opinion, but also the opinion of thousand others including all the tournament commentators (inkluding CCP itself).
No, wai, wha??
I truly believed that only you, Captain Futur3 were dissatisfied with ECM in Eve. And since I thought that only one person felt like this I didn't pay enough attention to this issue. Now I have to do a real soulsearch to find out where I stand on this issue!
I was blind, but now I can see. Thank you sir!
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 14:04:00 -
[83]
you are welcome!
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:29:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Karl Planck
Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha What Eve seriously lacks is tactical gameplay and that is where it alienates your PvP people. There is no option other than blob and damage because there almost quite literally is no other option other than blob and damage and see which spreadsheet wins, and macro fleet movement.
Lots of stuff in that long quote, but the whole argument hinges on this statement. In large scale pvp INDIVIDUAL tactics matter less and less. Blobbing is all about the initial fleet setup and intel, which is fine for most people as they just want to watch sh*t explode.
But you are DEAD WRONG about there not being tactics beyond the setup. If you don't think that there are movement tactics and that they are complex then you either don't have the skill to do it in eve or haven't put yourself in a situation that requires it. You are correct that the CC mechanics are much different in other games and your familiarity with them makes it understandable why you don't understand the field tactics present in EVE.
TL;DR most players complain about eve and skill simply because they have none. This attitude is only spread further because this one of the few games where you CAN BE successful without skill.
Same old, same old, but please try again.
I never said there *aren't* tactics, and trying to insult my skill or understanding of what tactics are present in Eve isn't going to bait me into some herdperp IHASSKILLZ argument.
I'll give you a real TL;DR since you were kind enough to respond, though. I simply think that it would be easy enough for CCP to highly revamp the tactical portion to provide what (as it appears to me at least) is a large portion of players who are dissatisfied with the individual skill and decision making processes in combat, with almost no effect on the rest of the game. The Starcraft reference itself was to illustrate how: while this game has amazing strategic play and does have some tactical play, and the strategic play *should* remain in the hand of the powerful, the rich, those who spend their time working at it to get in those positions of power to move the units; there is absolutely NO reason why simple changes to the tactical gameplay portion couldn't be down to give people like me who love tactical gameplay something at least marginally enjoyable and not insulting to our intelligence at a ridiculously low cost:return investment by CCP.
That makes me more likely to give CCP money.
That (in my humble assumptions) makes a lot more people more likely to give CCP money.
I want CCP to get money, I want Eve to get money.
How this upsets you so much I don't understand, unless you somehow really hate tactical combat and decision making aside from macro scale. If you were simply attempting to troll me because this is something I feel passionate about, then please go somewhere else. I'm no little kid who's going to get off my point because you state that I don't have skill, when my level of skill has literally nothing to do with my whole point. -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Zyress
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:43:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Miilla Edited by: Miilla on 13/06/2011 13:05:10
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=380
ECM already got an overhaul.
Originally by: OverlordY ECM and Dampeners need removing from eve. This is comming from a caldari pilot that flies a scorpion.
Missiles and Artillary need removing from eve. This is comming from a ganker.
Lets remove cannons, hybrids, and lasers of all sorts too this is coming from a demolition derby driver
|
Zyress
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:57:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Mister Smithington Hows this for an option?
ECM modules shut off all targeted non-ecm modules on the jammers ship (guns, launchers, webs, scrams, painters, damps, reps, nuets, cap transfer, etc.). So, you can jam a guy, but not jam, scram, and nuke him to death. At least not by yourself.
You want to shut someone down? Remove them from the fight? Fine, you can do that, but you limit yourself to pure crowd control in the process.
As a Caldari I could handle that as long as it applied to all other ew and recon boats as well. Thats fair. An ECM boat is the automatic primary anyway so you are either running or dying soon after the fight starts anyway
|
Zyress
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:00:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Xiozor Edited by: Xiozor on 13/06/2011 15:04:27 My only problem with ECM is that it screws the little guy, for gang warfare it's balanced, awesome infact. But if you're solo'ing it turns a 2v1 situation from a good fight to sitting there stunlocked while your battleship gets nibbled to death by a Drake.
ECCM isn't a good countermeasure to ECM, there's just no way you can stay competitive if you fit more than 1 ECCM module to your ship, and even then that'd only be the difference between being jammed 90% of the time and being jammed 50% of the time, you're still going to lose.
Even in gangs, if you make everyone to be ECM resistant you are seriously gimping yourself.
You don't seem to see much intelligent design and cohesion when people are putting fleets together however because taking specific anti-ECM ships which have sensor strength out of the nose is a brilliant countermeasure and having one or two ships gimped but still capable is much better than everyone being slightly impaired.
Bring along an armour tanked Machariel with 3x overheated ECCM's (Gives them a 44$ chance to jam you. With 7x overheating racial jammers from a fully skilled + implanted Falcon pilot) and 2x tracking computers. Hey-presto! You have just completely removed the enemies ability to field a single ECM ship lest it decloak and get instapopped.
An Apocalypse with Tachyons will do fine too if you're on the cheap.
The only fix I would suggest to ECM is this: Remove multispecs.
I would think a Caracal loaded up with ECCM and a sensor booster would be a cheap fix for most ecm problems you encounter.
|
Zyress
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:24:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Soi Mala Change them to remote ECM bursts like the supercarriers have.
Target a ship, and burst jam him and all others (including friendlies) within a 5km radius. Maybe add a jam duration like the current system to the burst, only much shorter, say 5 seconds or so. This would cause problems for huddled blobs (forcing some actual maneuvers instead of orbit FC at 1km), while making ECM that little bit less effective against single targets.
Actually thats not too bad, it would be a tool against blobs that way and we all know we need something to combat that.
|
Zangorus
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:29:00 -
[89]
ECM should make modules **** up and not remove lock, like guns "failing" to fire guns and make some module flicker... maybe slow down drones aswell , removing lock is so good 0.o
|
knobber Jobbler
Holding Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:38:00 -
[90]
Originally by: dgastuffz cant beat it nerf it how lame
Yeah, its lame. Recons & ECM are one class of ship in EVE which works really well. I hope they don't touch ECM or the ships that use it. People need to realise ECM has more than one counter to it and its not the be all and end all to a battle.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |