EVE Search - Sticky:[Winter] Ewar Tweaks for Retribution

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Winter] Ewar Tweaks for Retribution

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 14 post(s)
Grimpak Midnight Elites Echelon Rising 471	Posted - 2012.11.04 10:21:00 - [211] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: A few thoughts: 1. I believe that the proposed sensor compensation skills will cause more balancing problems in the future, inasmuch as they affect separate game mechanics - ie. ECM and ship scanning. didn't CCP changed that so that now it's impossible to have an unprobable ship and instead just made them really hard to probe down? that said, overhauling ECM is something that might be a tad too hard, maybe too hard for the results one can expect. Nerfing them into oblivion isn't the answer either. Tiny nerf/boosts, like the one proposed on this thread are better, specially when you consider damps as a counter-measure for ECM, but one must be careful not to overnerf nor overboost. ECM mechanics puts the modules always on a razor's edge as balance is concerned, specially because of how they work (yes/no) make it too strong, works too often. make it too weak, becomes useless. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img] [quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Iam Widdershins Project Nemesis 754	Posted - 2012.11.04 10:29:00 - [212] - Quote Bouh Revetoile wrote: Iam Widdershins wrote: If ECM drones are not being addressed that's a real pity. Currently fitting a cloud of light ECM drones is an adequate alternative to bringing an actual jamming ship. I am very much of the mind that ECM drones should reduce sensor strength with a stacking penalty, not actually jam on their own. They should not be a viable escape mechanism, but they should be a useful tool to complement a dedicated ECM ship. In fact, the biggest part of the ECM nerf is the new skill which also work for ECM drones. I think though the skill should only apply to ECCM modules. That is the most horrible thing to say. You have my scorn. Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Noisrevbus 270	Posted - 2012.11.04 10:29:00 - [213] - Quote Gripen wrote: CCP Fozzie, It would be great if you could comment on why are you doing changes and what you're trying to archieve with them because without such explanations changes may look like nonsense to some people. You know, like some other game companies do when announcing balance changes. I second this. What do you expect to achieve with these changes - and if this is not a complete change in any way, why are you pushing it through? Will that not just force you to do twice the work when you finally can allocate enough resources to give it proper attention? Should the players train extra ECM skills now, only to have them refunded later when you once again realize that skillpoint disparity is bad? People who complain about ECM (on the Tech II platforms) do not do it because of their range or relative ease of getting into. Some people will cheer at any punitive approach, but at the end of the day their solo ships will still be "permajammed" and they will continue to whine and whimper. No Falcon-alt or higher skillpoint player will complain about getting new skills to train. It's well more exciting training new ECM skills to dominate younger main characters than letting capital ships V trickle away month after month. If you adress the system with optimal-falloff nerfs and skillpoint additions, those are the factors you crank. Why? It feels like pointing out the obvious, but appearantly we need to remind you of it, since that is what you do: it's highly ineffective, it causes new issues you have to deal with in the future and you didn't provide us with any form of motivation. You are also continously shafting Tech II in favour of Tech I, is there an ulterior motive behind that? We'd like to know. I'd rather contend with 1 Falcon than 10 Blackbirds, any day of the week. The fabled Rook has not seen the light of day since Crucible. Are you nerfing it's ECM reach to match it's upcomming HML reach? CCP, kings of doing something for the sake of doing something - instead of fixing the problem(s).
Eridanii Firebird Squadron Terra-Incognita 7	Posted - 2012.11.04 11:06:00 - [214] - Quote Mirei Jun wrote: The issues as I see them: 1) This does not address ECM scaling problems. Frigates and Destroyers are still completely nullified by ECM, while medium and large ships are inherently stronger to them (although still get jammed more often then not). The same could be said about almost all forms of ewar againsts small to large ships. I don't see a problem with it scaling. Damps: yup, hurts frigs worse because they have crappy range to start Webs: hurts frigs worse because they rely on speed the most, BS are already bricks TPs: hurts frigs worse because they are hardest to hit to begin with whereas you have to try to miss a BS Neuts: frigs have smallest capacitor, easier to neut out TDs: arguably hurts all size ships equally but no effect on missiles ECM: frigs have lowest sensor strength to start Changing the ECM system to a mechanic that has a variable jam time would be welcome. Frigs are easiest to jam, but aren't necessarily locked out for 20s plus they have the fastest lock times so they can recover more quickly after the jam completes. BS's are harder to jam and with higher strength don't get locked out for as long but their slower lock times will make ECM against them more like a lockbreaker. For me, the drones are the biggest problem. They shouldn't lock you out for 20s. I don't mind Falcons and BBs being ECM pwnage machines. In small gang fights, 4 dps ships vs 3 dps + 1 ECM, the gang with the utility ship should win. That's just smart tactics. Change the ECM ship to a neuting/TDing ship, or a webbing/painting ship, or even a damping ship, the outcome should still favor the gang with ewar/utility ships. It just makes good tactical sense to disrupt your enemy. It's also more interesting than just lining up a bunch of dps ships across from each other trading volleys revolutionary-war-style. But people are still going to cry on the forums because it's NOT fun getting destroyed and not being able to fight back at all, which is the problem with current ECM mechanics. Even with a change to ECM, people will still cry when they lose to a falcon. To them I say, if you can't beat em, join em.
Jerick Ludhowe The Nyan Cat Pirates Nyanpire 188	Posted - 2012.11.04 11:07:00 - [215] - Quote Going to say this again, but the fact that sensor strength has any effect on the probing system is beyond ******** and it always has been. It needs to be removed asap and replaced with a system not cooked up by idiots.
Bouh Revetoile Barricade. 148	Posted - 2012.11.04 11:20:00 - [216] - Quote Fon Revedhort wrote: The difference is kiting requires efforts; simply fitting a ship for LR means pretty much nothing. EWAR takes no skill whatsoever, and btw neither does ECCM and all other so called 'counters'. It's lametardedly simplistic and that's why it's so effective in case of ewar and so ineffective in case of 'counters'. A good example of proper concept is neuting vs. cap boosting. Neuting still remains a PITA, but by intelligent cab boosting you can defend yourself quite well, and it actually requires a lot of skills to properly sync all your stuff, not to panic and press cap booster button immediately upon being hit by a heavy neut, but rather wait for the MWD cycle to sync up and so on and so forth. EWAR has nothing of that sort of things. Indeed ECM is a screwed mecanic as is, though I was more defending the idea of a generic EWAR, applying to any ship you can encounter, kind of like damp (they work on everything) but not only for range. In fact, ironicaly, TD and damps, favor minmatar ship, because you need to have speed supremacy and small signature to really profit from them ; and in the end, ECM is the only EWAR not favoring speed/sig.
kaltenp The New Era C0NVICTED 3	Posted - 2012.11.04 11:31:00 - [217] - Quote lol all the serious pvp'ers are happy to nerf e war out of game. to bloody lazy to fit ships to counter it as it may effect my dps which does not allow me to kill as many people! ecm is chanced based I have max skills and i dont get of jams every cycle and if you fit your ships to minimise effect I can hardly jam you at all well done in dumbing down the game. As people have said just take it out and reimberse me my skill points and falcon costs. i LOVE HEARING PEOPLE CRY WHEN i JAM EM UP but they still manage to kill me every now and again. can someone tell me the point for even flying recons anymore as my rook and falcon are now looking bad against a BLACKBIRD
Venusa Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation 24	Posted - 2012.11.04 12:35:00 - [218] - Quote I like the idea of reducing the cycle of jam or EC- drones, but keep in mind that increasing the cycle will increase the % to succeed a jam. You need to downgrade the jam strengh too then.
YuuKnow Inner 5phere 425	Posted - 2012.11.04 12:54:00 - [219] - Quote The ECM changes seem infective. Right now ECM is a largely offensive module. You could change it to a purely defensive module by changing the Jam to only prevent target locking on the ship that it projecting the ECM. Instead of the target being totally and utterly jammed, the target will instead be able to lock other targets, just now the ship that is jamming it.
Sheynan Lighting the blight 108	Posted - 2012.11.04 13:49:00 - [220] - Quote To be fair, I dislike ECM, I really do. I have used it in the past, and it really is bloody effective, but on the other hand I don't want to have a random numbers generator decide the outcome of my fights. Ever. So I'd propose to scrap ECM completely and replace it with two new forms of ewar that both inherit parts of the old ECM functionality: Just brainstorming: ewar 1: the "GTFO" module (the "old" ECM) short/medium ranged (20-40kms) script A: breaks the lock of the targeted ship, immediately relocking is possible, sensor strength could accelerate the relocking script B: reactivates MWD of the targeted scrambled ship , higher cap usage than script 1 cycle time 5-10seconds -2 warp strength during cycle time This would be the basic functionality, providing disruption through the forced relocks but only a true gtfo module if the enemy can't relock during the cycle time. Excellent to bail a friendly ship out, but dangerous for the own ship. Also especially useful for kiting gangs. Bonused ships would primarily have range/cycle time improvements and could increase the amount of scrams negated by script B. ewar 2: the "Make Decisions" module long ranged (similar to other ewar) decreases the amount of active slots by x% slot type (high, med, low, active targets) highslot type would "primary" non-weapons medslot type would primary "sensors" (Sebos, TCs, ECCM),then tank, then basic ewar and after that prop mods and primary ewar (like webs/scrams) lowslot type would affect less slots than high/mid you could always manually stop some modules to reactive others Sounds a bit weird at first, so here's an example. Say a Tempest is attacked by this module (highslot script). Say the module decreases the amount of active slots by 25%. Thus, the Tempest, having 6 guns/2 neuts fitted, can now only activate 8*0,75=6 of those modules. By default the neuts are deactivated, but the pilot could deactivate 2 guns to activate the neuts again. It would be challenge to correctly balance this between useless and totally op. But it would come close to the old ECM functionality of shutting the enemy down without having either total shutdown or any randomness. You could use this to to reliably shut down enemy utility highs, decrease their logi reps, decrease their tank or decrease their ewar/ counter ewar. It is however debatable if this should affect tanking at all, just shutting down ewar/buff midslots and highslots could already be enough to make it useful. Bonused ships would be the only ones to use med/low scripts and have a higher strength overall. Now one could use all the modern phrases to further advertise this, like "it brings caldari ewar inline with others", "it removes randomness and binary stuff", "it helps small gang", "it caters to fast decision making". But I won't do that .

Bubanni ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 534	Posted - 2012.11.04 14:06:00 - [221] - Quote What if ECM was much higher chance to break lock, but target could relock again right after, but cycle time was increased on the module 30 sec or so, or the reverse... fast cycle time of 10 sec, same strength as now and only breaks the lock with no jamming duration... you would basicly double your attempts to jam over time, but targets wouldn't ever be permajammed The lower the scan res the target has, the more effective it would be... Vs small fast locking ships it would become less effective... I really think that's the best change for ecm... a buff to cycle time and nerf to jam duration Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
serras bang Lucien Coven 43	Posted - 2012.11.04 14:22:00 - [222] - Quote Bubanni wrote: What if ECM was much higher chance to break lock, but target could relock again right after, but cycle time was increased on the module 30 sec or so, or the reverse... fast cycle time of 10 sec, same strength as now and only breaks the lock with no jamming duration... you would basicly double your attempts to jam over time, but targets wouldn't ever be permajammed The lower the scan res the target has, the more effective it would be... Vs small fast locking ships it would become less effective... I really think that's the best change for ecm... a buff to cycle time and nerf to jam duration got an ewar corp mate to look it over and they sem fairly happy with this(happy as they can be to a nerf) but we will see what happens with tds and missles as a dt ship could turn out to be jack of all (meybe having to even with bonused ships giving it a chance to miss or a lesser effect to increased range.)
Alticus C Bear University of Caille Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2012.11.04 14:32:00 - [223] - Quote In general I like the idea of reducing ECM optimal and boosting damp range, not sure if a10% change in ECM optimal is really significant. The sensor strength skill seems a little too much of skill point sink; I would rather see one skill rather than racial skills just like the CPU, powergrid skills. That said am not sure if changing the too hit chance for ECM is the right approach. As others have stated it is the mechanic that is the problem, I rarely see ECM on non bonused ships now and they should arguably be able to apply the ECM affect against ships that have not prepared a counter. Really I would prefer the mechanic be changed to disable all highslot mods rather than break locks. This achieves the goal of breaking RR and preventing weapons fire while still allowing e-war counters. It also closes the use of ECM drones as a get out of jail free card as tackle could still be applied. ECCM is a poor mod and could probably be incorporated into sensor boosters. I actually find tracking disruption worse than ECM. It is very powerful on un-bonused ships especially against small and medium weapons systems as it can maintain disruption within point range. Given that you are boosting tracking disruption on bonused ships by 12.5% I do not really feel the 5% initial reduction goes far enough, 10% at least would be better.
OT Smithers BLOMI 334	Posted - 2012.11.04 14:48:00 - [224] - Quote Three Points on ECM: 1. The Sensor Strength skill needs a rethink. It should be one skill only, rather than racial, and reduced to level 1 or 2. Obviously this change would be an additional indirect nerf to ECM, but that's better than adding a new "learning skill" into the game. Take this a step further and remove ALL racial ECM from the game. This would "nerf" ECM by replacing powerful race specific modules with less powerful generic jammers, and allow ECM pilots the option of fitting fewer modules plus a tank. Two problems solved in one go. 2. The all-or-nothing nature of ECM goes beyond just how the modules work in game. What the players WANT is an ewar effect that's powerful and interesting, and yet one that never significantly impacts their own personal gameplay. This is a contradiction and paradox, but that's the nature of gaming. 3. One of the oft-stated side effects from the drug "Viagra" is the dreaded six hour erection. The commercials suggest seeing your doctor if such a condition occurs. When it comes to how CCP deals with the Caldari, that erection has lasted years. Stop ******** them and seek professional help.
Super Stallion Caldari Provisions Caldari State 1	Posted - 2012.11.04 16:13:00 - [225] - Quote Bubanni wrote: What if ECM was much higher chance to break lock, but target could relock again right after, but cycle time was increased on the module 30 sec or so, or the reverse... fast cycle time of 10 sec, same strength as now and only breaks the lock with no jamming duration... you would basicly double your attempts to jam over time, but targets wouldn't ever be permajammed The lower the scan res the target has, the more effective it would be... Vs small fast locking ships it would become less effective... I really think that's the best change for ecm... a buff to cycle time and nerf to jam duration there is one problem with this approach, drones. You do not need a sustained lock on a target for drones to do their work. All you need is one lock. If ECM only broke existing locks... then those ships would be hard countered by any ship with a drone bay. It would make ECM boats worthless.
fukier Flatline. 93	Posted - 2012.11.04 17:05:00 - [226] - Quote i hope with the changes to rsd and the celestis that the arazu/lechasis will loose its hybrid damage bonus and get replaced with a optimal range bonus for rsd... otherwise the celestis will be the better rsd boat... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Dex Nederland Lai Dai Infinity Systems The Fourth District 71	Posted - 2012.11.04 17:28:00 - [227] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: The reason these are being revealed near the end of our feature announcements is that we were investigating options for a more comprehensive ECM rebalance, Can you share a bit about what the vision for ECM is? Perhaps, depending on that vision, some of the involved skills already exist. CCP Fozzie wrote: *Add four new racial sensor compensation skills that increase each type of Sensor Strength by 5% per level (Requires Electronics 4, rank 3 skills in the Electronics category) Shouldn't this be a single skill? Like Navigation? Also, this seems to be a counter skill to Signal Dispersion, any thought to the skill only improving the bonus from ECCM and Backup Arrays? With regards to ECM ships, as ships begin to be balanced, perhaps look at adjusting what the Caldari T2 EWar ships can do in comparison with their counterparts. The other T2 EWar ships have the capability to generally keep an enemy on the battlefield (Neut/Disrupt/Web) and an additional ability (TD/RSD/TP). Caldari T2 EWar have ECM. Lai Dai Infinity Systems
Bubanni ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 534	Posted - 2012.11.04 17:29:00 - [228] - Quote Super Stallion wrote: Bubanni wrote: What if ECM was much higher chance to break lock, but target could relock again right after, but cycle time was increased on the module 30 sec or so, or the reverse... fast cycle time of 10 sec, same strength as now and only breaks the lock with no jamming duration... you would basicly double your attempts to jam over time, but targets wouldn't ever be permajammed The lower the scan res the target has, the more effective it would be... Vs small fast locking ships it would become less effective... I really think that's the best change for ecm... a buff to cycle time and nerf to jam duration there is one problem with this approach, drones. You do not need a sustained lock on a target for drones to do their work. All you need is one lock. If ECM only broke existing locks... then those ships would be hard countered by any ship with a drone bay. It would make ECM boats worthless. Why would they become worthless just because of drones? That can already be put on them now, ecm ships could fit something to handle the drones then :) fit a little tank and such Adapt or die :) Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Jame Jarl Retief Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy 322	Posted - 2012.11.04 17:36:00 - [229] - Quote Am I the only one here who thinks adding new skills to counter ECM is a really BAD idea? Does this game really need more "mandatory PvP skills" like this? The game is slow paced enough already without adding 4 more racial skills to train.
Turelus Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District 56	Posted - 2012.11.04 18:01:00 - [230] - Quote Jame Jarl Retief wrote: Am I the only one here who thinks adding new skills to counter ECM is a really BAD idea? Does this game really need more "mandatory PvP skills" like this? The game is slow paced enough already without adding 4 more racial skills to train. No you're not! It's good that you mentioned it though so HOPEFULLY CCP will notice and rethink the idea. Instead of removing the skills at a later date if they change the mechanics and they become worthless. "Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."

OT Smithers BLOMI 336	Posted - 2012.11.04 18:02:00 - [231] - Quote Jame Jarl Retief wrote: Am I the only one here who thinks adding new skills to counter ECM is a really BAD idea? Does this game really need more "mandatory PvP skills" like this? The game is slow paced enough already without adding 4 more racial skills to train. Nope. In fact, quite a few people in this thread have mentioned just how lame this idea is.
Bubanni ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 534	Posted - 2012.11.04 21:04:00 - [232] - Quote Fozzie I am interested in knowing which ideas you and your team have had for changes to ECM besides these changes you already listed... :) Even far fetched ideas you had would be nice to hear, maybe us players could build on top of those? Say which ones we like and such? Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 65	Posted - 2012.11.04 21:27:00 - [233] - Quote I really hope that your longer term plan involves a total change to ecm mechanics but for now my comments would be; ecm skill changes; I don't think this is enough nor will it make much real difference when faced with ecm. at level 5 the ship would get a 25% increase to sensor strength which works out as typical frigate from 11 > 13.75; typical cruiser from 15 > 18.75; typical Battleship from 23 > 28.75. single ecm module jam strength on an equally lv5 skilled eaf is 10.3. So the chance to jam a frigate changes from 10.3/11 or 93.6% to 10.3/13.75 or 74.9% for cruisers from 68.7% to 54.9% for battleships from 44.8% to 35.8% It seems that a single ecm mod is still more likely to succeed than not on any of the typical cruiser class and below, this still means a bonused ecm ship will reasonably be able to hope to counter as many ships as it has ecm mods, half as many if it's being more cautious. Compared to tracking disruptors which also operate successfully still on a 1td to 1 target basis, perhaps 2td per target again if caution is required, BUT importantly still giving the disrupted pilot an option to manually mitigate some of the effect byclosing and reducing transversal. Compared to damps which work identically at a slightly longer range, still requiring 2-3 damps per target and still the simplest to mitigate as only range matters, not transversal. Target painters are becoming more useful but as many have pointed work in such a different way that comparisons fail at this level. So, in my opinion, damps have not seen any significant improvement to date and will remain mostly unused until they truly become effective with a single mod, 2 for the cautious player, or ecm and TDs become as ineffective until they commit as many slots to achieve the desired result.
fukier Flatline. 94	Posted - 2012.11.04 21:33:00 - [234] - Quote in eve for turret damage there are two things that are calculated that determins if/and how much damage will be applied. As an eve player you are only able to influence one aspect of this equation and that is the Chance to hit formula seen here But that is only half of the equation... there is this other part that is called applied damage which works as follows what i want to do is change ECM so it now affects how X is calculated... Change sensor strength away from being a factor in target breaking and replace it in a formula that affects how X is calculated. the higher your sensor strength the lower X can possibly be... ECM will now counter base sensor strength by not breaking targeting but now increasing the chance for X to be a higher number... something like if ECM strength is > target ship sensor strength then base number X can be is bigger... So now X can only be between 0.3 and 1 I think this would balance ECM against the other 3 Ewar that is out there and make a previously unchangeable mechanic X into something that as EVE players could manipulate. At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Doc Severide Caldari Provisions Caldari State 200	Posted - 2012.11.04 21:49:00 - [235] - Quote Balanced ECM? Translation = ECM doesn't work anymore. The name of the game should be changed to Nerf Online...
Bienator II madmen of the skies 1091	Posted - 2012.11.04 22:24:00 - [236] - Quote i like the idea of modules which counter certain strategies. However in eve its often not possible. for example you can't counter TD since all tracking mods are far to weak to reach anything same for dampening. sensor boosters do not help that much if you have three damps debuffing your targeting range ironically the only counter what works most of the time is ECCM (but ecm has other problems, e.g stacking) so what about giving some modules additional attributes to actively counter ewar? Something like this was attempted with capacitor batteries which are able to reflect part of the neutralizer effect. example: - A tracking computer could reduce all tracking disruption by 50%. (alternatively: it could give you minimum functionality, e.g you can't be disrupted below 70% of your weapons capabilities) - certain sensor mods give you a minimal targeting range - .. think you got the idea a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked
Lili Lu 575	Posted - 2012.11.04 22:30:00 - [237] - Quote Concerning ecm, these skills are a good addition to the game. This game in general needs more skills. When you get over 100mil in sp and have decided not to train supercap skills you notice this. CCP has for too long been focused on adding new modules and ships but very little in the way of skills. Skills need to be added since the game is time based skiling. They will not be mandatory skills. Noone will force anyone to skill them. People don't have them now and plenty pvp. But yes, it would be wise to train them. For most people this will be two racials. And like any skill they are rather easy to train to level 3. Of course then like any skill if you want that last two levels and marginally less useful time investment you have to put in some weeks of training for less reward. Nothing new here. There has been in the game tracking and sharpshooter skills. There has been long range targeting and signal acquisition. Now there will be racial sensor skills to combat racial jammers. There may come a time where a signature reduction skill is introduced as a partial counter to painters. These are the kinds of things CCP needs to introduce to the game. Skills to fill in omissions in the mechanics. As for the direct ecm alterations. Granted the range nerf is negligible. But these iterative nerfs are probably best. I wouldn't want some new reworking of ecm that wasn't well thought out. ECM has a place and should have a place in the game. It just shouldn't be as strong as it currently is. I read the Mittani's blog. Some goon I'm sure will repost the link even if I can't be arsed atm. But it is a rather good suggestion. Oh hell, I looked it up again anyway https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=http%3a%2f%2fthemittani.com%2ffeatures%2fecm-not-nerf-we-deserve-fix-we-need&domain=themittani.com It doesn't address the easy frigate jam phenomenon but it does address duration and the light drone jam phenomena. Something like this would be a good iterative addition to address ecm. ECM has been so incredibly powerful that ecm boat pilots have routinely filled their mids with jammers and lows and rig slots with boosting mods/rigs to make it even better. Ironically if ecm gets cut down a couple pegs it may help the ECM boat pilot fall from his currently top position as primary. ECM targets detest ecm boats, ecm boat pilots detest being the automatic primary. That all can change to the better of each with some of these changes. Look at the damn TDs. The nerf here was very underdone. The base modules need more of a nerf espcially as they will be acquiring a new ability to fubar missiles. That is the real preasent and future danger. Plenty of folks fitting TDs in an available mid already. That could become even more so in the future even if the TD for missiles is made a second module and not a set of scripts. Regardless, the TD boats could supplant the ecm boats for most reviled ewar pita in the game. All the changes in the op are in the right direction.
fukier Flatline. 94	Posted - 2012.11.04 22:37:00 - [238] - Quote Bienator II wrote: ? See projected ECCM/Tracking Links/Remote Sensor Booster/ and its most famous cousin Energy Transfers... All of these counter Certain types of Ewar be it nueting/ECM/TD/RSD... The only problem is that tracking links and Energy Transfers are the only two that get a ship bonus... leaving Projected ECCM and Remote Sensor Boosters left out... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Marzuq Scarlet Weather Rhapsody 33	Posted - 2012.11.04 22:40:00 - [239] - Quote ECM drones really need addressing.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 22	Posted - 2012.11.04 22:43:00 - [240] - Quote I'm also going to have to add my voice that four seperate skills doesn't seem the right way forward, the only things we have racial skills for are hull sizes (not even specialists) & guns/missiles. Everything else is a generic skill.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: 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.