Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 18:11:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Lifewire Edited by: Lifewire on 12/04/2005 22:29:43 It has become a fact: ECM was "patched". I played roundabout 5000 h EVE in the last 2 years - pvp only. This makes me think that devs don¦t know what they do when they "patch" something because they did not play 5000 h - they were starring at the EVE code. I don¦t have a problem to adapt to this patch - but i don¦t like that EVE PVP is reduced to pure firepower. EVE lost a lot of options in PVP with this unbalanced patch.
I want to ask the devs: why should i when i setup our hunting team fit more than one ECM ship now??? Give me one reason to not fit all BS as fastlocking gunships with maximum damage mods.
I also want to challange the devs to a 10 on 10. 10 devs in Scorpions vs 10 gunships. I bet we win this 10:0 because the devs Scorps will fall like flys while they coordinate their efforts to jam. The first 2 Scorps will even die before they get a lock. A gunship team only has to coordinate their primary and secondary target, while a ECM team has to coordinate the EW vs 10 targets (on teamspeak or gangchannel). The best part is that they have to re-coordinate their EW-efforts after each cicle. The ECM team has nothing: no tanking, no good damage output (crappy missiles) - they have only their ECM items and a lot of deadly targets that all need to be jammed. Only 1 or 2 not jammed gunships will hurt very fast, while the Scorps missiles (depending on comnbat range) do no or small damage.
Sorry devs - but i really have to say your EW-patch is crap. The reaction on this will be massive usage of gankships, even more than these gankships allready were used in the past. Sniping setups will also be used more. But calling this "EW-patch" is more than a joke. EW was just destroyed. EW might still be an option in smaller engagements (3 vs 3), but the larger the battle is, the less EW will be usefull, because coordinating EW is very difficult and this way it doesnt make sense at all to use EW. Gankships will rule.
EW was a way to fight outnumbered in the past. It was no problem to attack in a 5 vs 10 if there was a good EW plan. It was possible to attack 5 BS in 5 blackbirds and it was possible to win this battle if the 5 Blackbird-pilots did no mistake. EW was a powerfull item to good organised teams that offered options to win "unwinable" combats. EW was also an options for newer players that have bad gunskills to be usefull. I want to ask: why was this "patched"??? Can a dev plz explain this??? Do devs expect PVP to be better now??? Am i wrong when i say EVE was just reduced to fastlock and pure damage dealing setups???
The problem is the dmg gunships.. Not EW. ---------------------------
CEO: Black Sea Industries
|
Grut
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 18:41:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Katya Detia
The problem is the dmg gunships.. Not EW.
nah dmg gunships are what happens when you get a fleet together.... with a fleet of 10 gunships all their slots are working, on a tanked fleet only the targeted ships mods work. Mostly harmless |
Clevinger
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 19:08:00 -
[93]
If electronic warfare is going to work as guns do then what needs to be introduced are low slot mods to enhance the effectiveness of ecm modules and specialisation skills as you have with gunnery.
|
Killde
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 19:27:00 -
[94]
Yeah I think this is a nerf. Mainly because before no one wanted to waste a slot with a backup array or another medium with a sensor booster. Thus they got jammed (as they well should). So they come complain on the forums "ooohh i got jammed in my gankaddon! nerf it!" How bout instead we get some adeptation, actually put on some ECCM instead of catering to the large gank fest crowd?
|
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 19:43:00 -
[95]
Yep sniping is now the Number 1 sport .................
The EW changes Sux ... Mongo speaks !!
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 20:10:00 -
[96]
Quote: Yep sniping is now the Number 1 sport .................
The EW changes Sux ...
It¦s so good to see some of the old guys with brain - gimme 5 mongo
|
Grut
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 20:43:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Lifewire
Quote: Yep sniping is now the Number 1 sport .................
The EW changes Sux ...
It¦s so good to see some of the old guys with brain - gimme 5 mongo
wait until the prop changes come in
/me sets teh forum blaster to maximum whine Mostly harmless |
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 23:12:00 -
[98]
It just totally insane..... why a Scorpion has a maximum (with failoff) jamming / dampning range less than every sniping Battleship out their ...
Currently sitting with Tach 2's @ 100 km+ means you are free to gank ..
Close in a Scorpion is dead, long range it can't Jam ..... personally I think its a step backwards and apart from "unlimited sensor dampners" the previous system worked and was fun...
As per normal .. just my view, agree or disagree but don't yap yap. Mongo speaks !!
|
Viper SF
|
Posted - 2005.04.14 23:30:00 -
[99]
Long Distance Jamming ...
10% Bonus to Optimal Range of All ECM, Remote Sensor Dampners etc etc
Remote Sensor Dampner Optimum Range (without skill) = 25km Remote Sensor Dampner Optimum Range (Level 1) = 25km Remote Sensor Dampner Optimum Range (Level 2) = 25km Remote Sensor Dampner Optimum Range (Level 3) = 25km
Nurf Bat, Nurf Bat
|
Neon Genesis
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 02:10:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Neon Genesis on 15/04/2005 02:17:49 I think it should always have been like it is now. You rly think having 4 multispecs on should be able to completely disable another ship's combat ability?
You can go on about backups easily countering prepatch ew but if u wear 2 or 3 backups u got dominated by every ship not using ew
When i tested the ew i found it to be still functional but its not the i-win module it was __
There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
|
|
Matrix Aran
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 02:29:00 -
[101]
Question: How the hell does the new system take sensor strenghths into account? How the heck does the optimal and falloff affect the EW? The link in the patch notes aswered none of this, and to me it all seems to be a simple roll the dice thing, rather than you need x sensor strength to have a y % chance of doing z to a target.
|
SkyLander
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 04:27:00 -
[102]
It is totally chance based even tho all the devs swear that it isn't...... __________________________________________________
|
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 04:29:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Famine Aligher''ri on 15/04/2005 04:48:23
Originally by: Matrix Aran Question: How the hell does the new system take sensor strenghths into account? How the heck does the optimal and falloff affect the EW? The link in the patch notes aswered none of this, and to me it all seems to be a simple roll the dice thing, rather than you need x sensor strength to have a y % chance of doing z to a target.
Supposly from what I've been told and read it's like this with OP Range and Falloff.
OP Range - A 100% to MARK the target before math is calculated I guess Falloff - Chance to not MARK the target. (Like damage being less and less as you further away from target)
Once the "Mark" has hit the target, I'm going to assume it does the Math portion of the ECM. Then once that is taken away from the ships sensor strength whatever, it does the "Chance" portion to obviously give you that chance to jam sucessfully.
Mark -> -whatever from ships strength -> Chance rolls?
Something like that I assume and what i've read from other players. So to me the real problem is that chance roll hitting more than it should. Least it has for me. So the only way it would actually balance out is if I was in the "Falloff" range where I couldn't "Mark" "Hit" whatever the victim to get to the math and chance rolls period. So when you do use the "Right" ECM's, you increase your chances of totaly jamming the victim (By ships sensor strength) and you also have a chance roll incase they have ECCM or ship strength higher than you suspected.
So more of the Right ECM's vs Ship = Jamming Sensor Strength of a Ship + Chance rolls Then more of the wrong ECM's vs Ship = Chance rolls only.
Using the wrong ECM's or ECM's not adding up to fully jam a ship sensor would leave you to focus on only "Chance" rolls. The chance rolls do hit but don't hit as much as a right "ECM" setup would (ECM platform that totaly jams a ship's sensor strength). So yes you can jam a ship with a -4 jammer. Yet if it was a full battle, you would only jam the target 1-3 times as well not in a row. So that leaves holes of damage to be delt to you. However, this is unbalanced no matter how TomB figured it. Being a lot of fights end quickly or you are out numbered. So more "Wrong" ecm's = more chance rolls hitting. What was 1-3 times will = 3-6 times. If someone fails there next cycle, someone else might not.
So when you actually do use the right ECM's. You end up having like 90%-100% jamming each cycle being you can fully jam the sensor strength as well have a chance roll just incase the victim has backup sensor strength like ECCM's ect. This is what TomB prob based it all on. Seems more like he soloed ship tested this new system than actually adding up how many wrong or 1 modual ECM's = hitting there chance rolls. Unless there is some hidden secret somewhere or he wanted ECM's to be like this fully. Either way it's unbalanced to me. Even 1-2 jams on a frigate pilot = death being our fights arn't that long to being with. So my input is to lower the chance rolls or make a chance roll based on how low the jamming is.
Example : -4 strength to a 19 Strength ship = Lower Chance roll to overcome the 19 Example : -12 strength to a 19 Strength ship = Better Chance roll to overcome the 19 Example : -16 strength to a 19 Strength ship = Even Better Chance roll to overcome the 19
If anyone has something that seems to not be right on what I said, feel free to corect =)
Famine Aligher'ri, of The Aligher'ri -The Frig- |
Golgrath
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 04:45:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Matrix Aran Question: How the hell does the new system take sensor strenghths into account? How the heck does the optimal and falloff affect the EW? The link in the patch notes aswered none of this, and to me it all seems to be a simple roll the dice thing, rather than you need x sensor strength to have a y % chance of doing z to a target.
EW jamming strenth / Target ship's ECCM strength
Falloff works like with turrets.
So one multispectral (jamming strength 4) jamming a Raven (22 gravimetric points) has 4/22 = 18% chance of jamming him below optimal range. At optimal+falloff the chance is 9%. At optimal+(2*falloff) the chance is 0%.
|
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 04:52:00 -
[105]
2*falloff
Is that the "-4" going down to "-2" in falloff? If so how sure are you it does less strength. I was told (above post) that's how it works. Not too sure though being why would you falloff jam =)
Famine Aligher'ri, of The Aligher'ri -The Frig- |
Latex Mistress
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 06:03:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Lifewire The reaction on this will be massive usage of gankships, even more than these gankships allready were used in the past. Sniping setups will also be used more.
I said the exact same thing the day after I read the EW change dev blog, nice to see I'm in good company. From that time on I put the Scorp away and got a nifty Mega to play with.
In the mean time, I'm working my way into 425 II's and Scorp has worked its way into the (S)corp flight deck. Sad thing really, as I fancied myself as a fairly decent Scorp driver...
If ECM is an act of aggression, why am I not on kill mails?
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 16:05:00 -
[107]
This is what happens when DEVs that do not play enough EVE change things. Who ever is the boss in CCP - the DEVs should be forced to play EVE 4 h/day and their time to change the code should be limited to another 4 h. And they should be forced to play in Syndicate
|
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2005.04.15 16:47:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Famine Aligher''ri on 15/04/2005 16:48:02
Originally by: Lifewire This is what happens when DEVs that do not play enough EVE change things. Who ever is the boss in CCP - the DEVs should be forced to play EVE 4 h/day and their time to change the code should be limited to another 4 h. And they should be forced to play in Syndicate
I'm sure they play it more than most. Maybe you should ask for someone to balance it who isn't ran off ego. =)
Famine Aligher'ri, of The Aligher'ri -The Frig- |
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2005.04.16 00:13:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 16/04/2005 00:23:25
I think people neeed to get away from the idea jamming = multi-spectral modules. If you use racial jammers you have a far superior rate success, and the range to match long-reach gunships.
Another advantage is jammer-specific scorpions, simplifying who jams which targets.
E.g Scorp 1: 2x Sensor Booster, 3x Magnetometric, 3x Gravimetric ->Jams Megathrons/Dominixes and Raven's/Scorpions
Scorp 2: 2x Sensor Booster, 3x Radar, 3x Ladar -> Jams Tempests, Apocalypses and Armaggedons.
Neither of these two are going to get confused and start jamming the same targets, With the improved overview, all you need do is check the 'selected' item bar to know its the correct ship type, except for the Apocalypses of course.. (It would be nice if they got round to fixing the BS sizes in the overview for faster identification, given all BS's are supposed to be different sizes)
Sure, which each added Scorpion 'pair' you add further complexity, but by using racial jammers it has already simplyfied the process over multispectrals, and more importantly given the range to match the gunships. If you were really worried about coordination between 4 Scorpions have them soley fit one racial jammer type each, and go after as many targets as they can jam. Filling the low slots with signal amplifiers would also ensure a faster lock than any gunship too, at a pinch you could remove a sesnor booster or two if you do this and go all out for jamming capability (75% on 4 Battleships)
Will this work for sure? can't say as I've not tested it, but as I said previously I'm sure over the next weeks people will experiment and find the best method for the new EW. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on" |
Goberth Ludwig
|
Posted - 2005.04.16 01:17:00 -
[110]
This issue was raised the day the first notes for EW changes for test server went out - but of course nobody cared.
Well now enjoy the retarded gankafest / single multispec spam because u deserve it...
Actually I personally think whats truly uber right now is sniper setups - completely immune to new EW and perfect for beating short range gank ships, also lets not forget how much they own when coupled with some of the new target painting tacklers ...
|
|
Crusher166
|
Posted - 2005.04.16 01:54:00 -
[111]
I totally agree with you Lifewire.
It was fun trying to take on superior numbers while jamming them and it involved alot of skill, ie using F keys and co-ordination to cycle jam. But now that element of skill is lost and replaced by a system based on chance!
Also the EM "patch" will mean there will be less engagements unless people know for sure they have superior numbers because they are all in gankships. At least with the old EM system a fleet could try jamming tactics to take on a conciderably more sizable fleet. This therefore equals less fun for everyone.
The scorpion is a weak ship. Pre-patch it relied on its Ewar capabilitys or else it would drop like a stone. So, anyone flying a scorpion wants to know for sure he is jamming someone. However, now that the system is based on CHANCE it means if your jamming fails a cycle... your fk'ed.
And i wont even go into the compleatly absurd map timer changes... bye bye 0.0 fighting solo or in 2-3 people squads. Dual propulsion nerf ... ewar nerf... POSs... level 4 missions... whatever next? (and oh, missiles soon as well)
The trend seems to be everything that was good and FUN in this game is/has getting/been nerfed.
Crusher - Sybrite Inc. |
Pheole
|
Posted - 2005.04.16 22:57:00 -
[112]
all this patch was about is tweaking alliances who got the numbers to blob.
id be ****ed tho as an alliance member not able to do anything with 3 times the numbers of the ew enemies engaging ;D
ccp just took the last reliable thing from small corps. when small corps can jam, why cant alliances do so in blobs of 50+.
Just sad how far devs think cuz all this will be is a gankfest, totally a gree with u life.
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.04.17 00:18:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Lifewire on 17/04/2005 00:20:26 Edited by: Lifewire on 17/04/2005 00:19:18 Our experiences with the new EW-patch so far:
- in pure ganksetups only the numbers of ships count. This means if you have 5 and "they" have 7 - you will loose. Now way to change this, you will loose.
- a single Scorpion in a small battle is uber. I managed to jam a group of 4 BS and even had jammers left for frigs. It was a 6 of us vs 7 enemys. Enemy had no EW and was totally wiped out.
- BBs suck much. I used 6 multis on a group of enemy BS and none of the multis did work. BBs dont have the bonus on jamming strenght and so they are absolutly crap if you use multis. BBs were so nice ships earlier in game - sad.
- battles where more than 2 EW ships have to coordinate their efforts to jam are a mess. Teamspeak/gangchannel absolutly problematic since the coordination of EW-items cannot be handled.
What do we learn out of this: the larger the fleet the less usefull is EW. battles bigger than 5 vs 5 are hard to coordinate. Single EW-ship in smaller battles is uber and makes it possible to wipeout whole enemy team. Sniping and blobbing will increase. Small elite teams have to evade larger groups now - fighting them outnumbered is nearly impossible now. All in all EVE PVP lost and ganking is all that is left. Battles 5 vs 5 are still fun though. But if both teams have an EW-ship it¦s all chance based. No skill - it¦s luck.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |