Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
386
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
One of the major problems with ecm is the ability to have a 100% jam probability. No other ewar can do this - you cant 100% web someone, you cant 100% TD them, but because of the way ecm works, you can 100% jam them.
The math makes some wierd things happen 1) You can hit 100% jam probability 2) After 100% jam probability, higher ecm strength is wasted
How does ecm currently work?
When you activate an ecm mod, the probability of a jam is ecm strength/sensor strength. For a typical falcon (typical, not max jam strength) vs a cane (before the brand new eccm skills), you have 10.2 jam strength (15.9 heated). A cane has 16 sensor strength.
Before heat, a falcon has a 64% chance of jamming a cane, going up to 99% with heat.
The results are more ridiculous going down to cruisers or assault frigates. An ishkur has 12 sensor strength. A falcon can jam it 100% of the time with a heated racial jam, and 85% unheated. For a less tanked falcon, you can 100% jam an ishkur with an unheated jam.
How should it be? Like everything else in the game, there should be diminishing returns on jam strength. Going from 1 jam strength to 2 should be a bigger change in jam probability than going from 2 to 3. In addition, you should never hit 100%.
So proposed new math for ecm:
Jam probability = 2/pi * arctan(jam strength/sensor strength)
This requires an moderate increase in jam strengths across the board, to balance things with the new formula. Some points from this:
0) The 2/pi is just a normalization constant 1) infinite jam strength gives 100% jam probability, as does 0 sensor strenght 2) Jam strength = sensor strength gives jam probability 1/2 3) Jam strengths should be increased probably about 65%, but CCP would have to do some testing on that 4) Arcan is a good function for this, but there are others that would be equally good |
Titus Veridius
Calamitous-Intent
6
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think missile damage should follow a similar math. Each additional HML on tengu should get diminishing returns. |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
386
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Titus Veridius wrote: I think missile damage should follow a similar math. Each additional HML on tengu should get diminishing returns.
That is not how this applies diminishing returns. |
Titus Veridius
Calamitous-Intent
6
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sure it does, you just have to multiple the octane by the co-signer of the loan divided by the function of tengu.
This is basic math bro. |
Incumine
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:One of the major problems with ecm is the ability to have a 100% jam probability. No other ewar can do this - you cant 100% web someone, you cant 100% TD them, but because of the way ecm works, you can 100% jam them.
The math makes some wierd things happen 1) You can hit 100% jam probability 2) After 100% jam probability, higher ecm strength is wasted
How does ecm currently work?
When you activate an ecm mod, the probability of a jam is ecm strength/sensor strength. For a typical falcon (typical, not max jam strength) vs a cane (before the brand new eccm skills), you have 10.2 jam strength (15.9 heated). A cane has 16 sensor strength.
Before heat, a falcon has a 64% chance of jamming a cane, going up to 99% with heat.
The results are more ridiculous going down to cruisers or assault frigates. An ishkur has 12 sensor strength. A falcon can jam it 100% of the time with a heated racial jam, and 85% unheated. For a less tanked falcon, you can 100% jam an ishkur with an unheated jam.
How should it be? Like everything else in the game, there should be diminishing returns on jam strength. Going from 1 jam strength to 2 should be a bigger change in jam probability than going from 2 to 3. In addition, you should never hit 100%.
So proposed new math for ecm:
Jam probability = 2/pi * arctan(jam strength/sensor strength)
This requires an moderate increase in jam strengths across the board, to balance things with the new formula. Some points from this:
0) The 2/pi is just a normalization constant 1) infinite jam strength gives 100% jam probability, as does 0 sensor strenght 2) Jam strength = sensor strength gives jam probability 1/2 3) Jam strengths should be increased probably about 65%, but CCP would have to do some testing on that 4) Arcan is a good function for this, but there are others that would be equally good
Shut up! MICHAEL HARARI - I SOFA KING WE TODD IT |
Dervinus
Sniggwaffe
122
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Eve Online Forums, 2012. o7 toonies |
Solutio Letum
Lost Dawn Chaos Stealth Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
ECM is a bet against the devil not over powered mechanics,
if you have a falcon lets say and you are trying to kill a Mega Buffer fitted, lots of DPS loaded to, lots of med drones in general, blaster fitted, you bring mainly Gallente Jams only because you know for some reasons and you are able to refit for some reasons if you dont have them rigth away but it all works out from your view point so a basic bash on a mega with lots of ship starts happening at a gate, every one fells confident because they have a falcon, then rigth after falcon pops up gives a first jam he starts ECCM cycles, they felt confident and rushed to badly now there all gonna die because there 20km of a blaster damage and buffer fitted mega with well over 800dps at that range, and ofc they are all gank fitted
ECM is not over powered, its just an easy flipped coin, where if you are prepaired you win, and if you broth ECM and no one was waiting for it you get a really good play although... in a fleet, unless you are actually stupid enougth to only bring ECM ships, youll never parma jam all ships, and from what i know ECM ships dont like drones, and drones to like ECM ships, do i need to show you how quick an ECM ship can die or do you realize that? for example i can do even BETTER with a Arazu but with more roles, i can perma jam a ship with general range of 140km he wont get to shoot me because i can put hes range under 10km easy, and il get to Point him from over 40km easy, so in this senaro unless you got some range scrips (lols) you are mega but ******, and its not only luck here, its math, so again, unless you got an ECM driver stupid enougth to fill a full rack of the same racial ECM devices or plan on getting one because you know the ships that are gonna be there you wont even get to perma jam anyone |
Hy Jack
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 01:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Wouldn't it be easier and make more sense to have 100% chance to jam but skills affect how much of hte enemey you jam? like 10 jamstrength x 15 sensor strength = 66% jam. they can only use 33% of their ship when jammed. 2/3rds of their drones, guns, engines, crewmember rations, warp core stabs, etc become 'jammed'
OR
Take a lesson from AC5's in MWO and make a minigame out of getting unjammed - you must cycle each available target twice then ungroup and regroup your guns to break the jam. |
Anaphylacti
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
4
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 03:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
Hy Jack wrote:Wouldn't it be easier and make more sense to have 100% chance to jam but skills affect how much of hte enemey you jam? like 10 jamstrength x 15 sensor strength = 66% jam. they can only use 33% of their ship when jammed. 2/3rds of their drones, guns, engines, crewmember rations, warp core stabs, etc become 'jammed'
OR
Take a lesson from AC5's in MWO and make a minigame out of getting unjammed - you must cycle each available target twice then ungroup and regroup your guns to break the jam.
I'm pretty sure you are referring them to the Ultra AC5. I mean we have to get this stuff right. CCP obviously cares about this thread and the feedback we are providing here and it would be a shame for them to be interested in this mini game concept for fast paced fps shooters only to try the AC5 instead and not experience this excellent feature they were so looking forward to. |
Hy Jack
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 03:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote: I'm pretty sure you are referring them to the Ultra AC5. I mean we have to get this stuff right. CCP obviously cares about this thread and the feedback we are providing here and it would be a shame for them to be interested in this mini game concept for fast paced fps shooters only to try the AC5 instead and not experience this excellent feature they were so looking forward to.
Way to take my entire post out of context and focus on the only mistake which is an obvious typo |
|
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
744
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 09:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
I have cleaned some trolling from this thread. Community Representative GÇ+ EVE Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |