EVE Search - Why ECM is overpowered.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why ECM is overpowered.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
feawyn	Posted - 2006.08.17 16:05:00 - [61] the trouble with ECM, is not as much ECM in it self. but the fact it gets overused on ships that can easy do high dps while stil jamming. The dedicated ECM boats all have a relative small damg output. Up the fitting on ECM and give the boats a role bonus
Kery Nysell Caldari Nysell Incorporated	Posted - 2006.08.17 16:34:00 - [62] The problem does not lie in the ECM system, nor in the ECCM modules, but in the not-so-random number generator ... That thing can succeed at "dice rolls" with an 8% chance of success ten times in a row ... if I had that kind of luck IRL, I'd be gambling in Vegas for a living ...
Attiladehun Gallente Fire Mandrill	Posted - 2006.08.17 16:44:00 - [63] yeh they need to change the chance you can jam someone. The system is ok, but the chances are way too high. I even once had 40 sensor strength and still was constantly jammed, that's pretty annoying. Makes you wonder why you really want to fit anti-eccm then :/ But anyway it's just the chance is too high, if they lower that number it would be more fair tbh.
Clementina God's of Eve	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:00:00 - [64] Originally by: Sn4k3 3y3s Yeah. Whine time I was just messing about on the test server with the new 'FFA 3' and 'FFA 4' zones (for cruisers + frigates ) in my lovely deimos. A vexor warps in, and Im just like 'o ya ya t1, dieee!'. Within 1 second of locking me, I was jammed. The jam kept going, only breaking off for a 5 second interval during the whole fight, allowing his vexor to kill me, slowly. If this is not overpowered, I do not know what is. Make ECM number-based again, like the old system. That was fine, and ECM did what it was supposed to and no more. Whine I'm sorry, but this thread just does not deliver. Basically what you are saying here is you were flying along in your deimos and saw a vexor and throught "I can just insta pwn him, 'cause I'm flying tech II!!!1111!!!" Then you got your ass handed back to you on a platter. Now you come to the forums to whine and call for a nerf. Yes, ECM may have its problems, but sometimes you just lose.
Kery Nysell Caldari Nysell Incorporated	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:16:00 - [65] Originally by: Attiladehun yeh they need to change the chance you can jam someone. The system is ok, but the chances are way too high. I even once had 40 sensor strength and still was constantly jammed, that's pretty annoying. Makes you wonder why you really want to fit anti-eccm then :/ But anyway it's just the chance is too high, if they lower that number it would be more fair tbh. The theorical chance to jam is just fine, a Scorpion with maxed skills (BS and Signal Dispertion) and a T2 racial ECM would have a 11.25 "jam strength" ... With a sensor strength of 40, that scorp would have a theorical chance of jamming you of roughly 28% ... Once again, it's the not-so-random number generator that throws a spanner in the works, 28% should mean 1 jam in 4 cycles, NOT constant jamming ...
Lord Spidey Hmmzor. Muffins of Mayhem	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:23:00 - [66] Originally by: KilROCK Hell. If they fixed this, i could run around with dampeners and keep at range and you couldn't do crap because you wouldn't use Sensor boosters, now you'd whine Sensor dampeners are overpowered because you don't use the modules given out to counter them? You know whats odd is that dampers arent chanced based...it has to do with ship fittings and tactics instead of say...rolling the dice. Hopefully you see this difference between this and multispecs
xlop Gallente	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:25:00 - [67] Originally by: Kery Nysell Originally by: Attiladehun yeh they need to change the chance you can jam someone. The system is ok, but the chances are way too high. I even once had 40 sensor strength and still was constantly jammed, that's pretty annoying. Makes you wonder why you really want to fit anti-eccm then :/ But anyway it's just the chance is too high, if they lower that number it would be more fair tbh. The theorical chance to jam is just fine, a Scorpion with maxed skills (BS and Signal Dispertion) and a T2 racial ECM would have a 11.25 "jam strength" ... With a sensor strength of 40, that scorp would have a theorical chance of jamming you of roughly 28% ... Once again, it's the not-so-random number generator that throws a spanner in the works, 28% should mean 1 jam in 4 cycles, NOT constant jamming ... the problem IS THAT ECM is far too strong, the chances are far too high. racials give u 11.25 on an ECM ship. a typical BS has 20 strength, that is 56% of getting jamed. 1 SLOT shuts down 12slots!!! decrease all jammers strength to 1/3th current values, increase the 5% per lvl ecm skill on ecm ships to 10%
operated Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:34:00 - [68] I fitted a temp with 2 eccm 96% and a domi jammed me 3 times thats 1 whole minute he was draining me and letting his drones pound me , gave him time to reboost his armour . He told me he used 1 multi . Ecm is stupid k , 1 med slot module knocking out 8 hislots and 2 medslots , i think thats fairly overpowerd , what you gotta lose if you fit ecm ?Fit one and your sure youll getatleast a 20 sec jam in wich is retarted , though im talking bout 1 on 1 ,in fleets ecm can be a must but should be more like dampners . just my opinion
Synapse Archae Amarr Solarflare Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.08.17 17:42:00 - [69] Originally by: Sorja Originally by: KilROCK ...you've been given the tools to prevent your ships to get jammed easily, now. Big deal? you don't use it. CCP fault? no, yours? no. ECCM doesn't work. I use it and against my 46 sensor strength I still get jammed 2 out of 3 attempts by a single multispec on a Curse. But I already wrote that, you just didn't read it. The problem is the chanced based system, nothing else. This was stated trazillion times before CCP overhauled the ECM system and still they threw in what we have now. How does it make you like in your gang, when you are asked why your 7 jammers ship didn't jam anything for the whole battle and the only thing you can reply would be like: 'not my fault, that Enyo got me jammed for the whole battle with his multispec'. Huh? I'm proud to be one of the pilots (an ECM specialist even) who complained long and hard that the new changes made ECM into some kind of messed-up uber DOT modifier. I'm now sitting back and easing the pain of having such a crappy system by telling CCP "I told you so." --------------------------------------------- http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=349194&page=1Redo Fleets[/ur
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2006.08.17 18:11:00 - [70] I'm willing to bet the poster did not bother to fit any type of ECCM whatsoever, in that case he deserved to lose badly.
Striker IV Gallente Brother in Arms Corp	Posted - 2006.08.17 18:21:00 - [71] nice post Vathar - some good ideas in there Team work is essential... It gives the other team something ELSE to shoot at!
Karash Amerius Amarr O.E.C	Posted - 2006.08.17 18:28:00 - [72] I think the old system sucked, and I think the new system sucks as well. We need to start thinking about different applications of ECM other than jamming target lock. Target lock is such a powerful game component that messing with it needs to be done gingerly. Merc Blog
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.08.17 18:33:00 - [73] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 17/08/2006 18:35:10 Originally by: Karash Amerius We need to start thinking about different applications of ECM other than jamming target lock. Target lock is such a powerful game component that messing with it needs to be done gingerly. Thanks for caring about the root of the problem. Most of the "ECM - my ultimate solution" posts are completely obsessed about symptoms. NB. In Rust We Trust
Vathar Elegance	Posted - 2006.08.17 18:50:00 - [74] I like the idea of ECCM acting differently, be it by reducing a jammer's jamming strength or by "cleansing" a friendly ship ... Bringing teamplay into the equation is always nice imho ... _ Originally by: Stamm Minmatar are kind of like going down a flight of stairs on an office chair firing an uzi
Kurieg Universal Manufacturing Corporation Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2006.08.17 19:17:00 - [75] Make Sensor Boosters and Sensor Dampeners only about lock range. Sensor Boosters still useful for long range combat even if noone is Dampening you. Sensor Dampeners useful to try and stuff people at range. Make ECM and ECCM about the lock "on/off" switch AND Scan Resolution (lock time). ECCM now useful even if noone is actively jamming you. Heck, you could make ECM ONLY turn lock off, but ECCM helps you both beat ECM AND lock faster.
CCP HOSTILE	Posted - 2006.08.17 20:25:00 - [76] Originally by: Christopher Dalran I'm willing to bet the poster did not bother to fit any type of ECCM whatsoever, in that case he deserved to lose badly. You obvously haven't read the post where it says, have fitted "conjunctive racial backup" or similar mod to counteract at least a single multispec fitted frig, and still get jammed to death. Return to World Of Warcraft you little Dalran Wizard! Originally by: CCP doesn't care! FUN...remember that module CCP? Urgent CCP Attention! Or do you just opress with Sinister Bans like the Chinese Communist Party ??
CCP HOSTILE	Posted - 2006.08.17 20:30:00 - [77] Originally by: Vathar I like the idea of ECCM acting differently, be it by reducing a jammer's jamming strength or by "cleansing" a friendly ship ... Bringing teamplay into the equation is always nice imho ... Not to be stupid towards you, but, you are really inconsiderate towards those pooor lonesome people in this game, who really don't have the time for 24/7 Eve like you seem to do. Originally by: CCP doesn't care! FUN...remember that module CCP? Urgent CCP Attention! Or do you just opress with Sinister Bans like the Chinese Communist Party ?? I'm w8ing, ohhhh, here it comes! The Sinister Ban
Erik Pathfinder Caldari HelpCorp United	Posted - 2006.08.17 20:47:00 - [78] Originally by: Karash Amerius I think the old system sucked, and I think the new system sucks as well. We need to start thinking about different applications of ECM other than jamming target lock. Target lock is such a powerful game component that messing with it needs to be done gingerly. /agree ---------------
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.17 20:56:00 - [79] To the op, the difference under the old system was you would not of had those 5 seconds to fire in. Sorja, if there is a bug with the RNG then that is an entirely different issue from ECM being overpowered, that's a bug. Old system basically you used multispecs to jam in short cycles against BS, one scorp couls keep 3-4 enemy BS from firing pretty much at all. Against smaller ships, you just kept quite a few permajammed, thus meaning BS were required for serious combatants. Shrug, there are plenty of good soloutions in the thread above, including my prefered one of partial jamming. The "old system" isn't a soloution..it was a problem in itself.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.17 21:10:00 - [80] Edited by: Aramendel on 17/08/2006 21:13:05 Originally by: Kurieg Make Sensor Boosters and Sensor Dampeners only about lock range. Sensor Boosters still useful for long range combat even if noone is Dampening you. Sensor Dampeners useful to try and stuff people at range. Make ECM and ECCM about the lock "on/off" switch AND Scan Resolution (lock time). ECCM now useful even if noone is actively jamming you. .. Thats actually a pretty good idea IMO. ------- Anyway, my problem with the "Just fit ECCM" argumentation: Damperners and tracking disruptors are not that effective and universally useable that you "need" to use their anti-module. What makes ECM so "special" that it, of all EW methods, is the only one which makes fitting it's anti-module basically mandatory? It are not the skills - tracking disruptors and dampeners need more SPs. It are not the ships - each race has a ewar cruiser (although the minnie one is pushing the definitions). Caldari have the only Ewar BS, but gallente has the CS with the ewar spec.
Entreri Finwe Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.17 21:23:00 - [81] I don't get it, all you that that are complaining about ECM being random and chance based and that it's a no-go in PvP...do all of your guns track 100% and do 100% of the damage all the time? That's also chance based it may be a better algorithm or even a better system but it's still chance-based... Avoid the old system - there wasn't much love for that either - that's why they changed it - "everyone" complained... Partial jams though, I think that would be the best... Or how about each sucessful jam off-lining one random module on the jammed ship? ---
BlackPrince Amarr Minmatar United Freedom Front Electus Matari	Posted - 2006.08.17 21:37:00 - [82] Edited by: BlackPrince on 17/08/2006 21:40:19 Originally by: Karash Amerius I think the old system sucked, and I think the new system sucks as well. We need to start thinking about different applications of ECM other than jamming target lock. Target lock is such a powerful game component that messing with it needs to be done gingerly. Whoa, talk about blast from the past. Contego Octavius. Now, back to the main point of the thread. The big killer for ECM, especially for the battlwagon drivers, is lock time. I've been using ECM since the original system, it's funny how people (many of whom weren't even around for the old system) view it with rose colored glasses. The old system sucked the same as the current one, just in different ways. Leave ECM as it is, just do not force the jammed ship to re-establish lock, that's what really screws people over in combat. -=BlackPrince=- Minmatar United Freedom Front Raging Bull "Fair fights are for suckers."
Daphne Oboe	Posted - 2006.08.17 23:22:00 - [83] This is very fortunate. I just got on the forums to ask a newbish question about ECM (new to the game), and lo and behold, I found the perfect place to do it. There's something I don't understand here. When I look at the ECM modules on the market, they all seem to have significantly lower sensor strength than pretty much every ship. Like, they'll have strength of 7.2 or something, and I can't find a ship with lower than 10 sensor strength. How do they even work if that's the case?
magnus amadeus	Posted - 2006.08.17 23:45:00 - [84] Edited by: magnus amadeus on 17/08/2006 23:46:44 This is what I don't understand about the ECCM fitting comments. Why even bother fitting it? I mean ECM is still a much better counter to ECM than ECCM is, and it has the added bonus of locking down an enemy ship. This is still a case of 1 module where the only suitable counter is itself, thereby being overpowered. I mean if 1 ECCM had the effect of completely nullifing 1 ECM, then I could see the balance, but it does not. Then again that just puts you in a WCS vs. scrambler situation. Thats just my 2 cents anyway.
Liet Traep Minmatar Black Lance Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.18 01:35:00 - [85] Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski Originally by: Locke Ateid Is a step backwards such a bad things if the step forward was in the wrong direction anyway? Not my fault if you can't adapt. ECCM got boosted, now it's not CCP's fault if people are whiners and can't read sticky topics concerning upcoming "changes". Could you point me in the way of these changes? I've missed them.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2006.08.18 02:47:00 - [86] "but you CANT nerf EW, you already let ppl specialize in it!!!!" lolololololol sry, but i ran across this in one of the threads and i almost shat myself yeah, you trained one tree, \o/ for you. That gives you the right to 'i win' over someone that has trained all the trees (and may very well be fitting ECCM). Also, none of us have ever had established game components we already trained for altered for the 'better good' I cant be much more than trollish at this point, as almost everything to be said on the topic, HAS been said. Regardless, i'm stuck here at work.... and bored... so i'm taking you all on this trip w/ me Make the counters actually counter, and dont let ppl fit it on any old ship. How is this a hard concept? How is this NOT logical??? Your making the months (and years) of skill training on so many different trees boil down to a dice roll in combat (and a shyty dice roll at that). pilot A: "joe, wtf man!?!? 170mil mega and you didn't even start on that ravens tank!?!" joe: "sorry dude, that stabber had me jammed up whole fight" sound silly? It is. and the BEST your ever gonna hear on it is... "well its not gonna make this patch" I found my bat.. now where is that dead horse?
Matuk Grymwal	Posted - 2006.08.18 03:16:00 - [87] I too quite like the current system, and certainly prefer it over the old system. I agree it can use some tweakage, but I like the probability based approach. As others have mentioned I think reducing the cycle time is a good start (and cap usage accordingly).
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.18 06:19:00 - [88] Originally by: Ephemeron The current state of chance based ECM wouldn't be so bad if the effect of being jammed wasn't so overwhelming. If being jammed meant that some of your ship mods don't work, but you don't lose lock, then it'd be ok. For complete jamm, it should be harder to achieve than current system. And ECCM still suck at resisting ECM well you can still use modules when jammed, just none of the offensive ones. would you like your tank jammed (there were proposals to have a jammer for each slot type)? Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
Ephemeron	Posted - 2006.08.18 06:52:00 - [89] Quote: would you like your tank jammed (there were proposals to have a jammer for each slot type)? I wouldn't mind. My tank wouldn't consist of a single active module, and chances of ECM jamming all tank related modules at same time should be low.
Kathira Gallente Denial of Service Freelancer Coalition	Posted - 2006.08.18 06:53:00 - [90] The really first thing to make = frigate size jammers = cruiser size jammers = BS size jammers same as Nos and other stuff. Then make it that 3 multis have the same effect then 1 racial jammer to that specific race. You should need 1 racial jammer to equal the sensor strength of a ship of the same size for a chance of 50 % jamming. When you would put in a second racial jammer you would have the same stacking probs as usual so your chance of jamming would be around 70 % for the same ship size. When a BS with 3 multis ( 1 racial ) would jam a cruiser the chance would raise to ( around 70 % ) and when that BS would jam a frigate the chance would be ( around 90 % ). When a Frigate with 3 multis would jam a cruiser the chance would be around 38 % and the chance to jam a BS would be around 25 % ( dont hit me on numbers ). So to really have a good chance of jamming a BS nearly all the time you need around 4 to 5 jamming frigs ( which I mean thats a nice number ) or 3 Cruiser or 2 BS.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.