| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
   |
Posted - 2006.08.21 14:58:00 -
[1]
 Quote:
Seriously. Ecm kills the game.
I saw this in another thread today. I don't understand where all the hate for EW is coming from. With a few exceptions every EW module in EVE has a counter module. That's balanced design.
How we choose to fit our ships is up to us. If we fit wisely and anticipate our enemy's abilities we conquer. If we fit poorly we have no one but ourselves to blame. The modules in the game are varied and balanced enough to allow this. We all have access to the same equipment. I see no fault there.
EW encourages teamwork and makes small ships competitive against larger vessels. This allows well organized newer players to be effective against the veterans. That's an advantage in game design.
So, seriously, why all the EW hate?
|
Twilight Moon
Minmatar
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:01:00 -
[2]
ECM is overpowered, and ECCM doesnt counter very efficeively, and gives you no benefit if you arent ever the target of a jammer.
...on the other hand using a banana might be a viable alternative.
|
Laocoon
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:02:00 -
[3]
Frigs jamming BSes? hmm.
and ECCM are pretty crap. half the time they don't work. ECM [b]is[/i] messed, and is getting changed.
- Lao
Veto. Corp |
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:11:00 -
[4]
The best counter to ECM is ECM.
Thus, it is broken.
Also, even the effect adds nothing really in terms of enjoyment, which is, after all, what a game is all about. Sitting there defenceless, or killing a defenceless target is no fun for anyone
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:14:00 -
[5]
Quote:
ECM is overpowered, and ECCM doesnt counter very efficeively, and gives you no benefit if you arent ever the target of a jammer.
Overpowered how? This isn't clear. As for ECCM giving no benefit if you are not the target one can say the same about weapons upgrades. They offer no benefit if one doesn't fire his weapons. Both are situational. The argument is a strawman.
Quote:
Frigs jamming BSes? hmm.
Yes, as they should especially in more numerous squadrons. Electromagnetic spoofing doesn't take a tremendous amount of power or infrastructure. Is it that veterans feel they should have unassailable advantage due to spending the time to qualify for the battleship? Is that what motivated the comment?
To my eye EW in EVE is flawed because it doesn't go far enough. There is talk of shortening engagement ranges by design when that could be easily be accomplished by extending the effective range of EW. In truth EW should have longer ranges than guns and missiles due to the nature of the technologies.
|
Lord Spidey
Hmmzor.
Muffins of Mayhem
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:14:00 -
[6]
ECM relies on luck...not skill or a well thought out setup...hence it's broken
|
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:17:00 -
[7]
Edited by: HippoKing on 21/08/2006 15:17:10
The other huge issue with ECM is how it bases entire fights on luck. With guns, hundreds of shots are fired in many fights, and thus the chance balances out. With ECM, you will see 3-4 cycles in a majority of fights, meaning that who gets lucky once or twice entirely determines the outcome of a fight.
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:20:00 -
[8]
Quote:
The best counter to ECM is ECM.
Thus, it is broken.
Isn't that also true of offensive weaponry? How is EW deserving of special consideration here?
Quote:
Also, even the effect adds nothing really in terms of enjoyment, which is, after all, what a game is all about. Sitting there defenceless, or killing a defenceless target is no fun for anyone.
I've met several pirates who would disagree, but that's beside the point. You refer to rendering the target defenseless, Hippo. Players use range, speed and tactics to accomplish the same aim. How is EW different and somehow less deserving?
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:23:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Tuang Pao on 21/08/2006 15:24:42
Quote:
The other huge issue with ECM is how it bases entire fights on luck. With guns, hundreds of shots are fired in many fights, and thus the chance balances out. With ECM, you will see 3-4 cycles in a majority of fights, meaning that who gets lucky once or twice entirely determines the outcome of a fight.
This is a good point. The cycle time on EW is too large, too "granular". Shorter cycling on EW would minimize streaks of bad luck and bring them more in line with the game's limitations on turret weapons, which are governed by similair rolls of chance.
That's a mechanical design issue, though. It still doesn't answer why there's EWAR hate.
|
Nebuli
Caldari
Art of War
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:24:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
ECM is overpowered, and ECCM doesnt counter very efficeively, and gives you no benefit if you arent ever the target of a jammer.
Overpowered how? This isn't clear. As for ECCM giving no benefit if you are not the target one can say the same about weapons upgrades. They offer no benefit if one doesn't fire his weapons. Both are situational. The argument is a strawman.
Quote:
Frigs jamming BSes? hmm.
Yes, as they should especially in more numerous squadrons. Electromagnetic spoofing doesn't take a tremendous amount of power or infrastructure. Is it that veterans feel they should have unassailable advantage due to spending the time to qualify for the battleship? Is that what motivated the comment?
To my eye EW in EVE is flawed because it doesn't go far enough. There is talk of shortening engagement ranges by design when that could be easily be accomplished by extending the effective range of EW. In truth EW should have longer ranges than guns and missiles due to the nature of the technologies.
Huh?
Lets see, im fitting my ship, I have a spare mid slot, now do I go with a ECCM which MIGHT if I'm VERY lucky stop me being jammed SHOULD someone decide to try and jam me, or do I fit an ECM mod myself and attempt to jam every target I find, also prventing them from jamming me?
Answer should be fairly obvious.
And frigs should jam BSs, especialy in squadrons? what game do you play? it isnt EVE, ONE frig can jam a BS, doesnt require squadrons of frigs, if it did then you may be on to a winner, but it DOESNT.
ECM doesnt go far enough? are you frikkin crazy or what?
CEO - Art of War
|
Dixon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:25:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
The best counter to ECM is ECM.
Thus, it is broken.
Isn't that also true of offensive weaponry? How is EW deserving of special consideration here?
Quote:
Also, even the effect adds nothing really in terms of enjoyment, which is, after all, what a game is all about. Sitting there defenceless, or killing a defenceless target is no fun for anyone.
I've met several pirates who would disagree, but that's beside the point. You refer to rendering the target defenseless, Hippo. Players use range, speed and tactics to accomplish the same aim. How is EW different and somehow less deserving?
Range, speed and 'tactics' don't make you a flying piece of spectating poo. ECM is different as it makes your enemy _unable_ to fight back (no, fof doesn't cut it)... it's just boring and games shouldn't be boring.
- - - - - -
I have no strong feelings one way or the other... |
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
The best counter to ECM is ECM.
Thus, it is broken.
Isn't that also true of offensive weaponry? How is EW deserving of special consideration here?
What about tanking modules? Try flying a pure gank setup (no tanking modules what so ever: no plate, no DCU) in general PvP for a while and see how far it gets you.
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
Also, even the effect adds nothing really in terms of enjoyment, which is, after all, what a game is all about. Sitting there defenceless, or killing a defenceless target is no fun for anyone.
I've met several pirates who would disagree, but that's beside the point. You refer to rendering the target defenseless, Hippo. Players use range, speed and tactics to accomplish the same aim. How is EW different and somehow less deserving?
Range makes you hugely vulnerable if someone gets in close. ECM works at all ranges except the absolute extreme (more than about 200km)
Speed requires player skill to be used, and is counterable with a module (web) which reduces your speed to 10%.
Tactics is all about player skill, and should be rewarded.
ECM involves pressing a button. If you are really clever, you can work out what racial jammer to use before pressing said butotn 
|
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
The other huge issue with ECM is how it bases entire fights on luck. With guns, hundreds of shots are fired in many fights, and thus the chance balances out. With ECM, you will see 3-4 cycles in a majority of fights, meaning that who gets lucky once or twice entirely determines the outcome of a fight.
This is a good point. The cycle time on EW is too large, too "granular". Shorter cycling on EW would minimize streaks of bad luck and bring them more in line with the game's limitations on turret weapons, which are governed by similair rolls of chance.
That's a mechanical design issue, though. It still doesn't answer why there's EWAR hate.
But then there is the issue of lock time. Let's say we reduce ECM to 5 seconds. Jamming a battleship in a cruiser suddenly becomes the I-win button because he needs to get at least 2 failed cycles in a row to even lock you and loose a shot, 3 to do any damage.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:28:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Overpowered how? This isn't clear. As for ECCM giving no benefit if you are not the target one can say the same about weapons upgrades. They offer no benefit if one doesn't fire his weapons. Both are situational. The argument is a strawman.
That is a silly comparsion.
Perhaps try something logical, like the counters of the *other* EW systems. Tracking disruptors -> tracking comps. Increase your range & tracking, your guns hit targets easier. Sensor damperners -> sensor boosters. Higher targeting range and faster locking speed.
The only positive effect of ECCM is when someone tries to use ECM on you.
Also, the very "Just fit ECCM" argument when people complain about the high effeciency of ECM proves that it is overpowered. You never see similar posts about tracking disruptors or damperners. What makes ECM so "special" that it should require it's anti-module to be "balanced" and the other EW modules do not?
- it are not the skillpoints, ECM is actually less SP intensive than TD or SD.
- it is also not the "caldari are meant to be the EW race". This justifies that caldari ships are more EW specialized than other races ships - which is the case, they have the only EW BS and the caldari recons have 3 boni for ECM while the other recons have only 1 boni for their EW module - not that ECM (without the ship boni) is more powerful than the other EW modules.
|
Deja Thoris
Contraband Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:35:00 -
[15]
1) ECCM is not as effective as ECM, the maths proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
2) All other mods have a pre-determined outcome within a defined situation (to a large extent) - Guns will hit and tracking disruptors will decrese turrets effectiveness etc if you are within range. ECM is however chance based.
3) ECM totally disables a ship to all practical intents and purposes. Web and scram a jammed ship and it cant control range etc etc.
Sure if we make this RL comparable then we could have more EW. I personally love to grind ISK for a shiny toy so 3 noobs with EW level 1 can kill me with one multispec.
As Hippo said, when a counter is "more of the same" it is not balanced. Your reasoning is flawed, a counter to guns is tanking btw.
Bottom line is it's not fun to fight EW heavy fleets because chance defeats skill, this is not fun.
|
FawKa
Gallente
Nova Elements
The Phantom Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:37:00 -
[16]
Because a Domi with nano's in the low - yes - all low, and 4 ECM's and a few nos can beat up every BS atm.
Saw that in some eve recorded movie for some time ago - and that was just wrong.
PVP battle is kinda based on 'if he has ECM I lose'. Try fighting on Sisi, you'll see.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=369662&page=1#10
Link to banner |
Diana Merris
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:38:00 -
[17]
Fight = Fun
ECM = no fight = no fun.
The best solution I've seen proposed so far seems to be Maya's.
|
Centurin
Sturmgrenadier Inc
R i s e
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:38:00 -
[18]
This the first time I've actually seen someone defending ECM. I fly a Domi with 3 Hypnos Multispecs and I definitely know it's overpowered.
-----------------------------------------------
"Freedom is the right of all sentient beings" - Optimus Prime |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:39:00 -
[19]
That was my quote... thanks for making it anonomous, but I tend to stand by my opinions even if they arent popular sometimes. No need for protection. :)
And this thread answers some of the questions you have, so ill just skip this discussion... been doing it before many times.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:40:00 -
[20]
Quote:
And frigs should jam BSs, especialy in squadrons? what game do you play? it isnt EVE, ONE frig can jam a BS, doesnt require squadrons of frigs, if it did then you may be on to a winner, but it DOESNT.
Right, one frig can jam a battlehsip, BUT the chance is small that it will and it won't happen often. Check out the relative strengths of EW modules and the native scan strength to determine the odds.
Quote:
ECM doesnt go far enough? are you frikkin crazy or what?
Nope. For example, one of the longstanding issues in the game is how to counter long range snipers. It's common enough that the designers are considering forcing shorter engagement ranges. 150km snipe builds could be countered if remote sensor dampeners reached out to 200km. The sniper would be unable to target at that range and would be forced to move closer DUE TO PLAYER ACTION. This would not require a broad design rework of combat ranges.
EW in this case empowers we players to counter the sniper if we fit for it. That's an advantage.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:40:00 -
[21]
Originally by: HippoKing
But then there is the issue of lock time. Let's say we reduce ECM to 5 seconds. Jamming a battleship in a cruiser suddenly becomes the I-win button because he needs to get at least 2 failed cycles in a row to even lock you and loose a shot, 3 to do any damage.
Exactly. IMO the whole "all or nothing" concept of ECM is FUBAR. It should have an completely different effect, severity determined by the ECM strength/sensorstrength relation and subject to stacking diminishing returns (just like the other EW methods, too, btw).
What it should be? Beats me. Perhaps slowing down *everything* on the other ship. shield/cap regeneration, weapon ROF, cycle times of all modules. Basically all electronic modules getting errors, decreasing their effeciency, so everything takes longer (and lasts less time) than normally.
|
CB Apollo
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:53:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Laocoon
Frigs jamming BSes.
With my skills:
Frig + caldari jammer II jamming Raven = 32% chance
Frig + caldari jammer II jamming Raven with EECM II = 16%
Frig + multispec jammer II jamming Raven = 22% chance
Frig + multispec jammer II jamming Raven with EECM II = 11%
OR:
1x caldari jammer II = 32%(Raven)
1x caldari jammer II = 16%(Raven+ECCM II)
2x caldari jammer II = 54%
2x caldari jammer II = 29%(Raven+ECCM II)
Whats the matter with that?
Please resize your signature, oh and I love you - Jacques
|
DarkElf
Caldari
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:53:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
Seriously. Ecm kills the game.
I saw this in another thread today. I don't understand where all the hate for EW is coming from. With a few exceptions every EW module in EVE has a counter module. That's balanced design.
How we choose to fit our ships is up to us. If we fit wisely and anticipate our enemy's abilities we conquer. If we fit poorly we have no one but ourselves to blame. The modules in the game are varied and balanced enough to allow this. We all have access to the same equipment. I see no fault there.
EW encourages teamwork and makes small ships competitive against larger vessels. This allows well organized newer players to be effective against the veterans. That's an advantage in game design.
So, seriously, why all the EW hate?
I haven't read all the answers here but let me explain why i feel ecm is killing the game.
The whole system of ecm in my opinion is fine and sounds great, however - it's broken
For example, my carrier with 1 best eccm has i think a sensor strength of about 140 something. After testing with a corp mate in a domi he can jam me on about half his cycles with a hypnos multi spec jammer which is supposed to only have a jamming strength of about 5. he then put 5 heavy ecm drones on me which have a strength of about 1 or something each and i was pretty much perma jammed.
Now if you know how the ecm chance system is supposed to work you'll know that this is very wrong and ccp don't seemt acknowledge this.
That for me is the issue
DE
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:54:00 -
[24]
Quote:
1) ECCM is not as effective as ECM, the maths proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Then perhaps it would be appropriate to make it so. CCP, you reading this?
Quote:
2) All other mods have a pre-determined outcome within a defined situation (to a large extent) - Guns will hit and tracking disruptors will decrese turrets effectiveness etc if you are within range. ECM is however chance based.
Turret weapons are also chance based. We can maximize their effectiveness, to be sure, but in the end it comes down to a random number check to see if the damage is applied. How is EW different?
Quote:
3) ECM totally disables a ship to all practical intents and purposes. Web and scram a jammed ship and it cant control range etc etc.
Ah, this is how EW is different. It renders the players powerless. Thanks, Deja. 
Quote:
That was my quote... thanks for making it anonomous, but I tend to stand by my opinions even if they arent popular sometimes. No need for protection. :)
Right you are, Jim. Thanks for the source.
Quote:
That is a silly comparsion.
Perhaps try something logical, like the counters of the *other* EW systems. Tracking disruptors -> tracking comps. Increase your range & tracking, your guns hit targets easier. Sensor damperners -> sensor boosters. Higher targeting range and faster locking speed.
Indeed, it was intended to be silly to encourage participation. I'm not afraid of looking goofy if it brings us closer to truth. Looks like it's working! 
|
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 15:59:00 -
[25]
Originally by: CB Apollo
Originally by: Laocoon
Frigs jamming BSes.
With my skills:
Frig + caldari jammer II jamming Raven = 32% chance
Frig + caldari jammer II jamming Raven with EECM II = 16%
Frig + multispec jammer II jamming Raven = 22% chance
Frig + multispec jammer II jamming Raven with EECM II = 11%
OR:
1x caldari jammer II = 32%(Raven)
1x caldari jammer II = 16%(Raven+ECCM II)
2x caldari jammer II = 54%
2x caldari jammer II = 29%(Raven+ECCM II)
Whats the matter with that?
Two griffins can make an ECCM fitting raven pretty near useless?
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:02:00 -
[26]
Quote:
Two griffins can make an ECCM fitting raven pretty near useless?
Or encourage the Raven pilot to bring friends to counter the Griffins. Aside from the technical limitations of the server hardware, which are considerable, anything that encourages teamwork is good in games. This is especially true in MOGs.
|
Wache Eisen
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:09:00 -
[27]
I agree with the teamwork notion. ECCM useless is your not targeted? Use a projector one to boost your buddy.
You got one or two ECM's on your frig,..chances are you'll be lucky to keep one target jammed. They have buddies with them and you'll be 'primary'taged.
I feel the same way about sniping,..I hate it! I can only guess the anti-ECM'ers feel as helpless as the anti-snipers. The answer I hear from the pro-snipers are,..get a buddy,...cloak in and warp to him,..etc,..
again,..back to 'Teamwork'
my 2isk,..
|
Tharrn
Amarr
1st Praetorian Guard
Vigilia Valeria
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:13:00 -
[28]
63 Radar strength (two named ECCMs) and jammed with a Caldari jammer. 78 Radar (2 named ECCMs) and jammed for all but one cycle in a gang fight (in fact the whole gang was jammed...)
78 Radar strength yet again and jammed consistantly until the Rook was blown up.
On the other hand I have jammed a Scorpion with a single Gallente jammer long enough to have a Curse lock it down.
There's too much luck involved really.
Now recruiting!
|
Kcel Chim
Caldari
Arcane Technologies
The Five
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:21:00 -
[29]
we have the typical problem here at hand.
Someone who seems to have no experience with ECM starts a thread and claims "ive read its overpowered, i dont agree".
Ecm is wrong in so many different ways, tons of ppl with lots of experience see it every day.
Ecm requires 3 skills and if u fit 1-2 mods on a frig you have an instant "i win" button over a ship which is 300 times as exspensive. I dont know any other mmporg where this wouldnt be considered "overpowered".
As for the "bring a friend" argument, Eve doesnt have battlegrounds. This means combat is in the majority of all cases not organized nor fair.
Like others stated the "random number" pulling doesnt work. Maybe it works in theory or it works if you compare all of eve but there are obvious streaks of luck or bad luck (which is neither a good thing), no eccm will change that or ever has (for the matter of ingame experience).
In short, its broken. If you dont believe it do your homework read 1 gazillion of threads and spend 1-2 billion isk on ships and grind some "pvp experience".
P.s. Dont forget i.e. Amarr ships who dont have mid slots to throw around for eccm mods and are handicapped with the crappy lowslot eccm stats. Its not caldari online.
|
Gaius Sejanus
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:21:00 -
[30]
Quote:
Looks like it's working
No it isn't, else you wouldn't be keeping this up.
ECM completely debilitates the target. No other module has that same function without either substantial drawbacks or the ability to avoid it. There's no avoiding ECM. You can't dodge it, you can't meaningfully outrange it, you can't defend against it (except of course to hit the other guy with ECM first, and that's no solution). Tracking disrupters are useless against missiles. Dampeners don't help you much when your target gets into blaster/AC/pulse laser range.
The counters to Tracking/Damps have benefits all on their own. ECCM is useless when you aren't subject to ECM, and even then it barely works anyway.
No ship tactic should be valid against all targets. ECM is. Therefore ECM is broken. And please stop bringing guns/launchers into this:
1) It is hardly a given that everyone will fit guns/launchers on their ship, even presuming their ship has the capability to fit guns/launchers.
2) Lots of defenses against guns/launchers. Plates, repairers, boosters, hardeners, transversal velocity, pure velocity...and of course, the more balanced versions of EWar.
You want to balance ECM? Quintuple the cap cost for using them, be rid of all targeted ECMs (bursts only), and apply a 200% scan resolution penalty to the ship using the ECM and its drones.
|
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:24:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Overpowered how? This isn't clear.
Well if it isn't clear to you it doesn't make it unclear to everyone.
---
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:48:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Wache Eisen
I agree with the teamwork notion. ECCM useless is your not targeted? Use a projector one to boost your buddy.
You got one or two ECM's on your frig,..chances are you'll be lucky to keep one target jammed. They have buddies with them and you'll be 'primary'taged.
I feel the same way about sniping,..I hate it! I can only guess the anti-ECM'ers feel as helpless as the anti-snipers. The answer I hear from the pro-snipers are,..get a buddy,...cloak in and warp to him,..etc,..
again,..back to 'Teamwork'
my 2isk,..
Irrelevant.
To repeat myself: ECM is not the only e-war module.
The whole "teamwork" issue (nevermind that it can be countered by enemy teamwork here) is not necessarily to defend vs tracking disruptors or sensor damperners.
What makes ECM so special that it justifies it being considerably more powerful than other EW modules?
|
Testicular Testes
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 16:53:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Testicular Testes on 21/08/2006 16:53:43
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
And frigs should jam BSs, especialy in squadrons? what game do you play? it isnt EVE, ONE frig can jam a BS, doesnt require squadrons of frigs, if it did then you may be on to a winner, but it DOESNT.
Right, one frig can jam a battlehsip, BUT the chance is small that it will and it won't happen often. Check out the relative strengths of EW modules and the native scan strength to determine the odds.
'Hypnos' Multispec (Sig Disp V) vs Tempest : 33% chance per roll
3x 'Hypnos' Multispec vs Tempest : 0.67 * 0.67 * 0.67 = 0.31 / 31% chance not to be jammed, or a 69% chance to be jammed per cycle.
EW chances being anywhere near fine is a complete and utter myth Even for hilariously cheap modules with low skills (Compulsive Multis with Sig Disp III), you'll get 5.29 strength per jammer - or a 22% - 29% chance to jam any BS in the game with a single disposable module.
But the low end of jamming is not the problem, as the real problem is the combination of extreme versatility (it counters guns, jamming, nossing, webbing, scrambling, tracking disrupting, sensor dampening - basicly anything except smartbombs and drones, perfectly) with aforementioned high probabilitys. Once we go into the realm of specialist EW ships, we're talking silly numbers like a 50% chance per multispectral to jam aforementioned Tempest, or a 75% chance per racial at up to 160 kilometers range (before gangbonuses).
Once you realize the power of electronic warfare in general, the powerplay becomes obvious. Sit ECM or even sensor dampening ships 150 out from the gate, throw down a bunch of dedicated tacklers (particularly webbers) at the gate. You don't ever have to engage if you don't want to, and anyone that does try to engage at odds favorable to you becomes unable to move, warp, target or do pretty much anything - infact they become indefinitely snared in every conceivable way, while you're at no risk whatsoever (your tacklers can warp out easily, particularly with EW support - your 150km support can warp out even easier).
The same problem proliferates itself in every single engagement regardless of size. The only ones that are excempt are those where 20 or more sniping battleships are present - in which case the boredome steps up a notch and we move the fight out to 200k and stuff instapops.
Snaring is generally bad though, particularly indefinite ones like EvE has. But most popular methods of snaring a target still allow it to fight back, and possibly free itself from a tackler - ECM removes that possibility nearly completely. To be fair, EW isn't ruining combat - it's removing combat and replacing it with a formality.
And attempts at romanticizing the whole endeavor as 'clever' target spoofing underhanded subtleness are not helping things - it's none of those, it's upfront and blatant complete disabling. I'm not particularly bitter about losing ships to EW - because if anything, I use alot of it. I use it because I realize the problem, and that it's the single most powerful tool in the game bar none.
|
xeom
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:04:00 -
[34]
I think ECM should have slots just like any other module in-game.Because tbh some ships need it to be viable.Tempest anyone?
CCP where are our t2 shield power relays? | ..SIN is closed.New sig coming soon! |
Rigsta
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:05:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Rigsta on 21/08/2006 17:05:32
There's some good discussion here. The problem with your argument, Tuang Pao, is that it is not based on actual PvP experience.
ECM makes you lose all your target locks and prevents you from locking anything at all. This prevents you from using any ability or module that requires a target lock - which happens to be the vast majority of combat actions and modules.
In short, ECM allows you to "switch off" an enemy target for a substantial length of time. That is broken, and the proof is that everyone and his dog is using it.
EW in general is a good idea, it adds combat variety. It's the application of the idea that is wrong.
-----------------------------------------------
CRY HAVOC! And let slip the combat drones!
To meander aimlessly towards your target...
Perhaps stopping for a picnic along the way...
And then turn |
Twilight Moon
Minmatar
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:08:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Twilight Moon on 21/08/2006 17:09:19
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Turret weapons are also chance based. We can maximize their effectiveness, to be sure, but in the end it comes down to a random number check to see if the damage is applied. How is EW different?
Turrets are not random. You have full control over them via your actions, you can change range, transversal velocity, and your optimal range all via your own actions. You can change the targets signature radius, their speed and the speed at which your own turrets track via mods.
With ECM you just press the button and hope CCP's random number generator comes up good for you.
...on the other hand using a banana might be a viable alternative.
|
Christopher Dalran
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:18:00 -
[37]
If everything is as people claim, i have one question.
Why is ECM taking all the heat for being good while ECCM is taking no heat for being bad. If no counter is the problem people have why not make ECCM better instead of nerfing ECM?
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:21:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Aramendel on 21/08/2006 17:22:33
Originally by: Testicular Testes
..Sit ECM or even sensor dampening ships 150 out from the gate, throw down a bunch of dedicated tacklers (particularly webbers) at the gate...
Won't work, at least not at those ranges. Even with max EW range skills damperners and tracking disruptors have effective ranges of about 90k (optimal + half of falloff). ECM on the caldari specced ships can reach up to 110-120 due to their ecm range bonus, other ships half that.
Still OK sniping distances, though.
Originally by: Christopher Dalran
If everything is as people claim, i have one question.
Why is ECM taking all the heat for being good while ECCM is taking no heat for being bad. If no counter is the problem people have why not make ECCM better instead of nerfing ECM?
Because it is on it's own far more effective than the other EW modules. There is nothing which justifys ECM being more powerful than TD or SD.
|
Testicular Testes
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:33:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Testicular Testes on 21/08/2006 17:34:00
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Testicular Testes
..Sit ECM or even sensor dampening ships 150 out from the gate, throw down a bunch of dedicated tacklers (particularly webbers) at the gate...
Won't work, at least not at those ranges. Even with max EW range skills damperners and tracking disruptors have effective ranges of about 90k (optimal + half of falloff). ECM on the caldari specced ships can reach up to 110-120 due to their ecm range bonus, other ships half that.
Still OK sniping distances, though.
135 km optimal per racial with max skills, before gangbonuses. Thanks for playing.
And SDs are primarily for non-EW ships, due to working perfectly fine in falloff. Quicker cycles means the occasional success simply breaks locks, and works well enough to keep them off your tacklers / your ECM Flycatcher. 3 damps per Raven, with 2 Ravens dampening at optimal + falloff will give you 3 active dampeners more often than not :)
This isn't theorycraft, it's the stuff I do and see done on a regular basis.
|
inSpirAcy
Caldari
The Solopwnmobiles
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:35:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Christopher Dalran
Why is ECM taking all the heat for being good while ECCM is taking no heat for being bad. If no counter is the problem people have why not make ECCM better instead of nerfing ECM?
It was, in a recent patch. It's still nowhere near enough; there are almost no situations where fitting your own ECM wouldn't be more effective than ECCM.
And, as already pointed out, ECCM is the only counter module that has no practical benefit by itself. Sensor boosters reduce locking time and increase locking range, tracking computers boost turret tracking and range, etc. ECCM just sits there looking pretty. Not to mention the poor ships without enough mids to fit ECCM, having to resort to the crappy low slot mods...
To me, the whole idea of ECM's devastating capability is wrong. I'd be happier if the module were thrown out of the game completely, rather than tweaked to work a little less often, counter module or none. I don't want fights based on rolling a dice.
|
HippoKing
Caldari
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:41:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Christopher Dalran
If everything is as people claim, i have one question.
Why is ECM taking all the heat for being good while ECCM is taking no heat for being bad. If no counter is the problem people have why not make ECCM better instead of nerfing ECM?
It isn't ECCM's fault. ECCM was hugely buffed, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that (as long as the chances don't become HUGELY distended) ECM will always be better, because as well as preventing the target shooting you, it ALSO prevents him ECMing you 
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 17:46:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Testicular Testes
135 km optimal per racial with max skills, before gangbonuses. Thanks for playing.
Multis are more commonly used, though, and those do have significantly reduced ranges 
If you want to jam only caldari ships racials are an option, of cource.
|
incheon
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:01:00 -
[43]
I think ECM's shouldnt 'break' a lock. They should keep your hi-slots from firing only for a the cycle. Leave everything else out of the 'ECM' curse, like drones and painters, webs,...scrams. Anything Not in a hi-slot. Leave hard 'lock breaks' to the Burst ECM with short range.
how's this? Feel free to burn the ideas down : p
|
Kurieg
Universal Manufacturing Corporation
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:04:00 -
[44]
ECM/ECCM - affect chance to jam and locking time. Due to picking up a new benefit, ECM strengths reduced 30% (or pick a new number - what chance do you think a maxxed Scorp with a T2 Multi should have to jam sensor strength 20 (average BS)? 20%? 25%?)
Note - If chance to jam was removed so that ECM/ECCM was only about locking time, I think noone uses ECM at that point.
Sensor Damps/Sensor Boosters - affect locking range only.
Now ECCM has a point aside from negating ECM. Side benefit - extreme long range sniping now takes much longer to lock since they probably can't fit all the normal stuff + ECCM for faster locks.
Then push out all the ranges on EWar so that the dedicated EW platform for each type can reach max targetting range.
|
Zeno Kang
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:06:00 -
[45]
Let's see now. I know what ECM needs to be "fixed."
WCS modules should include built-in ECCM.
|
Vikram Bedi
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:07:00 -
[46]
Originally by: xeom
I think ECM should have slots just like any other module in-game.Because tbh some ships need it to be viable.Tempest anyone?
I like this idea...
I honestly don't mind a defined ew ship being able to nearly perma-jam someone, but it just seems wrong that any old ship can also do it.
Either slots, or grossly nerf them, then give solid bonus's to the ew ships.
|
Eclipsen413
Shadows of the Dead
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:21:00 -
[47]
They should take the chance based thing out and use skills. put a new skill in the game that puts up the jamming strength of the jammer.
say i try to jam a megathron wich has 21 points of magnometric strength
if my jammer has only 7.2 jam points i SHOULDENT be able to jam that ship
there should be a skill that puts up the jam strenght for jammers.
and specialty skills for racial jammers. like magnometric jamming specialization.
__________________________________________________
you're slower than Stephen Hawking in a snow storm |
Ilya Murametz
Caldari
Hybonashi Industries
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:25:00 -
[48]
First of all, I use EW very often, i fly scorpions/blackbirds/falcons/rooks.
Ok that said, as of now this EW thing is "chance based" ...... my conclusion to that is CCP THIS CHANCE IDEA PROBABLY RANKS ON THE TOP OF THE MOST RETARTED IDEA'S EVER that made it into the game,in my book atleast.
One example... Arbitrator(non-ew platform) with one Multispectral module jamms a fecking CAPITAL SHIP (Chimera) ....are you fecking kidding me????
I'm really not sure where it all gone wrong and why the old system got changed... it worked just fine. Now here's an idea, using the above mentioned example. Chimera 80 Gravimetric, one multispec 4-5 (depends which one) so an 80 strength ships should not be COMPLETELY jammed by 4-5 strengh, how about this 80-4(5) = 76(75) in end equaling, lesser amounts of targets being able to lock by the ship getting jammed, longer to target maybe (but that would defeat the purpose of dampeners i know...) anywho fecking something.
And here's how and why it's jacked up for those who still thinks it's ok:
A Chimera carrier sitting on the front line(even though ccp made it that it can't) Carrier and fleet is ready for combat, carrier has all gang members locked so it can shield/armor/cap rep/boost them, fighters assigned. Enemy fleet warps in,opens fire, in that fleet there's ONE lonely arbitrator with ONE multispec jammer. Arbitrator breaks carries lock, which in result prevents carrier to boost anybody causing multiple ship losses due to concentrated fire from enemy fleet.
And yes,a half decently smart fleet commander would call that arbitrator primary after it's establsished that its jamming BUT carriers lock is brocked for 20 seconds, + another 20-35 seconds to lock gang member again... how many ships you think went down by now BECAUSE of that ONE arbitrator with ONE multispec... that ONE module totaly changed the out come of the entire battle.... good idea there sparkies (aka devs/gms/developers, who ever got drunk in iceland on the day that idea was made)
Hhmmm..wow, fair? so in today world we can adapt and overcome and use same tactics and not whine about it... but is it the right thing to do? 
Originally by: some nub ..aka recovering WoW person
What lvl can I PvP ?
|
Lolita Humbert
Caldari
Copasetic Joint Special Task Force
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:32:00 -
[49]
I dont know if anyone else thinks this will solve things, but personally I think that ECM should be moved to a hislot. IMHO the real problem isnt as much the highly EW specced ships jamming, as much as it is the armor tanked ravens that can jam and still put out great dps. Make it so if a ship can jam, its offensive capabilities are severely limited.
Monkeyfingers: 15 year old space hooker
Monkeyfingers: awesome. |
Arknox
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:37:00 -
[50]
Auto targetting system I :
"Targets any hostile ship within range on activation. Grants
a +2 bonus to max targets when online"
make the module so ecm doesn't affect it
in other words the ECM doesn't jam the autotargetter but it jams the ships own targeting system.
It makes a useless module usefull and it grants a bonus to the ship even when you're not jammed.
perhaps even make it low or midslot.
and remove the ECCM modules.
problem solved ?
i like beans |
Testicular Testes
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:38:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Testicular Testes
135 km optimal per racial with max skills, before gangbonuses. Thanks for playing.
Multis are more commonly used, though, and those do have significantly reduced ranges
If you want to jam only caldari ships racials are an option, of cource.
Multis on Rook/Scorpions are silly though for exactly above reasons, plus the Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar succession in threat levels, sensor strength and popularity of ships.
Multis are only great for people without range bonuses and 6+ mids.
|
Sevi Rekior
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 18:59:00 -
[52]
I demand Target painters be boosted before ECM is nerfed  . Target painters are EW too but not once have I seen it mentioned in this thread .
ECM in its current form is not perfect for sure but imo it's lightyears ahead of the old system(if you don't know what that was, just nod and agree).
What can be done to improve the current system? Tweak jamming strength, sensor strength. Alternatively (or in addition) change the effect for a succesfull roll from the current total jam to eg. jamming all active offensive modules(nos, turrets, launchers,... except for perhaps EW modules) that require a lock.
In closing... Boost Target painter
|
fmercury
Contraband Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 19:01:00 -
[53]
Here's my idea:
-ECM only prevents you from activating offensive modules while the cycle is active (guns/nos/ew), and doesn't kill your lock.
-Seed a skill, +5% or +10% to ship sensor strength per level.
There's a skill to boost almost every single attribute of your ship except sensor strength. What's the deal here?
|
Eleni Shakira
Citizens of E.A.R.T.H.
E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 19:56:00 -
[54]
ECM's problem isn't it's effectiveness, it's problem is it's proliferation. There is nearly zero reason to fly an ECM designed ship anymore when a wolfpack of regular ships can do the job faster, better, and to more targets.
I have good news, I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching from Geico to Progressive.
EARTH |
Koth Krakenworth
Minmatar
S.A.S
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 21:22:00 -
[55]
Look, it's quite simple:
Take two identical ships, say two battleships. Fit them exactly the same, with something like 3 or 4 ECM modules in the mids. Put two pilots in them, one who just barely can use the modules fitted and one that is specialized in everything, having 15m+ extra SP then the first pilot. Take them into battle. Both use exactly the same commands.
Outcome?
Usually people would say something in the line of "OFC TIS TEH BBQWTFPWNZOR PILOT WIT TEH PHAT SP, LOLZORZ!!!!111!!1!", but the fact is that the result is totally random, that this extra *year* or more of specialized character training goes out into the window because of a random factor called "luck", involved in succeeding with your ECM. This points to a very broken feature in the game, one that is taking away the fun for some people. Sure, the low sp guy would love to actually be able to win in the situation descibed above, but in truth do you really believe it is fair? When the roles are reversed, would you like to see some 3 month old character who just jumped into a battleship kill your awesome T2 fitted BS with loads of SP behind it because the first guy managed to get a few jam cycles in and you did not?
Honestly, the current ECM system discourages people from engaging in low numbers and going solo, simple because in some fights it will all be up to luck instead of skill. I liked the old system much better, more reliable and required a lot more skill from the pilots who flew ECM fitted ships. Not saying CCP should take it back, but seeing people defending the current system makes me grind my teeth, I cannot see any other argument from the defender then "the current system removes the gap between the people who lack PvP skill/SP/resources and those who have high SP and/or a lot of PvP experience as well as the equipment to make use of it", but this is just silly since this is what a multiplayer game is all about. The people who got more experience, better character skills and better equipment should not face any problems against anyone with a simular setup, lacking in those departments.
Because the current ECM system goes against this very basic principle, it is one of the currently most broken features in the game I believe, right after me not automatically recieving 10% of all ISK generated in the game.
Arrrrrrrr....
Signature: Complete Image
|
Paper Airplane
Aurum Technologies Limited
Novus Ordos Seclorum
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 21:40:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Quote:
Seriously. Ecm kills the game.
...
So, seriously, why all the EW hate?
First off you don't seem to be properly distinguishing between ECM and EW. It's important to note that most EW works fine, but ECM is overpowered.
The problem, imho, lies mostly with multispec jammers. They are one of the most powerfull modules in the game and they work in every situation.
There are so many variables to consider that giving the exact reasons as to why it is overpowered, or how to fix it, is difficult at best. However it IS overpowered...if you don't believe everyone here that is confirming that then go do a little PvP and find out for yourself.
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 23:15:00 -
[57]
Quote:
...the low end of jamming is not the problem, as the real problem is the combination of extreme versatility (it counters guns, jamming, nossing, webbing, scrambling, tracking disrupting, sensor dampening - basicly anything except smartbombs and drones, perfectly)...
Snaring is generally bad though, particularly indefinite ones like EvE has. But most popular methods of snaring a target still allow it to fight back, and possibly free itself from a tackler - ECM removes that possibility nearly completely. To be fair, EW isn't ruining combat - it's removing combat and replacing it with a formality.
And attempts at romanticizing the whole endeavor as 'clever' target spoofing underhanded subtleness are not helping things - it's none of those, it's upfront and blatant complete disabling.
Thanks, TT. That helped elaborate on the hate very clearly.
Quote:
There's some good discussion here. The problem with your argument, Tuang Pao, is that it is not based on actual PvP experience.
ECM makes you lose all your target locks and prevents you from locking anything at all. This prevents you from using any ability or module that requires a target lock - which happens to be the vast majority of combat actions and modules.
In short, ECM allows you to "switch off" an enemy target for a substantial length of time. That is broken, and the proof is that everyone and his dog is using it.
EW in general is a good idea, it adds combat variety. It's the application of the idea that is wrong.
I must disagree here, Rigsta. I do have experience with ECM. Earlier in my EVE career I flew in frigate wolf packs and EWAR, including ECM, was our principle method of disabling a dangerous foe for the takedown. It wasn't an automatic "I Win" button for the encounter because there were some instances when the wolfpack simply could not break the tank of the target before the pack ran out of cap and had to disengage. That the pack lacked enough DPS to do the job shows there were other variables in play.
I've also been the victim of ECM shutdowns, so I've seen it from both sides. That experience showed that EWAR was a tool available to everyone equally, so I didn't see the cause of all the discontent. Now I understand it better.
The issue revolves primarily around denying the player the chance to actually play in combat. No one likes to be shutdown, yet there needs to be some non-lethal way of controlling combat in EVE. If the counters to ECM were more effective, if FOF missiles were actually worth a damn, if passive targeters were immune to ECM spoofing and so on there would be more options available to us for replying to an ECM attack. Those things aren't available though so the best defense in this case is a good ECM offense.
Quote:
First off you don't seem to be properly distinguishing between ECM and EW. It's important to note that most EW works fine, but ECM is overpowered.
You are quite right. Thanks for the terminology correction.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 23:34:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
The issue revolves primarily around denying the player the chance to actually play in combat. No one likes to be shutdown, yet there needs to be some non-lethal way of controlling combat in EVE.
It's not exactly that.
Generally Tracking Disruptors and Sensor Damperners are doing effeciently the same thing. They have 2 main differences to ECM though:
- they are not universally useable (TD do nothing against a missle/droneship, dampeners are relatively ineffecient vs closerange ships)
- you usually need 2-3 to get a significant effect on enemy ships (1 IS effecting a ship heavily, but usually not enough to rely on it)
Add these 2 differences together and you will see the modules rarely used outside specialized ships and alltogether far less often than ECM.
The real problem of ECM is that it is useable universally vs all ships and that it is still quite effective even when used only with 1 module.
The "making other ships helpless" is what basically all EW modules do (not counting the minnie ones, which IMO do not really justify being called "EW modules"). The problem is that ECM is far more effective than other EW and has no ships it is weak against, resulting in an "oversaturation" of it in the game.
|
Tuang Pao
The-Wrath
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 23:41:00 -
[59]
Would it be better if the Multispec ECM module was removed from the game and we were left with only the specific ECM types to select from?
That would give us the interesting choices good game design requires, diminish ECM presence in battle and reward advance preparation. That's good play.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 23:53:00 -
[60]
It would be a start. Although wouldn't change much for RP corps (like pie) and for general PvP caldari would probably be ****** (since those are the most common ships most people would probably fit their ECM if any).
IMO the whole mechanismn is borked and needs to be reworked to something else which gives you a hard, not chancebased return just like the other EW modules.
|
Neon Genesis
Gallente
Hooligans Of War
|
Posted - 2006.08.21 23:56:00 -
[61]
The problem imo is that with the current system, you don't even have to dedicate your setup to ecm only and you can still completely disable multiple ships at once, whilst fielding an otherwise very acceptable setup in most, and in some case all, other aspects. The dominix is the worst example of this.
It's way too powerful at the moment considering it can be used effectively with such a limited sacrifice of slots.
|
Vera Nosfyu
Minmatar
Stormriders
|
Posted - 2006.08.22 00:34:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Tuang Pao
Would it be better if the Multispec ECM module was removed from the game and we were left with only the specific ECM types to select from?
That would give us the interesting choices good game design requires, diminish ECM presence in battle and reward advance preparation. That's good play.
It would be nice variation, but that isn't the problem, really. The problem is that:
A. Any (pvp) ship with spare midslots fits ECM, THIS INCLUDES SHIPS WITH BONUSES TO OTHER EW.
B. A Rook, with racial jammers, can neutralize 2-4 ships(depending on class) at any range. What other ship can do that? Curse/Lachesis can neutralize one, maybe two or three if they're very small. Don't get me started on the Huginn.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Violence solves all problems, no man, no problem." --Josef Stalin |
Tiuwaz
Minmatar
Omacron Militia
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.08.22 00:38:00 -
[63]
'buff' ecm and make it as powerful and useful as Targetpainters
Originally by: Oveur
This is not the conspiracy you are looking for.
|
Nyxus
GALAXIAN
|
Posted - 2006.08.22 02:01:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Tiuwaz
'buff' ecm and make it as powerful and useful as Targetpainters
Better yet, make them just like Tracking Disruptors - except that they only work against missile ships. 
THAT would be perfect.
Nyxus
Originally by: Tux
The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
|
The Fates
|
Posted - 2006.08.22 02:04:00 -
[65]
Quote:
The issue revolves primarily around denying the player the chance to actually play in combat.
QFT ^^
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |