EVE Search - The ECM Blog Thread

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The ECM Blog Thread

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:21:00 - [1] Linkage Discuss. _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
Kulmid Nubs. Black Reign Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:25:00 - [2] Solution: give dedicated ECM ships a role bonus, that increases jammer strength and leave the current bonus on Griffin and Blackbird...
Paigan Amarr Katsu Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:27:00 - [3] Originally by: Kulmid Solution: give dedicated ECM ships a role bonus, that increases jammer strength and leave the current bonus on Griffin and Blackbird... Thougth the same thing when reading tux' blog. Apart from that, i'm looking forward to fitting the "Jammer Damage Module" on my scorp and go on instapermajam everyone else even after the patch. Nice :D -- This game is still in beta stage
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:30:00 - [4] It is an improvement, but slightly disappointing imho. Would have hoped for a more fundamental change in the function of the module. Limiting it to EW ships will just lead to "Oh look they have a Scorp, that's no fun, let's dock" in small gangs again. I do have a suggestion to augment that change though: Make ECCM activation recalc all jamming on you, and if the jammer loses that calc, the jam is terminated. Seeing how ECCM has a faster cycle than ECM, I think this might be the feature that actually makes ECCM a viable fitting option. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Black Reign Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:32:00 - [5] Originally by: Leandro Salazar It is an improvement, but slightly disappointing imho. Dito. Also does nothing to the balance of the different EW system to each other.
Zakgram Apocalyptic Raiders Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:36:00 - [6] Edited by: Zakgram on 23/10/2006 12:38:14 The rook only has 2 low slots and the falcon has 3. To have any sort of survivability you stick a plate and repper in - and for the falcon a cap charger since for some reason the non-combat one gets an extra slot. Adding a lowslot module to de-nerf some of the strength nerf will mean that we either need to dump the plate, dump the rep, or (if on the falcon) dump the cap charger. So we either take a bigger nerf (rook) or a lesser nerf (falcon since it can fit at least 1 ecm+ module). Additionally the rook is already tank weaker than the falcon since fitting the heavy launchers means you don't have enough grid for a 1600m plate, but the falcon user doesn't generally bother with weapons so has plenty of grid and can fit the biggest plate. Hmm....
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:37:00 - [7] The issue will still be, that someone can get lucky and jam you with one jammer. You'll still have 'I lost a ship because some noob in a tard setup got lucky and permajammed me with his 1 multispec'. Thats was what really needed. Also, the aforementioned 'oh look, they have a Scorp' syndrome is still in effect, which could have done with an alteration. Also, depending on numbers, it's possible that this could turn out to be a buff to EW ships like the Scorp or Rook/Falcon. I wish we'd gotten some numbers. Scrapheap Challenge Forums
EvilNate Caldari Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:37:00 - [8] I personally don't see a problem in making a ECM ship, pure ECM. They are powerful, but if they fail at what they do, they are screwed. With the change to stabs, people flying scorps will be quite vunrable and we all know these ships go down quick. A ship like a NOS Domi packing ECCM is a real threat. Fail 1 jam on the ship and your cap will likely be gone in seconds, leaving you with no way to defend yourself. Nate.
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:37:00 - [9] I would have liked to see a way for non-racial sensor strength to be increased and taken into account, but I guess it's not to be. WTS: multispectral ECCM Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
GO MaZ No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:38:00 - [10] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Make ECCM activation recalc all jamming on you, and if the jammer loses that calc, the jam is terminated. Seeing how ECCM has a faster cycle than ECM, I think this might be the feature that actually makes ECCM a viable fitting option. I really like this idea, and the blog made me happy in the pants
EvilNate Caldari Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Zakgram The rook only has 2 low slots and the falcon has 3. To have any sort of survivability you stick a plate and repper in - and for the falcon a cap charger since for some reason the non-combat one gets an extra slot. Adding a lowslot module to de-nerf some of the strength nerf will mean that we either need to dump the plate, dump the rep, or (if on the falcon) dump the cap charger. So we either take a bigger nerf (rook) or a lesser nerf (falcon since it can fit at least 1 ecm+ module). Hmm.... Not really. If you read the blog again, the ECM changes are to the modules and ECM ships is suppose to make ships like the NOS/ECM domi weaker, cause they would need to use low slots to boost their ECM abilities to be as effective as they were before, but to make sure that the current ECM ships stay as they should be. Of course, putting ECM boosting mods will make them better, so thats always a plus. Nate.
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:40:00 - [12] Quote: Before I tell you what changes we're going to make, let's go over what's wrong with ECM to begin with. In my opinion there is not much wrong with dedicated ECM ships. They are very powerful and can lockdown multiple opponents but they are very vulnerable. RIP EvE-Online.
Gazon Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:40:00 - [13] Generally I think that is a step in the right direction. Us Amarr-only users will be stuffed, of course, but that's one of the drawbacks you take on. I'm curious to see the numbers since it would be bad if the dedicated ECM ships became even more powerful than they are now. If they have to sacrifice their tank for that, fine, but please, significantly. I mean that if a Scorp/BB/Griffin pilot wants to make sure that he can instapermajam then he must sacrifice at least 66% of his lowslots to balance the fact that he can effectively take several enemy ships out of the fight. You see that I am coming from an Amarr vs. mixed fleet, small engagement point of view. In fact, if the EW modules would depend on racial ship bonuses to be effective I'm sure we would see much more fights either without an overuse of EW or with a more balanced EW (Gallente using Dampener, Amarr Tracking Disruptors, Caldari ECM and Minmatar... err... Target Painters ). One last point: we've also tweaked the cpu need of ECCM and backup arrays a bit. Please define "tweak" Now recruiting!
MECTO	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:41:00 - [14] Originally by: Tuxford Step 1: Lower the jam strength of all ECM modules, Step 2: Increase the ship bonuses of all dedicated ECM ships, Step 3a: Create a new low slot module that boosts the jam strength of all ECM modules, Step 3b: Stacking nerf the jam strength attribute. QFT!!! very good. i was whining about it before christ was born!! GOOD CHANGES BUT NO HP CHANGES TUX WE DON'T NEED THEM Originally by: Kusotarre I am awesome in fleets, everyone on teamspeak trembles in fear as my battlecry blasts through their headphones, heralding a new era of target-less randomosity.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:41:00 - [15] Praise the lord they do listen! I always maintained that ECM strength needed nerfing with a bonus on dedicated ships! The introduction of a low-slot module is debatable though... It's not really going to spell the end for the lame Domi is it? Originally by: anonymous If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that.
Zakgram Apocalyptic Raiders Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:42:00 - [16] Originally by: EvilNate Not really. If you read the blog again, the ECM changes are to the modules and ECM ships is suppose to make ships like the NOS/ECM domi weaker, cause they would need to use low slots to boost their ECM abilities to be as effective as they were before, but to make sure that the current ECM ships stay as they should be. I did and this is the killer: Stacking nerf the jam strength attribute. When flying both my rook and falcon I have to sometimes use 3-4 modules on a bs to get it to shut down - but without any data to support how these nerfs are going to work it sounds like it's just going to make things weaker. I.e. the blog hints at changes but doesn't describe a single one in any detail, so isn't very useful for discussion purposes.
Gazon Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:45:00 - [17] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Make ECCM activation recalc all jamming on you, and if the jammer loses that calc, the jam is terminated. Seeing how ECCM has a faster cycle than ECM, I think this might be the feature that actually makes ECCM a viable fitting option. I like that idea, very good. Gives the victim a real counter chance. Now recruiting!
Colwyn	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:47:00 - [18] I would have liked to have seen Multispecs been made an ew boat only mod... Even if the sensor stregnth gets nerfed down to 1 or 2, as Testy says, it's still a chance to jam and people WILL still fit it... Dominix tank is already powerful and im sure many wouldnt mind dropping a single low slot mod for the ecm stregnth mod. It's a step in the right direcion but I do still think the whole ecm system needs a complete overhaul. Having it based on a 'dice roll' is still just a little bit too lame imho.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:49:00 - [19] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 23/10/2006 12:51:38 Originally by: Zakgram Originally by: EvilNate Not really. If you read the blog again, the ECM changes are to the modules and ECM ships is suppose to make ships like the NOS/ECM domi weaker, cause they would need to use low slots to boost their ECM abilities to be as effective as they were before, but to make sure that the current ECM ships stay as they should be. I did and this is the killer: Stacking nerf the jam strength attribute. When flying both my rook and falcon I have to sometimes use 3-4 modules on a bs to get it to shut down - but without any data to support how these nerfs are going to work it sounds like it's just going to make things weaker. I.e. the blog hints at changes but doesn't describe a single one in any detail, so isn't very useful for discussion purposes. Your recons are going to be boosted. Add a few "damage-ecm mods" and they have better jamming strengths. EWAR ships will be better EWAR. Not so much incentive to fit ECM on non-EWAR ships. I call the ECM fix an improvement. Nice one on CCP. --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind. Pax Caldaria.
Gazon Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:51:00 - [20] Originally by: Colwyn It's a step in the right direcion but I do still think the whole ecm system needs a complete overhaul. Having it based on a 'dice roll' is still just a little bit too lame imho. Somewhere I read about giving the ECM modules a minimum range meaning that a ship if it manages to close on the EW boat could just burn through the jam due to close range and lock anway. This would open quite a few tactical opportunities (have dedicated ECM killers with MWD) and necessities (Have ECM defenders with webs to intercept ECM killers). Well, just food for thought anhow :) Now recruiting!
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 12:54:00 - [21] Numbers will make or break that. In general, I think the solution is a good one. I'd go with about a 50% reduction in ECM base strength as a start point. Stacking nerf, I read that as stacking nerf on the 'ECM damage' mods. Rather than on the multiple ECMs. Not that it matters _too_ much as stacking only really starts to hurt past 3 or 4 jammers, which IMO would be a fair trade for a higher base jam strength. I'm glad they didn't _stop_ the use of ECMs on non ECM ships. That would have been a bad move. As it is, they're now _far_ less attractive than they would have been - if we use the 30% jam chance, and it's now 15%, then ... well, that becomes a debatable choice - is them firing at me for 15% of the time worth more to me than a 25% shield hardener. (Or other Ewar, or ... etc. etc.) For me, I'm just waiting to see the whinging when people start to realise that tracking disruptors or RSDs are actually more effective.
Thud Caldari Mad-Warping-Maniacs	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:00:00 - [22] Ok,thats it,srew this. I still have to use eccm on my geddon,witch hasnt enough med`s to fit em? Ok,i train minmater BS now. rip amarr I am disappointed. Is it really so hart to find another effect for ecm? Now its even more chance based "jamm or die". No fight at all, you perma jam and win without being hit one time,or you fail and die in seconds? Very exciting combat! @tux making a target helpless is not balanced and will never be! Look at TD`s,thats EW i like, it makes the target weaker,not helpless,it is still able to fight. Of course you have to find something that effects all ships,not only turret ones. But the "not able to lock anything" system will always suck. ____ ____ My english is bad.
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:01:00 - [23] Good to see that they've at least understood the problem after my continous spamming: That 1 slot used has 1/3 chance to deactivate 10 slots on the hostile - ie, ECM is very very overpowered. Really waiting for some numbers: * ECM must have at most 50% of the strength it has today * EW ships (rook, scorp, falcon, blackbird etc) must not have higher strength than they have today (when looking at skill with level 5). If these 2 holds true when we get numbers, I'm happy. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
Stanis Gallente 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:04:00 - [24] I like this. It's definatly an improvment, but why don't you cut the jamming cycle in half? Make it to be 10 sec and not 20. I believe this will help also.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:06:00 - [25] Originally by: Stanis I like this. It's definatly an improvment, but why don't you cut the jamming cycle in half? Make it to be 10 sec and not 20. I believe this will help also. 10s ECM is a massive boost to their effectiveness. Consider what that would do to relock times. Then consider what'd happen if I put a remote sensor dampener on you.
Malena Panic Gallente Acme Technologies Incorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:06:00 - [26] Originally by: Testy Mctest The issue will still be, that someone can get lucky and jam you with one jammer. Now think about how that luck will be affected by the hp boost and much longer fights.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:07:00 - [27] Originally by: dalman Good to see that they've at least understood the problem after my continous spamming: That 1 slot used has 1/3 chance to deactivate 10 slots on the hostile - ie, ECM is very very overpowered. Really waiting for some numbers: * ECM must have at most 50% of the strength it has today * EW ships (rook, scorp, falcon, blackbird etc) must not have higher strength than they have today (when looking at skill with level 5). If these 2 holds true when we get numbers, I'm happy. Mostly agreed. I don't mind much, EW ships being a bit better. Assuming the stats roll out the same, but then there's a choice of ECM damage mods, instead of armour tank, that would be acceptable in my book. Go all out ECM on that scorp, but then have absolutely no tank, rather than a couple of plates and a repper.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:09:00 - [28] Edited by: Taipan Gedscho on 23/10/2006 13:11:18 no matters what the whiners say: let tux apply his changes as he likes. let us deal with it for several months. let us get tux back to the drawing board to tweak the changes. rinse and repeat. AND PLEASE for the love of all that is holy and sexy... stop the whining, its taking overhand! (but if eccm stuff would be able to actually break a jam... i would appreciate it )
DARKKK	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:16:00 - [29] With coming WCS nerf... i'll just replace wcs to ECM "dmg mods"...
Andrea Jaruwalski Caldari S.A.S Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:33:00 - [30] You better release a mod that increases effectivness of other EW mods while you're at it. Like Dampeners. /me winks at Shin ra ☻ KR GIRLY SIDE / WTS PILGRIM + CURSE + T2 DRONES PACKS
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:35:00 - [31] Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. Let's see it first and whine later:P He managed to solve blaster problems ok. I'd like to see jammers only disabling weapons though. Especially with massive hp increase(? still in plan) it will be very hard to keep someone still.
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:38:00 - [32] Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. Why? Damps aren't changing. _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:39:00 - [33] Edited by: LUKEC on 23/10/2006 13:43:18 Edited by: LUKEC on 23/10/2006 13:41:10 Edited by: LUKEC on 23/10/2006 13:40:14 Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski You better release a mod that increases effectivness of other EW mods while you're at it. Like Dampeners. /me winks at Shin ra ☻ I was playing with damps alot lately... They are quite ballanced. They could use more range though(especially on recons). Ballance of damps = fit 3 sensor boosters(12s lock for bs on raven, lock cca 70km(damps start to fail at this range) ), ballance of ECM = fit 3 backups and still get jammed. Another thing is ... ecm mess every ship, smaller so much more, while damps fail completely on 3/4 intys (all they need to do is come closer). Hacs/bigger aren't problem, torps take care of those stupid enough to get close.
Andrea Jaruwalski Caldari S.A.S Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.10.23 13:43:00 - [34] Maybe Dampeners could use a little range increase and maybe affect max target lock on ships. Seems Tracking disrupting, Dampening, target painting will never be on par with ECM, just different usage. KR GIRLY SIDE / WTS PILGRIM + CURSE + T2 DRONES PACKS
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:03:00 - [35] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. Let's see it first and whine later:P He managed to solve blaster problems ok. I'd like to see jammers only disabling weapons though. Especially with massive hp increase(? still in plan) it will be very hard to keep someone still. The guy is bonkers. I actually think he just gets wasted all day then when its time to fix something reads the forums and picks the first thing that comes to his head (so long as it is not an amarr fix). The "problem" is not crows with multispecs or the fact all the non-caldari recons fit ecm too. The problem is its chanced based. People can win or loose because of luck on whether or not their modules work. Is this really how you envisaged pvp 3 or 4 years ago? All the other EW modules have the same problem once you go past their optimals. Should I really be able to dampner from 222km in my raven? No. The whole point of creating an "ecm dmg mod" as it were is to allow non ew ships (EG dominix/raven), to be turned into ew ships). HOLD THE PHONE Wasn't the whole reasons for the cycle jamming > Chance based system that midslots determined EW capability which was unfair for arma etc. Yet these ships usually have more lows. So why can't you change it back to something similar to what it was but have this EW dmg mod to make ships such as the arma be capable of being (limited, but effective) EW boats. Furthermore, why didn't you just do this in the first place ?
Jernau Gurgeh Gallente	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:08:00 - [36] Originally by: Shin Ra The "problem" is not crows with multispecs or the fact all the non-caldari recons fit ecm too. The problem is its chanced based. People can win or loose because of luck on whether or not their modules work. Is this really how you envisaged pvp 3 or 4 years ago? Considering that guns sometimes miss, and sometimes score wrecking hits, I'd say that the answer to your question is "yes". There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not.
Trac3rt GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:10:00 - [37] Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. Good going Tux! :rolleyes: As other people have said, the module needs to be balanced with the other EW. TDs and SDs cripple but don't completely disable the other ship while ECM is an 'I-Win' button on a ship setup to use it properly. Personally, I think the problem would be better resolved one of two ways: - Remove Multispecs completely. ECM ships have to choose which racial jammers to take, and if they pick incorrectly the jammers are about as usefull as a Tracking Disruptor on a Raven. Pilots would have to choose between specialisation in a certain race and risking being vunerable to more ships, or spreading their racials out and losing the ability to put multiple jammers on a single target. This keeps ECM more powerfull against the right targets, yet more specialised in what it works against. - Give ECM strength bonuses to specific races only. Instead of a static 20% bonus to jam strength, you would get 20% bonus to magnetometric jam strength (Gallante ships). Making ECM usefull but not 'I-Win' against some ships, and more powerfull against Gallante ships. The same way that TD's and SD's work better against some races over others. I much prefer the first suggestion over the second. ECM is fundamentally unbalanced and broken in comparison to the other EW, and limiting its use to a specific race is not addressing the core problem. ___
Loka Gallente adeptus gattacus Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:12:00 - [38] Edited by: Loka on 23/10/2006 14:13:32 Ok iam a genius and thats why i have a perfect idear for changes. How about this. We give every ship a fix amount of Sensor Strength. Then you have the ECM Modul, which will reduce your sensorstrength. Once below 0 you can lock ** :D The enemy can than fit ECCM to increas his own Sensorstrength. I know it was the old system, but at least skillbased not luckbased. what could be stayed with is this optimal and falloff thing. 100% effectiveness in optimal, decreasing strength at falloff. Jamming a BS outside optimal will be hard though. I know iam a genius. But hey what was wrong with old system, to start with? _________________________ Noob In Action - [NIA]**
Ishana Minmatar Neo Knight Errant	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:21:00 - [39] Originally by: Trac3rt Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. Good going Tux! :rolleyes: As other people have said, the module needs to be balanced with the other EW. TDs and SDs cripple but don't completely disable the other ship while ECM is an 'I-Win' button on a ship setup to use it properly. QFT _________________________________________________________
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:27:00 - [40] Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh Originally by: Shin Ra The "problem" is not crows with multispecs or the fact all the non-caldari recons fit ecm too. The problem is its chanced based. People can win or loose because of luck on whether or not their modules work. Is this really how you envisaged pvp 3 or 4 years ago? Considering that guns sometimes miss, and sometimes score wrecking hits, I'd say that the answer to your question is "yes". The tracking analogy would only work if there was a chance that your ship blew up on a successful hit. Also, it would only work if the chance to hit was absolute and you could not do anything about it. To be more precise: this analogy would only work if a 425mm Railgun had a 40% chance of killing a Raven, 20% chance of killing most other battleships, and around 80 to 100% chance of killing an interceptor. Your intuitive reaction is that "no that's pure BS", it's not. The objective of ECM is to prevent the other ship from functioning while the objective of weapons is to kill them. While the end results are very different, an analogy does not care about end results. ECM, when successful, completely removes a targeted ship from influencing the surroundings for 20 seconds. By comparison, a Dampener reduces the area of influence a ship has by about 50%. A Disruptor reduces each turret's area of influence by 50% and their chance of influence by 50%. For ECM to have X% chance of reducing influence 100% is not analogous with any of the other systems, especially considering that they have stacking penalties. Shin Ra, actually has a point. It's a matter of chance based, and you can't protect yourself against chance, you can only insulate. The old system wasn't any better, however. In that system you had 100% or 0% chance of shutting down an enemy. What is needed is partial shut down, or at the very least reduced shut down effect. For instance, ECM does not remove lock, it only removes targeted module activation. - What am I listening to?
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:30:00 - [41] They should either: o Break all active target locks or o Prevent a ship from aquiring new targets NOT BOTH!!! _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:33:00 - [42] why does ECM need to be "special"? why cant it just be as effective as other ewar mods? then we wont have to hear "omg an ecm boat!! primary it!!!!111". tux, make ecm just break peoples lock. then it will be as usefull as other ewar mods. BS needs some 8 seconds to relock, and much more on smaller targets, not even calculating time neaded for finding all your targets again in overview. this would finally make it usefull to mix different ewar ships/mods in a fleet. not just load as much ecm as possible.
MECTO	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:45:00 - [43] Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh Originally by: Shin Ra The "problem" is not crows with multispecs or the fact all the non-caldari recons fit ecm too. The problem is its chanced based. People can win or loose because of luck on whether or not their modules work. Is this really how you envisaged pvp 3 or 4 years ago? Considering that guns sometimes miss, and sometimes score wrecking hits, I'd say that the answer to your question is "yes". hes in raven Originally by: Kusotarre I am awesome in fleets, everyone on teamspeak trembles in fear as my battlecry blasts through their headphones, heralding a new era of target-less randomosity.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:53:00 - [44] Originally by: Trac3rt Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. Good going Tux! :rolleyes: As other people have said, the module needs to be balanced with the other EW. TDs and SDs cripple but don't completely disable the other ship while ECM is an 'I-Win' button on a ship setup to use it properly. No, it's gone from a module that every ship fits to get their 25% jamming chance, to a module which requires specific decisions as to whether to fit or not. The EW ships remain good at it, but ... please try and kill a battleship in a scorpion some time? Or another cruiser in a BB. Their damage output is pitifully bad. 6 highslots in a 4/4, with no damage bonus, and not enough P/G to fit a full rack anyway? So they're a tradeoff. You lose the firepower of $other_ship_in_class to get electronic warfare. Which is as it should be. Not every damn armour tanking ship, and probably most ravens out there fitting 'em, and never ever seeing scorpions in anything other than a fleet, and that only because ravens aren't all that good at 100km ranges.
Mallick	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:56:00 - [45] Quote: It seems fair to sacrifice hard defenses for electronic warfare, but this isn't really totally true. You're using a low slot when armor tanking, leaving a med slot free for electronic warfare. Tuxford is implying that ECM ships should not have poor damage output - as they sacrifice Defense and NOT Offense to fitt ECM. So, lets give the Scorpion 6 missile slots. xD
Popsikle Caffeine Commodities Company Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.23 14:56:00 - [46] Originally by: EvilNate I personally don't see a problem in making a ECM ship, pure ECM. They are powerful, but if they fail at what they do, they are screwed. With the change to stabs, people flying scorps will be quite vunrable and we all know these ships go down quick. A ship like a NOS Domi packing ECCM is a real threat. Fail 1 jam on the ship and your cap will likely be gone in seconds, leaving you with no way to defend yourself. Nate. TBH, the problem with this is diversity. Right now, being a scorp pilot is bad, because we get called primary all the time. It leave no imigination for what ship does what, who is ecm, who is dps, ect. I think we need MORE diveristy, not less. __________________________________________ -= We Fly for our people =- -= I fly for Blood =-
Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:01:00 - [47] http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=413947&page=1
Enortiz	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:01:00 - [48] Originally by: Thud Ok,thats it,srew this. I still have to use eccm on my geddon,witch hasnt enough med`s to fit em? Ok,i train minmater BS now. rip amarr I am disappointed. Is it really so hart to find another effect for ecm? Now its even more chance based "jamm or die". No fight at all, you perma jam and win without being hit one time,or you fail and die in seconds? Very exciting combat! @tux making a target helpless is not balanced and will never be! Look at TD`s,thats EW i like, it makes the target weaker,not helpless,it is still able to fight. Of course you have to find something that effects all ships,not only turret ones. But the "not able to lock anything" system will always suck. Originally by: Nahia Senne why does ECM need to be "special"? why cant it just be as effective as other ewar mods? then we wont have to hear "omg an ecm boat!! primary it!!!!111". tux, make ecm just break peoples lock. then it will be as usefull as other ewar mods. BS needs some 8 seconds to relock, and much more on smaller targets, not even calculating time neaded for finding all your targets again in overview. this would finally make it usefull to mix different ewar ships/mods in a fleet. not just load as much ecm as possible. qft
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:02:00 - [49] Edited by: James Lyrus on 23/10/2006 15:03:05 Originally by: Nahia Senne why does ECM need to be "special"? why cant it just be as effective as other ewar mods? then we wont have to hear "omg an ecm boat!! primary it!!!!111". Out of interest, have you looked at how effective RSDs and tracking disruptors are? They're not a trivial module to fit for a straight 25% jamming rate, but when used right they're utterly deadly. They're a little less directly effective, but the 100% success rate (ok, within optimal I'll grant you) means they're a lot better for complementing a well thought out combat tactic. A TD II drops optimal and tracking by 50%. An RSD II drops locking speed and locking range by 50%. That's just one module, rather than needing 4 or more ECMs. ECCMs will remain as effective, but will be less of a 'must have' module, because not every ship you see, ever will be running ECMs
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:09:00 - [50] Edited by: welsh wizard on 23/10/2006 15:13:30 Originally by: Shin Ra The problem is its chanced based. I'll have to disagree here Shin. In my eyes the biggest problem with ECM is that you can fit it on any ship you want and maintain the modules usefulness to the full extent of your skills. Frigates shouldn't fit modules like this, its stupid. Theres going to be a split in opinion here but this is definitely an improvement. The game needs ships that fill specific roles. I think current jamming ships should be as effective as they are now at jamming and none ECM ships should have their ability to jam reduced significantly. I'm a bit dubious about this low-slot module especially if it can be put on ECM ships to increase their jam strength, that sounds a bit overpowered. You can spare a low on most Domi setups also so it doesn't properly deal with lame setups. If you want to jam your opponent you bring a jamming ship. Originally by: Nahia Senne why does ECM need to be "special"? why cant it just be as effective as other ewar mods? then we wont have to hear "omg an ecm boat!! primary it!!!!111". I don't see the problem with this. I think removing the obvious danger ships first adds alot tactically to every battle. We're in danger of falling into an 'every ship is too similar' scenario as it is. Uniqueness is what this game should be about, if you want to jam, bring a jamming ship. If you don't want to be jammed, fit the relevant modules which do work contrary to popular belief. Originally by: anonymous If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that.
Blind Man Caldari 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:19:00 - [51] Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. agreed
DeadDuck Amarr DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:24:00 - [52] So if I'm not wrong we are talking about 4 dedicated ecm ships that will be better at what they do: Blackbird Griffin Rook Falcon The others will loose a lot of the advantages that they had untill now. If I'm not wrong the other ships (thinking on the curse, dominix, ishtar, etc..., all the non ECM ships but with a lot of mid slots to spare) will loose a lot of the advantages they had untill now. It's a nerf anyway... and the future situation will be a lot better then the present status.
Simon Illian Caldari Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:31:00 - [53] curse don't have a bonus to EW (aka TD) ? -\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/ When you need a mad man, call me i'me ready to serve ! -\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/-\_/null
Tharrn Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:33:00 - [54] Sticking to ships of your own race becomes less and less viable unless you are Caldari :( Now recruiting!
starship enginer	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:41:00 - [55] Originally by: Ishana Originally by: Trac3rt Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. Good going Tux! :rolleyes: As other people have said, the module needs to be balanced with the other EW. TDs and SDs cripple but don't completely disable the other ship while ECM is an 'I-Win' button on a ship setup to use it properly. QFT QFT QFT so now if the ECM dmg mod thing gives lets say 25% one times rook with amarr jammer 7.21.251.5*1.25 = 16.875 100% chance of jamming a geddon att the time WOOT FOR THE NERF TUX U THE MAN, giving caldari ecm boats a dam BOOST!!! just give us 2 skills which up our dam ships ECM strength by 10% each FFS the ecm nerf was actually sometime i was gona use to consider returning to eve but this changes very little, only that now caldari can still wtf own you with ecm rather than all 4 races. NERF ECM DAMMIT
DeadDuck Amarr DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:43:00 - [56] Originally by: Simon Illian curse don't have a bonus to EW (aka TD) ? Step 2: Increase the ship bonuses of all dedicated ECM ships I think this exclude all the EW ships except the ECM ones.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Black Reign Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:44:00 - [57] Originally by: James Lyrus Out of interest, have you looked at how effective RSDs and tracking disruptors are? They're not a trivial module to fit for a straight 25% jamming rate, but when used right they're utterly deadly. They're a little less directly effective, but the 100% success rate (ok, within optimal I'll grant you) means they're a lot better for complementing a well thought out combat tactic. A TD II drops optimal and tracking by 50%. An RSD II drops locking speed and locking range by 50%. That's just one module, rather than needing 4 or more ECMs. And what exactly will 1 module do? Due to range limitations you cannot use TDs effeciently past 70 km or SD past 50 km. With 1 damperner on it a BS (which has no sensor booster fitted, mind you) will have about 50 km locking range. The effect is nil exept a longer lockingtime. For a really disabling effect, which consists of getting the targetting range below the magic 20 km warp disruptor range, you will need at least 3 damperners on a non-specialized ship or 2 on a gal recon (assuming the target BS has no sensor boosters). And vs frigs (where 1 ECM module is plenty to jam them it is only effective vs setups like a longrange crow or crusader. If you want to get very close anyway you do not care if you have only 2 km lockingrange. For the same reason it is only of limited use vs any shortrange ACs or blaster cruisers and BSs. The same applies on tracking disruptors. You need to stack them to get a disabling effect and ACs and blasters and frigs in general are not hurt too much by it. And of cource missles are not effected at all.

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:44:00 - [58] Originally by: Blind Man Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. agreed TomB never went anywhere. He's the lead game designer and every single change I make is sanctioned by him. Not only because he is lead game designer but also because I have tremendous respect for him. I don't run it only by TomB either I talk to Hammerhead and Oveur as well. _______________

Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:45:00 - [59] Guys, for the love of god stop the personal attacks :/ _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
inSpirAcy The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:47:00 - [60] I'm going to agree with Shin here. These changes are more than welcome and will definitely improve the situation (if implemented correctly) but the chance-and-full-disable system is still fundamentally broken. If there's no desire to fix that then I'm just going to avoid fights with ECM boats full stop.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:51:00 - [61] ONE thing that boggles me all the time: people are complaining about the system being chance based and all... isn't a big part of drone/turret damage also chance based? and when we're talking 'bout wrecking hits this becomes a real big issue. am i right there, or did i miss something?
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:53:00 - [62] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho ONE thing that boggles me all the time: people are complaining about the system being chance based and all... isn't a big part of drone/turret damage also chance based? and when we're talking 'bout wrecking hits this becomes a real big issue. am i right there, or did i miss something? Yes, the fact that a turret doesn't have a 30% chance of taking someone out of the fight for 20+ seconds. _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
inSpirAcy The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.10.23 15:55:00 - [63] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho isn't a big part of drone/turret damage also chance based? and when we're talking 'bout wrecking hits this becomes a real big issue. am i right there, or did i miss something? It's all about granularity and polarisation. A turret will fire many, many times during a fight as will a drone. The average damage dealt in each fight, assuming even resists, will be roughly the same. Hit quality can also be influenced through many different factors, partly fitting and partly maneouvering. ECM has a much, much longer cycle than the RoF of most weapons and its success rate is only affected by signal strength. The effects of a poor hit are also far less polarised than a failed ECM cycle.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:01:00 - [64] Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind. Pax Caldaria.
Instagib Amarr Reykjavik University Corpus Maximus	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:04:00 - [65] Ugh.. trying to get some feeling for this.. If the current system is.. Normal ships: Multi: 4.81.25 = 6.0 Racial: 7.21.25 = 9.0 5% ECM ships: Multi: 4.81.251.25 = 7.5 Racial: 7.21.251.25 = 11.25 10% ECM ships: Multi: 4.81.251.5 = 9.0 Racial: 7.21.251.5 = 13.5 Now for some pure imaginary numbers.. Lets say they.. 1) Half the ECM strength 2) Double the strength of ECM bonuses on ships that already have them 3) Give BB and Griffin 5% ECM bonus (maybe 10% for BB) 4) Create a ECM low slot mod that boosts strength by 50%, lets call it EMOD Then we would have something like.. EMOD multipliers (stacks) 0x EMOD = 1 = 1.0x 1x EMOD = 1(1+.51) = 1.5x 2x EMOD = 1(1+.51)(1+.5.87) = 2.15x 3x EMOD = 1(1+.51)(1+.5.87)(1+.5.57) = 2.77x 4x EMOD = 1(1+.51)(1+.5.87)(1+.5.57)(1+.5.28) = 3.15x Normal no bonus ships: 0x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.25.51.0 = 3.0 1x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.25.51.5 = 4.5 0x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.25.51.0 = 4.5 2x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.25.52.15 = 6.45 1x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.25.51.5 = 6.75 3x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.25.52.77 = 8.31 2x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.25.52.15 = 9.68 3x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.25.52.77 = 12.47 5% ECM ships (e.g. Griffin, maybe BB) 0x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.25.51.0 = 3.75 1x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.25.51.5 = 5.63 0x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.25.51.0 = 5.63 2x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.25.52.15 = 8.06 1x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.25.51.5 = 8.44 3x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.25.52.77 = 10.39 2x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.25.52.15 = 12.09 3x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.25.52.77 = 15.58 10% ECM ships (e.g. Scorp, maybe BB) 0x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.5.51.0 = 4.5 1x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.5.51.5 = 6.75 0x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.5.51.0 = 6.75 2x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.5.52.15 = 9.68 1x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.5.51.5 = 10.13 3x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.251.5.52.77 = 12.47 2x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.5.52.15 = 14.51 3x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.251.5.52.77 = 18.70 20% ECM ships (e.g. Rook/Falcon) 0x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.252.0.51.0 = 6.0 1x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.252.0.51.5 = 9.0 0x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.252.0.51.0 = 9.0 2x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.252.0.52.15 = 12.90 1x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.252.0.51.5 = 13.5 3x EMOD, Multi: 4.81.252.0.52.77 = 16.62 2x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.252.0.52.15 = 19.35 3x EMOD, Raical: 7.21.252.0.52.77 = 24.93 Again just some random imaginary numbers, I think they show the concept works at least works. Nerfing single ECM, no bonus ships, while making dedicated ECM ships even stronger... ugh.. well maybe not the best numbers I picked
Ituralde Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:05:00 - [66] So, in other words, since ECM is too good, lets restrict it (at least multispecs) to ECM ships that are... you guessed it, all Caldari. Not too bad in concept but really not a viable fix. I might mention that ECM is the biggests wild card for the ACpest and that should probably be looked at... Fear is the mind-killer.
Chronus26 Gallente Dark Blood Contracts	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:05:00 - [67] Exactly what I was hoping for in a fix, it's the simplest way and requires no serious new feature implementation which means less chance for new bugs to slip into the system. Which Is good. Yup. ----- Move along, nothing to see here...
Octavio Santillian Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:09:00 - [68] Originally by: Trac3rt Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. ... QFT There are two problems with ECM: 1) the absolutely crushing devastation of its effect, 2) and to a lesser extent the degree to which it is chance based. The way I see it, ships that can afford to fit ECM will still do so after the fix because the effect of ECM is completely overpowering. So we will have is a situation were fitting become even less interesting because people who can afford to sacrife even more slots to ECM will do so, and those who can't afford to fit ECM will be totally, and I mean totally screwed! You want a true ECM solution. Make ECM a dedicated module like a cove ops cloak, and give every race at least 1 dedicated ECM ship in the three primary classes (i.e. frigate, cruiser, and BS). The Caldari can keep their ECM recons to give them a slight ECM edge. ItÆs just that simple. Another option is to change the effect of ECM so that it only breaks existing locks, thus forcing opponents to relock. This way ECM is more powerful when mixed with dampeners and ECCM is more powerful when mixed with sensor boosters. IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F&@ing Caldari boost. ôWeÆre not doing for ISK...........WeÆre doing it for a ***load of ISK!ö
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:13:00 - [69] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 23/10/2006 16:13:22 Originally by: Octavio Santillian IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F&@ing Caldari boost. It is called, side-effects. Not Caldari's fault. --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind.* Pax Caldaria.
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:15:00 - [70] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. I like it. A lot. I am still sacrificing a slot or 2 but at least then I could shoot back. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:18:00 - [71] Give caldari target painters (because they're excellent with missiles) and make ECM Minmatar (because we wouldn't mind having a defensive form of EW, at least for a couple of months). _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
Octavio Santillian Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:21:00 - [72] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 23/10/2006 16:13:22 Originally by: Octavio Santillian IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F&@ing Caldari boost. It is called, side-effects. Not Caldari's fault. Never said it was the Caldari's fault. They are just the beneficiary. ôWeÆre not doing for ISK...........WeÆre doing it for a ***load of ISK!ö
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:22:00 - [73] No no no. The problem with ECM is not jammer strength. It's the fact that a single non-EW frigate has a random chance to jam the BS, rendering it completely useless for 20 seconds (imagine what happens in a fleet battle in 20 seconds). It completely negates the use for any modules increasing the sensor strength, cause that chance is absolutely random and no matter what your sensor strength is, after the jamming succeeds, you are sitting duck. Why not make jammers have the same penalty as firing larger missiles at faster/smaller ships, but in reverse? Right now, if you fire larger missiles at smaller ships, the smaller ship takes a reduced damage. The rationale is: "if you want to hit smaller ships, fit smaller launchers or field a smaller ship" Have the same in reverse for jammers: if you want to render a bigger ship useless through jamming, field a bigger ship. How to make it work? Leave the jamming chance as is, but change the duration of being jammed to depend on the sensor strength of the jammer and the ship being jammed. So - If a frigate jams a frigate, the jammed duration is 20 seconds (no change) - If a frigate jams a cruiser, the jammed duration is 10 seconds (because the cruiser has higher sensor strength than the frigate) - If a frigate jams a battleship, the jammed duration is only 5 seconds (cause the battleship has a high sensor strength) - If a BS jams a frigate, the jammed duration is 20 seconds (no change, cause the BS has overpowering sensor strength) - If a cruiser jams a frigate, the jammed duraction is 20 seconds (no change again, cause the cruiser has overpowering sensor strength). Now dont forget that the above will be offset by the relocking times. In a Frigate vs Battleship, even though the BS is only jammed for 5 seconds, it will have a high penalty cause it will take it long time (5-15 seconds) to relock the frigate. However in a fleet situation, if the above Battleship gets jammed by a small frigate, it can quickly recover (5 seconds) and continue fleet fighting within 2-3 seconds it would take to lock other fleet battleships. This way, small ships can still hinder bigger ship's electronics. But considering that bigger ships have more powerful electronics, they recover quicker. So if you want to efficiently jam an enemy BS, you need to bring your own EW-dedicated BS. Similarly, EW-dedicated smaller ships can have a bonus to the jamming duration (upto the maximum of 20 seconds). This does not change the ECM's defensive role. Whether you are a hauler, frigate or a BS, you still have the same chance to break the enemy's lock and get away. This will however stop the absurd of small frigates rendering bigger ships (with more powerful and sophisticated electronics) useless for too long in fleet encounters p.s. the number above are only for example. If this is to be implemented, it will be by comparing the sensor strengths between ships =================================== Above comments are my personal views, and do not represent my corporation or alliance, unless otherwise indicated
Kunming Amarr adeptus gattacus Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:24:00 - [74] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. I like this idea, also makes sense to train up targeting skill and multi-tasking skill high up for ppl that dont see a point in them.. like me
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:28:00 - [75] Quote: IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F*&@ing Caldari boost. I f-ing wish.. This probably just killed Caldari ECM.. ECM gets lowered, the ship gets bonuses, and you get a low slot mod to boost ECM to get it all back to where it is now??.. Umm.. Caldari don't have low slots to spare.. They have fewer lows than any other race, and those lows are generally used for fitting.. Ouch.. Gonna wait to see how this turns out, but my guess is that Caldari just got their gonads stomped on.. Glad I switched over to Gallente..
ProphetGuru Gallente Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:29:00 - [76] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Now that has potential. Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
Tsar Maul	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:29:00 - [77] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Just because I don't post as often doesn't mean you can steal my ideas ;)
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:44:00 - [78] Originally by: Tsar Maul Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Just because I don't post as often doesn't mean you can steal my ideas ;) I did not steal. Might have come from somewhere. If it is yours, thank you. If not, geniuses think alike. :) --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind. Pax Caldaria.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:45:00 - [79] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 23/10/2006 16:49:52 Originally by: Trac3rt Edited by: Trac3rt on 23/10/2006 14:16:01 So ECM has gone from an overpowered broken module that everyone can use, to a broken overpowered module that only the Caldari can use, and will get an EW 'damage mod' lowslot module to make them even more broken and overpowerd. Good going Tux! :rolleyes: As other people have said, the module needs to be balanced with the other EW. TDs and SDs cripple but don't completely disable the other ship while ECM is an 'I-Win' button on a ship setup to use it properly. Quoted for truth. These changes just screw over the other EW ships, tempests, and other ships because: a. ecm is better than a shield tank because shield tanking sucks b. other EW is less effective because it doesnt break lock/work on everything c. sigh... caldari FTW AGAIN Pidgeon-holing modules into distinct ships is a BAD IDEA. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. I like this idea very much. Originally by: Ituralde So, in other words, since ECM is too good, lets restrict it (at least multispecs) to ECM ships that are... you guessed it, all Caldari. Not too bad in concept but really not a viable fix. I might mention that ECM is the biggests wild card for the ACpest and that should probably be looked at... Yep... Originally by: Octavio Santillian Another option is to change the effect of ECM so that it only breaks existing locks, thus forcing opponents to relock. This way ECM is more powerful when mixed with dampeners and ECCM is more powerful when mixed with sensor boosters. IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F*&@ing Caldari boost. The rest of your post is stupid but I agree with this idea above. This change, simply put, solves the "problem" of ECM on non-caldari ships, which isnt a problem, except that ECM as a whole is overpowered. Restricting an overpowered module to just one race is ridiculous. Fix ECM, don't restrict it. I suggest: a. Make ECM only break locks, combine with damps for winnage b. somehow make ECM not effective on some targets (like damps/TDs are atm) c. use jenny's ECCM suggestion above d. remove multispecs Oh yeah. ECM 'damage mods' are a bad idea.
inSpirAcy The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:47:00 - [80] Originally by: ProphetGuru Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Now that has potential. I like it, although it's a huge swing in the other direction for small gang fights. When there's proportionally less targets to lock, you waste less time relocking them with ECM upon you. Which is, perhaps, not even a bad thing.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:48:00 - [81] Edited by: Cmdr Sy on 23/10/2006 16:51:58 Originally by: Tuxford Step 1: Lower the jam strength of all ECM modules, Step 2: Increase the ship bonuses of all dedicated ECM ships, Step 3a: Create a new low slot module that boosts the jam strength of all ECM modules, Step 3b: Stacking nerf the jam strength attribute. Step 1 must apply a reduction large enough that fitting a pair of ECM damage mods to a ship without a strength bonus, does not return the jam strength of an ECM module to anywhere near current strength and effectiveness. Otherwise, people will still fit ECM to Ravens, plate them, laugh at their new hitpoint increase, and add a pair of ECM damage mods to restore much of their previous functionality. Other ships with a good balance of mids and lows (eg Dominix) may also find that plates > repairers in the new long fights, and set up for pure hitpoint endurance and maximising jam strength rather than active tank. What you then have is once again, a class of non-ECM specialised ships which are unassailable solo. The idea has potential, but when considering all the delicate balancing you do between these four factors, please get Steps 1 and 3 right. Otherwise everyone with no mids to spare is even more stuffed.
MyOwnSling Gallente RONA Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:52:00 - [82] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. The problem I see with this is that it makes ecm useless in a 1v1 fight. You will never be able to jam the enemy, completely rendering your ecm mod useless. ----------
LoKesh Amarr InQuest Ascension Vertigo Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.23 16:54:00 - [83] Originally by: Old Geeza Originally by: Taipan Gedscho ONE thing that boggles me all the time: people are complaining about the system being chance based and all... isn't a big part of drone/turret damage also chance based? and when we're talking 'bout wrecking hits this becomes a real big issue. am i right there, or did i miss something? Yes, the fact that a turret doesn't have a 30% chance of taking someone out of the fight for 20+ seconds. No... a turret just removes someone from the fight permanently.
Chode Rizoum Minmatar Finite Horizon	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:03:00 - [84] Edited by: Chode Rizoum on 23/10/2006 17:03:25 Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Blind Man Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. agreed TomB never went anywhere. He's the lead game designer and every single change I make is sanctioned by him. Not only because he is lead game designer but also because I have tremendous respect for him. I don't run it only by TomB either I talk to Hammerhead and Oveur as well. just ignore does *****ers.. and look at my nidhoggur edit: why is c rackers profanity
MyOwnSling Gallente RONA Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:04:00 - [85] Just to clarify, the ecm jam is not based on a "random chance". It is based on a probability that is dictated by the respective strengths of ecm mods and sensor strengths. If the chance to jam were truly random, then there would be no point in equipping jammers that have higher strengths. ----------
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:07:00 - [86] Edited by: Shin Ra on 23/10/2006 17:07:14 Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Blind Man Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. agreed TomB never went anywhere. He's the lead game designer and every single change I make is sanctioned by him. Not only because he is lead game designer but also because I have tremendous respect for him. I don't run it only by TomB either I talk to Hammerhead and Oveur as well. Dude, seirously. Its not in your job description to be liked by us. 3 Major issues have come out of your proposed changed and you have commented on none of them 1) Amarr omgwtf! 100 page thread and all you said is "I don't play amarr" or something that I suspect was supposed to be a joke but was certainly not funny to anyone who fits a laser. There are far to many problems, many of which I don't even know about, but they are certainly the weakest race right now. 2) ECM is still broken. People do not like the chanced based element (and its a different kind of chance based element from guns). There are loads of options and suggestions out there (ala TomB's EW thread a while back). This change will NOT make the problem go away. It will mask part of the problem and create a whole host of other problems. Also, you don't mention EW drones. How will they be affected? 3) HP increased. I totally forgot what I was gonna rant about here, but it was good. Oh yeah and the minmatar carriers suck. Anyway my point: Listen to people, and acknowledge their points even if you don't intend to change it. Let them know whats going on. Rather than saying: This will change to X etc. There is a problem with x. Currently people x. This causes y. So we are changing x to z in an attempt to stop y for occuring. We realise this will not stop y completely and welcome ideas and comments regarding possible side-effects. If you think you have discovered a problem or serious side effect, please post on abc thread. If we can understand your reasoning a bit better, then we more easily point out areas you may have missed. Shin Ra P.S FFS spend just 1 hours this week reading the amarr thread and come up with a decent kind of reply.
Attak Trioptimum Storm Armada	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:12:00 - [87] Kudos to Tux for not ignoring the problem, and the fix is a step in the right direction. I was kinda hoping for something more creative though, but then balancing(ha!) becomes even more difficult. My only request is, make the lowslot ECM mod work for all EW types? As in, boost range for ECM, damps, TP's, ect.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:13:00 - [88] I don't think that I could be more disappointed. As I see it, the issue with ECM is that it breaks locks, and that at the same time so many modules need a lock to perform. Even so many modules that do not require a lock are absolutely useless without one: tracking computers for instance. As long as EW messes with the ability to lock, no matter the chance, the penalties, and the side effects, it's going to a problem game-play wise. I can't add anything I haven't posted ten times in the pasts months already so I'll leave it as it is, and finally train caldari BS V before torp V. NB. In Rust We Trust
Malvahne Amarr Wulong Mercenaries	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:21:00 - [89] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Props to this solution, it has my vote.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:39:00 - [90] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Possible issue, in a fleet fight where everyone only has Primary and Secondary locked at any one time, fitting a mid-slot ECCM module will render ships immune to jamming. We don't want ECM to get a WCS style countermeasure. Or perhaps I have completely misunderstood your idea.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:40:00 - [91] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Right. So if you are in an ECM ship you are f-d. All your opponents just unlock every target except you. Congratulations! You're now primary and your ECM is useless to stop people. Bye bye. How is that "shoot but not effectively"?? Seems more like a death sentence for BBs. Bad solution. Think it through. You'd need to make ALOT more changes to have something like that work.
inSpirAcy The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:46:00 - [92] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Right. So if you are in an ECM ship you are f-d. All your opponents just unlock every target except you. Congratulations! You're now primary and your ECM is useless to stop people. Bye bye. How is that "shoot but not effectively"?? Seems more like a death sentence for BBs. ECM + damp = win. Why do you think ECM ships are made primary so quickly, anyway? Because they have the potential to utterly devastate an entire fleet in incredibly small numbers at incredibly long distances. Take away their devastating effects and you increase the value in taking out damage dealers over EW ships. I like this idea because it actually tries to address the fundamental problems with ECM, rather than tweaking numbers to reduce its impact a little. Come up with a better one and I might like yours, too.
Darpz Rampage Eternal	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:53:00 - [93] so is this effecting Jammers only or all ECM (Damps painter and Tracking rupters)
Gabriel Karade Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents	Posted - 2006.10.23 17:56:00 - [94] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Can boost two anti-ecm mods along? Backup array (low slot) - Guaranteed to give 1 target lockable when jammed when module is fitted. ECCM (mid slot) - Guaranteed to give 2 targets lockable when jammed when module is active. If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. I like that idea, I for one would certainly consider trading firepower/tank for the ability to lock at least 1 target. ---------- - Office Linebacker -
xenodia Gallente RONA Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:06:00 - [95] Originally by: Leandro Salazar It is an improvement, but slightly disappointing imho. Would have hoped for a more fundamental change in the function of the module. Limiting it to EW ships will just lead to "Oh look they have a Scorp, that's no fun, let's dock" in small gangs again. True, but at least you cant turn a ship into a solopwnmobile by fitting 1 ECM mod. Drone ships will come back to earth a bit in 1 on 1 fighting. This signature space for rent
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:16:00 - [96] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Right. So if you are in an ECM ship you are f-d. All your opponents just unlock every target except you. Congratulations! You're now primary and your ECM is useless to stop people. Bye bye. How is that "shoot but not effectively"?? Seems more like a death sentence for BBs. Bad solution. Think it through. You'd need to make ALOT more changes to have something like that work. I do not understand you. I said, if you are jammed and you fit counter-mods, you will be able to maintain minimum lock. All other targets are randomly lost until a relock or train multitasking skills to minimise ECM effect. You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. You can still shoot but not effectively. Primary and Secondary also have chances to live longer in fleets or fights. ECM based on probabilities are good. ECCM are also useful. Tux's review on ECM is good but should also buff ECCM mods and make some advanced targetting skills useful. --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind. Pax Caldaria.
Tsar Maul	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:20:00 - [97] When I suggested all this months ago I was ignored
Il Reverendo Minmatar	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:21:00 - [98] Originally by: Shin Ra The problem is its chanced based. The whole point of creating an "ecm dmg mod" as it were is to allow non ew ships (EG dominix/raven), to be turned into ew ships). HOLD THE PHONE Wasn't the whole reasons for the cycle jamming > Chance based system that midslots determined EW capability which was unfair for arma etc. Yet these ships usually have more lows. So why can't you change it back to something similar to what it was but have this EW dmg mod to make ships such as the arma be capable of being (limited, but effective) EW boats. Originally by: Shin Ra 3 Major issues have come out of your proposed changed and you have commented on none of them 1) Amarr omgwtf! 100 page thread and all you said is "I don't play amarr" or something that I suspect was supposed to be a joke but was certainly not funny to anyone who fits a laser. There are far to many problems, many of which I don't even know about, but they are certainly the weakest race right now. 2) ECM is still broken. People do not like the chanced based element (and its a different kind of chance based element from guns). There are loads of options and suggestions out there (ala TomB's EW thread a while back). This change will NOT make the problem go away. It will mask part of the problem and create a whole host of other problems. Also, you don't mention EW drones. How will they be affected? 3) HP increased. I totally forgot what I was gonna rant about here, but it was good. Oh yeah and the minmatar carriers suck. Anyway my point: Listen to people, and acknowledge their points even if you don't intend to change it. Let them know whats going on. Shin Ra's hit the nail on the head.
Veryez	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:27:00 - [99] Well that's a first, I actually agree w/Jenny. The ECCM boost is a good idea. Also the changes to ECM are a very good step in the right direction. If anyone really thinks ECM ships are overpowered, then train up for them and fly them for a while. No offense and very limited tank, not to mention using almost all your cap to run ECM (and very little else). Oh and add to the fact that you are always primary - period. Sad the blackbird is getting gimped by this - it use to be a good ship to fly. But as was stated before, non-ECM ships using ECM was abused and needed to be changed. Will be interesting when the numbers come out.
OrangeAfroMan Suffoco Noctis Atrocitas	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:29:00 - [100] ECCM should kick in and have like a 40% chance to turn the jam around on the jammer if you get jammed.... I do find the change to be a bit... underwhelming btw :/ Oh wellz, adjust and adapt Gronsak is Tux's angry alt.
Wheya Amarr Bruderschaft des Wahrhaftigen	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:30:00 - [101] Edited by: Wheya on 23/10/2006 18:31:58 Originally by: Naughty Boy I don't think that I could be more disappointed. As I see it, the issue with ECM is that it breaks locks, and that at the same time so many modules need a lock to perform. Yes, I was hoping for so much more as well. Reducing the ECM strength and adding a low slot EW upgrade is one small step into the right direction but by far not that what I was hoping for. Like Naughty Boy I would like to see that ECM would not break looks but would disable high slots only. - this way the opponent still would have a chance to use his ecm as well instead of the 'first lock, first jamm = win' duel - this way scramblers still would work. ECM too many times was misused as wcs. - this way the activation times of ECM could get a overhaul, making shorter periods and therefore more 'fair' results possible. 20 seconds jamming + relocking time is too many times either win or loose (this is valid for the jammer and the jammers victim). A short activation time of ECM which would stop the timer on high slot modules for a few seconds is what I was hoping for. As others RPers already pointed out ECM is only another disadvantage for those who are so predictable because everyone knows they are flying only ships of one race. Roleplay should not be punished by game mechanics. It should be encouraged. PvP can become very frustrating if almost everybody fits racial jammers against you. ECM is too powerfull on small ship and it's too powerfull against small ships. I was hoping for ship sized EW.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:37:00 - [102] Originally by: inSpirAcy Why do you think ECM ships are made primary so quickly, anyway? Because they have the potential to utterly devastate an entire fleet in incredibly small numbers at incredibly long distances. Take away their devastating effects and you increase the value in taking out damage dealers over EW ships. Err.. Take away their devastating effects and all you have is a ship with no tank, lackluster damage potential, and acts as nothing more than the warm-up target for your opponents.. All ECM pilots (should) understand that they are primary targets - that's a given.. However, they should also have the ability to defend themselves.. For EW ships their ECM is both their weapon and their defense.. Jenny's ECCM idea completely deprives them of that defense.. Originally by: inSpirAcy I like this idea because it actually tries to address the fundamental problems with ECM, rather than tweaking numbers to reduce its impact a little. Come up with a better one and I might like yours, too. Personally I like the way ECM works right now.. The probability system of ECM strength vs sensor strength is good.. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.. I can miss every cycle with 5 multispecs on a frig, and that's a good thing.. The frig SHOULD have a chance.. Not too keen on non-EW ships using EW though, so an overall nerf and a role bonus for EW ships would be good.. So I do support a numbers tweak.. But what would really work is an ECCM boost.. ECCM shouldn't be an immunity, but it should have a significant effect.. I'd like to see a minimum sensor strength bonus of +10 so it'd be more useful for smaller ships.. A +96% bonus to a sensor strength 6 frig isn't a good trade-off for the fitting and cap cost.. However, the +96% is fantastic for BSs and it always amazes me that BS pilots don't fit an ECCM mod (it's like not putting on an armor plate!).. Plus it'd be nice if the ECCM gave a chance to break a jam every cycle (as mentioned earlier in the thread).. And finally (this is the big one), Projected ECCM should effect every ship in a radius rather than just a targeted ship.. Would make it a heck of alot more useful and you'd see alot more logistics-type ships in gangs.. And I think that's a good thing.. Basically, boost ECCM without making it an "I'm immune, I win" button..
Sarrena Amarr	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:42:00 - [103] Sounds good Tux, lets try it out. I think I can live with ECM ships doing ECM and non ECM ships crippling their tank to do it.
Elve Sorrow Amarr Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:43:00 - [104] Simple change that will balance everything: EW only breaks a lock, and doesnt keep the target jammed for its duration. You could go with a middle road option too: EW jamms as it does now, but ECCM reduces the cycle time. IE ECM against a non-ECCM'd target = 20 secs jammed. ECM against an ECCM'd target = 10 seconds jammed. Cycle time of the jammer remains the same in either case though, giving the target a small window in which to counter in some fashion. God im good. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
inSpirAcy The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:49:00 - [105] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Err.. Take away their devastating effects and all you have is a ship with no tank, lackluster damage potential, and acts as nothing more than the warm-up target for your opponents.. Like, I dunno, a sensor dampener boat? A TD boat? A TP boat? Do you see the pattern here? ECM is not the only valid form of EW. The two are analogous in most people's minds because ECM absolutely and utterly dominates the others in every respect. We've become so used to it that, as you demonstrate quite adequately, we intuitively expect ECM ships to be primary by default. If your desired goal for the game is for ECM to continue to dominate, then of course these suggested changes make no sense. It's just that an awful lot of the playerbase disagrees that ECM should dominate in an idealised form of EVE, hence my support for Jenny's idea.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:52:00 - [106] Originally by: Elve Sorrow Simple change that will balance everything: EW only breaks a lock, and doesnt keep the target jammed for its duration. You could go with a middle road option too: EW jamms as it does now, but ECCM reduces the cycle time. IE ECM against a non-ECCM'd target = 20 secs jammed. ECM against an ECCM'd target = 10 seconds jammed. Cycle time of the jammer remains the same in either case though, giving the target a small window in which to counter in some fashion. God im good. But that would mean nerfing Caldari, Elve. That is just verboten.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 18:57:00 - [107] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. Thing is, with this sort of ECCM you'd only lock your two primary targets and jamming could NEVER effect you.. Ever.. You are completely immune to jamming.. One million Blackbirds all attempting to jam you at the same time? Doesn't matter! You have your one Jenny-ECCM mod. You can always lock a primary and secondary target! It doesn't matter how much jamming is brought to bear on you, or how powerful it is - you can ALWAYS lock two targets.. And frankly, do you ever really need more than two targets? Focused fire = dead opponents.. Split fire = dead you.. Pop first target, move to the second, and start locking the next.. This ECCM completely negates jamming.. This ECCM is an immunity.. Immunites always break a game.. There has to be a chance of success or failure, regardless of how remote.. Otherwise there is no fear and it just becomes a stacking numbers game.. 99% of the time the Apoc should pwn the Griffin, but there should always be that 1% chance for the Griffin to get it's revenge..
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:03:00 - [108] I think this change should be the first step. Its easy to implement since no underlying system changes, and its simple overall. however, the system does need a change, because it will either be cheesy overpowered as it is now, or lame underpowered. The system needs a fundemental change to truely make it good, while not being so cheesy. As it stands, EVE benefits from it becoming lame underpowered, and I hope this change makes that happen, then the final change can make it a good tactical weapon. Im just so tired of the cheese. Originally by: Tuxford Yes we don't play on our main accounts simply because you would lose all respect for us
Spaced Skunk Yesodic Nomads Corp	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:05:00 - [109] The changes seem good, basically you wanna jam effectively? you need to reduce your tank. Its a good change tbh, I am glad the dedicated ECM ships keep thier effectiveness.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:06:00 - [110] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. Thing is, with this sort of ECCM you'd only lock your two primary targets and jamming could NEVER effect you.. Ever.. You are completely immune to jamming.. One million Blackbirds all attempting to jam you at the same time? Doesn't matter! You have your one Jenny-ECCM mod. You can always lock a primary and secondary target! It doesn't matter how much jamming is brought to bear on you, or how powerful it is - you can ALWAYS lock two targets.. And frankly, do you ever really need more than two targets? Focused fire = dead opponents.. Split fire = dead you.. Pop first target, move to the second, and start locking the next.. This ECCM completely negates jamming.. This ECCM is an immunity.. Immunites always break a game.. There has to be a chance of success or failure, regardless of how remote.. Otherwise there is no fear and it just becomes a stacking numbers game.. 99% of the time the Apoc should pwn the Griffin, but there should always be that 1% chance for the Griffin to get it's revenge.. If you want to lock 2 targets max, it is entirely up to you. The balance is, if somebody calls a different target and you do not have the target ready or if the current target warps away, you will waste time locking a new target. It is balanced to me. Defender can fit ECCM mod if they want to. It is an option than WCS or some other mods. Is it that you do not like ECCM? --------- Cruelty is God's way of showing kindness and God is kind. Pax Caldaria.
MyOwnSling Gallente RONA Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:08:00 - [111] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. Thing is, with this sort of ECCM you'd only lock your two primary targets and jamming could NEVER effect you.. Ever.. You are completely immune to jamming.. One million Blackbirds all attempting to jam you at the same time? Doesn't matter! You have your one Jenny-ECCM mod. You can always lock a primary and secondary target! It doesn't matter how much jamming is brought to bear on you, or how powerful it is - you can ALWAYS lock two targets.. And frankly, do you ever really need more than two targets? Focused fire = dead opponents.. Split fire = dead you.. Pop first target, move to the second, and start locking the next.. This ECCM completely negates jamming.. This ECCM is an immunity.. Immunites always break a game.. There has to be a chance of success or failure, regardless of how remote.. Otherwise there is no fear and it just becomes a stacking numbers game.. 99% of the time the Apoc should pwn the Griffin, but there should always be that 1% chance for the Griffin to get it's revenge.. I agree completely. As somebody stated before, this would essentially be like a wcs for ecm, except no matter how many ecm boats there are trying to lock you down, you will always be able to lock targets, where a wcs can be overwhelmed by multiple scramblers. I don't think this solution proposed would work all that well. ----------
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:10:00 - [112] Edited by: Dr Fighter on 23/10/2006 19:13:58 Edited by: Dr Fighter on 23/10/2006 19:11:07 Things i rekon ECM needs to be more ballenced: LARGE decrease in strength on ECM modules, with a quite large bonus bringing them back upto normal strength on ECM ships. {so the single module cowboys hav um, say half as much chance to jam then before with their single ecm module as they do now} Jamming effect either FAR shorter, 10 seconds or so, OR make ECM just break current locks {20 seconds is evil, but it becaomes really unfun when 2 or 3 jams are successful in a row} {{Further more, with locking taking upto 20 seconds on BS anyway, means with the currect system, even a jamming gap is usless as by the time you hav a lock the ship jamming you has another chance, before you hav any time to do anything about it}} Just because another EW system makes sensor times longer, does not mean ECM cant hav some extra effect (particullary if ECM changed to breaking locks rather than reducing max locked targets to 0) {lock gets broken, and a minor 25% reduction in lock times ONLY when a successful ECM lock break occurs} Cap reduction inline with any cycle changes {cap use on ecm is pretty bang on atm} Make bursts work better, larger range less cap, strength is okay. Im not a fan of ECM.
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:10:00 - [113] Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 23/10/2006 19:10:38 Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. Thing is, with this sort of ECCM you'd only lock your two primary targets and jamming could NEVER effect you.. Ever.. You are completely immune to jamming.. One million Blackbirds all attempting to jam you at the same time? Doesn't matter! You have your one Jenny-ECCM mod. You can always lock a primary and secondary target! It doesn't matter how much jamming is brought to bear on you, or how powerful it is - you can ALWAYS lock two targets.. And frankly, do you ever really need more than two targets? Focused fire = dead opponents.. Split fire = dead you.. Pop first target, move to the second, and start locking the next.. This ECCM completely negates jamming.. This ECCM is an immunity.. Immunites always break a game.. There has to be a chance of success or failure, regardless of how remote.. Otherwise there is no fear and it just becomes a stacking numbers game.. 99% of the time the Apoc should pwn the Griffin, but there should always be that 1% chance for the Griffin to get it's revenge.. Well, you got one thing wrong. Quote: If you get jammed, you will lose MAX_TARGET - (Backup_array + ECCM) randomly. If you fit counter mods, you can still shoot but not effectively. Say Backup+ECCM = 2 and Maxtargets = 6. Then you lose 4 targets. If you only locked two, well, then you are guaranteed to lose those two. As for relocking or keeping the jamming ship as targets, how about making it so that you will ALWAYS lose the jamming ship itself and also cannot retarget that ship while his jamming works? You can target two others though. Basically jamming a ship is guaranteed to keep him from locking you, but allows him a chance to lock someone else. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Hakera Anari Higard	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:10:00 - [114] Originally by: Elve Sorrow Simple change that will balance everything: EW only breaks a lock, and doesnt keep the target jammed for its duration. sorry elve, couldnt agree less with that idea, at least not until major overhauls were made to sensor boosters (always been favourable of a splitting of the two effects there) in which case i might disagree less :) . Tux's plan is the fairest solution Ive seen which has been mentioned by many in the recent past as the best solution (that includes the disable high slots instead of lock suggestion but i disagree with that one more because of technicality issues than the concept itself). admitadly much like the hp increase plan I would of gone another way to CCP, but the end result is similar enough for ecm. Personally whilst Tux's plan is the most straight forward change i was more inclined towards a capacitor and cpu nerf of the module with counter bonuses on the ew specialist ships. Its not as much as I thought ECM was too powerful (though I still am not happy with sensor dampners) on non ew-specialist ships but that it was too easy to equip and use on such ships. The chance based system was fine imo outside of that. though in passing i am wondering how the stacking nerf would work, as i assume the majority of the issue is normal pvp ships with just 1 jammer fitted mostly or ravens for eg with 3-4 jammers as is typical in 10-20 gang warfare. Stacking nerf to me then would only entail a nerf upon the ew specialist ships themselves unless the ship bonus countered it well enough. overall quite happy with the suggested CCP changes myself.
Randay 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:17:00 - [115] wierd fix. hard to predict the effect on pvp setups. basically leaving alone dedicated ecm boats and nerfing the tanking ability of nondedicated ecm boats. I think it will just end up being a boost to dampeners. goodbye single multispec setups, hello single damp setups. for this change to be effective it must be applied equally to all other ecms. 1. reduce the strength of all ecm, dampeners, target painters, tracking disruptors, nos, neut, warp disruptor, stasis webbifier, etc... 2. increase the boost to dedicated ew boats for thier respective ew type. 3a. add low slot EW upgrade modules for each ew type. 3b. stacking nerf on all ew types. goodbye electronic warfare, hello tankville, population: eve. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Originally by: Reddari Now just be nice before I start to make life for the BOB devs (yes you have some) harder by exposing their player characters.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:27:00 - [116] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Say Backup+ECCM = 2 and Maxtargets = 6. Then you lose 4 targets. If you only locked two, well, then you are guaranteed to lose those two. Ahhh... Now I see.. Well yeah, that would work fairly well then.. Thumbs up!..
Sonho	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:29:00 - [117] Originally by: Chode Rizoum Edited by: Chode Rizoum on 23/10/2006 17:03:25 Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Blind Man Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. agreed TomB never went anywhere. He's the lead game designer and every single change I make is sanctioned by him. Not only because he is lead game designer but also because I have tremendous respect for him. I don't run it only by TomB either I talk to Hammerhead and Oveur as well. just ignore does *****ers.. and look at my nidhoggur edit: why is c rackers profanity QFT ,ignore the whiners ,see what is wrong and what is not. If it were for some people we were still riding with 2 MWD ,1400 with no tracking and scorps with 100% resist and with the gankageddons. Get kali on test server so that we can test the new things and read the players proposals but dont cave in to all their demands ,including me ,and see ,compare what is BEST FOR EVE.
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.10.23 19:30:00 - [118] That was me up there.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:03:00 - [119] Originally by: inSpirAcy ECM is not the only valid form of EW. The two are analogous in most people's minds because ECM absolutely and utterly dominates the others in every respect. We've become so used to it that, as you demonstrate quite adequately, we intuitively expect ECM ships to be primary by default. No, ECM is not the only valid form of EW.. And no it does NOT dominate all others.. It's just easier to use.. Dampeners are actually far better if used correctly.. Originally by: inSpirAcy If your desired goal for the game is for ECM to continue to dominate, then of course these suggested changes make no sense. It's just that an awful lot of the playerbase disagrees that ECM should dominate in an idealised form of EVE, hence my support for Jenny's idea. Way to go at completely ignoring the second half of a post.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:06:00 - [120] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Personally I like the way ECM works right now.. The probability system of ECM strength vs sensor strength is good.. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.. I can miss every cycle with 5 multispecs on a frig, and that's a good thing.. The frig SHOULD have a chance.. Not too keen on non-EW ships using EW though, so an overall nerf and a role bonus for EW ships would be good.. So I do support a numbers tweak.. This is very clumsy wording, but the best way I can express my gut feeling is by saying that the effect of ECM on a fight is extremely disruptive and non-linear. Suppose two Thoraxes have a 1v1, same guns, tanks, drones and skills, but one fitted with a multispectral jammer, the other not. Suppose it takes a Thorax an average of 60 seconds to chew through the hitpoints of another. Comparing sensor strength to jam strength suggests that the chance of a successful jam in any one cycle is roughly 1/3. It is an extremely crude approximation with so few rolls of the dice, but one would expect the non-ECM Thorax to be jammed for 20 seconds during the 60 second fight. That Thorax automatically loses the fight, if even one jam takes place, because this is the inevitable reality in this sort of PVP encounter. You only have a 1/3 shot at it, but the consequences are 100% if you succeed. So what are the chances of failing a single jam cycle? Why, 2/3. But over the course of the fight, the chance of failing all three jam cycles drops to (2/3)^3, or 30%. Essentially that gives you a 70% chance of victory before taking skills into account. The jamming Thorax pilot could have a fraction of the skillpoints or experience of the non-jamming pilot, and would still probably win. With somewhat superior skills, the jamming pilot would be virtually assured a victory, largely because his use of ECM took him almost the whole way to the finish line. If the fight was to last far longer of course, the disruptive effect of a jam as a contribution to the whole encounter would decrease, and would actually hinder the jamming pilot as a Thorax does not have the cap to support ECM for long. However, T2 blasters eat through 800mm and 1600mm plates with ease. Now, pick all the holes you want in this, I am not a mathematician, but however you express it, what you have here is a 'win' button for cruisers. Battleships have higher sensor strengths, but they have more midslots and larger capacitors to more than compensate for that. Unless of course you are Amarr, or flying a Blasterthron. Originally by: inSpirAcy Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Err.. Take away their devastating effects and all you have is a ship with no tank, lackluster damage potential, and acts as nothing more than the warm-up target for your opponents.. Like, I dunno, a sensor dampener boat? A TD boat? A TP boat? Do you see the pattern here? ECM is not the only valid form of EW. The two are analogous in most people's minds because ECM absolutely and utterly dominates the others in every respect. We've become so used to it that, as you demonstrate quite adequately, we intuitively expect ECM ships to be primary by default. I agree. When people think electronic warfare, they think ECM. One click, and the enemy's weapons are switched off. Even one switch-off in an interval can win you the fight. Subtle effects such as making the enemy easier to hit for more damage, or reducing their effective damage, or reducing their lock range and scan resolution just enough to MWD into range without getting half your armour stripped before you activate your guns? Who needs that these days? I will declare an interest in this, I have millions of SPs in EW, of which I probably use 500k, and a Scorp named "Miss 20 Turns". I have fought fleet actions against T2 torp-firing ECM Ravens. This can't continue. ECM users will have to get used to it being a subtle effect, and not a "When this card comes into play, go fetch a beer" deal.
Roxanna Kell BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:11:00 - [121] Good solution By CCP, hope it doesn't affect damp. Quote: "Don't touch the RED but
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:17:00 - [122] Originally by: Cmdr Sy Excellent post Cmdr Sy, I commend you on that most excellent of posts. It sums up quite nicely the problems with ECM that I and many others currently have. Really it's not the chance of a jam, it's the chance of not getting at least ONE jam that is the root of the problem. Well said. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Pestillence Chav-Scum	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:18:00 - [123] I've not read the other comments but its a pretty weak / uninventive change imo. A bit like the sacriledge changes, coulda been awesome but you were happy with mediocrity. Small tweaks like "do not lose lock but cant activate offensive mods" would have made the world of difference to ECM "overpoweredness". Atm a bs that is jammed for 20 seconds needs another 15 to lock a frig leaving 5 seconds where he isnt jammed to do what he needs to do before another cycle starts. Thats just an example, an possibly not a great one, the point I wanted to leave was you coulda achieved so much more...
Merin Ryskin Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:31:00 - [124] The thing I'm worried about with forcing ECM to a few specific ships is it's so completely against EVE's basic principles. This is supposed to be a class-free game, with as much freedom to choose your setups as possible. And ECM should be one of those options... not a one-module win button, but ships other than the blackbird/griffin/scorpion should be able to effectively use it if you devote enough effort/skill points to it. So I'd like to see some numbers... assuming the low slot modules are used, what would happen to an ECM ferox, for example? What kind of jam strength would be realistic? Will say three or four ECM modules (with or without low slot boost) still have a good chance of shutting down an opponent, or will they be a complete waste of a slot? Of course there's a fairly simple alternative, cut the strength, but give all ECM modules a passive bonus: "X% to strength of all ECM modules". So the one-module win button is completely eliminated, but ewar specialists can still make the choice to spend their ship's mid slots on ECM instead of tackle/tank/cap/etc.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:34:00 - [125] Now having made the case to adjust ECM, to my satisfaction at least, I can see some ways in which it can be achieved. One way is to increase the base sensor strengths of all ships by some proportion (+25% max), thus removing the incentive to fit ECM to everything with a spare midslot, and putting it firmly back in the hands of dedicated ships with strength bonuses. Yes, it becomes a Caldari-only* weapon, but since it is relegated to specialist platforms flown in fleets only by pilots with a specific role, that does not matter. There are always people who can fly Caldari, and it is the team that benefits from a fleet support ship, not an individual. * Some FCs will insist every BS fits a racial anyway, so no need to worry, you can play blob co-operative jamming too. Another way is to boost ECCM and backup arrays, to give pilots the completely voluntary option of sacrificing a low or mid slot to meaningfully increase their chances of surviving jam cycles. Some will go for it, others won't. People can carry on fitting ECM to everything, because you never know, the other guy might not have a counter. And in an increased number of cases, it will backfire. Hooray for player choice? If nothing else at least give us the option. Another way is to increase ECM cap use yet again (+50-100%), and increase cap use bonuses where applicable. This way, mounting ECM is put out of reach of cruisers not specialised in ECM deployment. Battleships can still go for it, but that's a different bridge to be crossed. Making ECM in some way graded rather than all-or-nothing would be rather tricky, as that would mean rewriting the whole concept. All ships can use SDs, TDs, TPs, and much as the inequality pains me, nothing with the core concept that ECM possesses, that is, a complete shutdown of targeting functionality, can be permitted to be fitted to absolutely every size and role ship. And so there is CCP's juggling of absolutely everything in a more complex manner than should be necessary. With increased complexity of changes, more things to go wrong, more difficulty in striking the balance. I can see what they are trying to do - nerf ECM to disincentivise fitting it to everything with a spare midslot, boost its effectiveness on dedicated platforms to compensate, but I can't help but feel it could have been done more simply and elegantly. These changes are going to be a tangle to sort out.
Octavio Santillian Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:38:00 - [126] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Quote: IÆm glad to see that there is a realization that ECM is crazy overpowered, but this solution is just another F&@ing Caldari boost. I f-ing wish.. This probably just killed Caldari ECM.. ECM gets lowered, the ship gets bonuses, and you get a low slot mod to boost ECM to get it all back to where it is now??.. Umm.. Caldari don't have low slots to spare.. They have fewer lows than any other race, and those lows are generally used for fitting.. Ouch.. Gonna wait to see how this turns out, but my guess is that Caldari just got their gonads stomped on.. Glad I switched over to Gallente.. Kill Caldari ECM? I think you are ignoring the part were dedicated ECM ships will get/do get a bonus to ECM strength, and will then be able to add mods to make their ECM capabilities even more potent. Now for the million isk question...who gets dedicated ECM ships...I'll let you answer that on your own. ôWeÆre not doing for ISK...........WeÆre doing it for a ***load of ISK!ö
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:39:00 - [127] I dont se the point in this at all really.. The ppl who whine about ECM whine about its effect and it being a factor in pvp. (I guess they want tank and dps be the only factors. making it a really booring game) The ppl who acknowlege that ECM should be a factor in the game thinks its fine as it is. ECM changed way back to make it available for others than caldari. whats the point of restricting it now? Let me quote a new player in corp.. and he`s so right: Tostibakker > ew is the only way to counter high sp gunners for a noob
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:44:00 - [128] Originally by: Pestillence I've not read the other comments but its a pretty weak / uninventive change imo. A bit like the sacriledge changes, coulda been awesome but you were happy with mediocrity. Small tweaks like "do not lose lock but cant activate offensive mods" would have made the world of difference to ECM "overpoweredness". Atm a bs that is jammed for 20 seconds needs another 15 to lock a frig leaving 5 seconds where he isnt jammed to do what he needs to do before another cycle starts. Thats just an example, an possibly not a great one, the point I wanted to leave was you coulda achieved so much more... signed. tux, go grow a pair and do the right thing
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:48:00 - [129] Just for the sake of it, because this could have been much more and I'd really hate to see this change be the final word on EW balancing (and because 34 jumps on AP in a BS will take some time). Quote: In my opinion there is not much wrong with dedicated ECM ships. They are very powerful and can lockdown multiple opponents but they are very vulnerable. In my view, this is the Achille's heel of the whole reasoning, especially considering how much EW beats tanking in about every possible scenario. How can a powerful ship that can lockdown multiple opponents could be considered vulnerable? It's the same "gankageddon can't tank so it's balanced" kind of reasoning, which I'm glad didn't have much weigth when the stacking changes were brought in. Tanking sucks and there isn't a whole lot to do to make it ever balanced; The only hope for a good defensive system would be to "capitalise" on a good EW system (considering how well it scales with the size of your own gang and the size of the opposing gang). Tanking should be a secondary defensive system in regard to EW, but that would require massive changes to EW. Quote: So what is the problem? Being able to tank and jam at the same time is part of it, the other is how powerful a single jammer is. It's a bit unfair towards people that can afford to put a single jammer in their med slot. They're not sacrificing a whole lot of resources for a module that makes you unable to lock for 20 seconds and with about a 30% chance of success. And a dedicated jamming ship isn't sacrificing a whole lot for it either. It's not like jammers are less valuable than anything else in a mid slot on a dedicated jamming ship, when compared to other ships. And it's not like this change is going to improve this aspect either, considering the new bonuses. And even if they did sacrifice a lot, it doesn't change what's wrong with the nature of ECM itself (damps are in the same category as far as I'm concerned). Preventing someone from doing almost anything is just bad design, and when npc'ing against guristas I _really_ minize the client for a whole 20 seconds when it happens. You can crush the jamming chance as much as you want, it's going to make the mod pitifull at best, or not change anything at worse, but not any more balanced. It's just the worse parameter to tweak in this situation. "Everyone and their mother-in-law fitting ECM" is a symptom/consequence of ECM being broken, it's not a cause. As such, you can prevent many ships to fit ECM, you won't address the main issue. In fleets, you are only seeing dedicated jammers anyway. This fix is only going to change the repartition of mid slots modules on ships and the amount of dedicated jamming ships in small gang. Something along the line, "1 gank-geddon + 1 gank mega + 1 EW raven + 1 EW domi" will be replaced with "1 gank-geddon + 2 gank mega + 1 scorp" and that is all. Yeah, all EW will be in 1 less tanked ship, and people have to do something very original and creative: attack the EW ship first. This surely does not add a whole new tactical depth. To Tux's discharge, this is going to address the pwnmobiles a bit (EW raven, domi, and the like) but that could be only marginal. Quote: If we work with the system we have right now, what can we do about this? To us it's pretty simple, move part of your jamming power to the low slots, decrease strength of single jammers and make jammers reletively more powerful on ECM ships (that does not mean boost ecm ships). And what if we do not work with the system we have right now, considering how nicely it proved to be broken ? Ok, certainly this isn't coherent with Tux's analysis but as I said, I'm in deep disagreement with the basis of it all. (continued) In Rust We Trust
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:49:00 - [130] (reserved for homemade spam). In Rust We Trust
Tranklukator	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:55:00 - [131] The proposed changes don't fix ECM, they restrict it to Caldari, and that breaks the balance even more. So here's the possible solution. Split the 3 ECM subsystems: Multispec Jammer. Low slot. Reduces the sig. radius of using ship by 20%. So enemy miss more, missles do less damage, but still there is a chance to hit. Racial Jammer. Med. slot. The same as Multispec, but affects the enemy ship, so that it does less damage to everyone, not the user only. ECM burst. High slot. Breacks locks of anyone inside blast radius, including the user (chance based effect). Disables drones and guided missles. Has a small chance to offline sensor\EW modules on each ship being hit by it, or disable it's sensors for 30 sec. Scorpion\Blackbird gets bonuses to racial jammers, some faster Minmatar ships to Multispec jammer instead of damage, Apocalypse gets bonus to ECM bursts. So Scorpion remains good for fleet combat, reducing incoming damage greatly (smaller sig, fewer wrecks, more misses). But now jammed ships may at least pretend that they are doing something :) Minnies get something defensive to put in the low slots instead of WCS. And Apocalypse gets it's unique role as a half-kamikaze EMP bomber, assaulting sniper blobs and gatecamps.
Imhotep Khem Vortex.	Posted - 2006.10.23 20:57:00 - [132] I like the ECM idea of it affecting max locked targets. I don't like the idea of ECCM making it so you can always lock at least 1 target because this hoses 1v1. Anyway, all you need is 1 target locked to be effective, so the idea needs work. ____ "If your not dyin' your not tryin'." "Are you prepared to go all the way, Alexi?" DuGalle
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 21:01:00 - [133] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon The ppl who whine about ECM whine about its effect and it being a factor in pvp. (I guess they want tank and dps be the only factors. making it a really booring game) Wouldn't it be kinda boring sitting immobilised, unable to lock, clicking the 'lock' button a few times before starting to click the 'warp' button so your pod gets out? Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon The ppl who acknowlege that ECM should be a factor in the game thinks its fine as it is. In fleets, in a support role, definitely. Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon ECM changed way back to make it available for others than caldari. whats the point of restricting it now? We all learn from mistakes. Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Let me quote a new player in corp.. and he`s so right: Tostibakker > ew is the only way to counter high sp gunners for a noob Yes, if by EW he means... Tracking Disruptors - "Oops, there go your gunnery skills!" Sensor Dampers - "Haha, you can't hit me until I'm at optimal!" Target Painters - "Daaamn, was that your inty? Oh I'm so sorry!" ECM - Sorry, if he's not in a fleet, he shouldn't be playing with that. Harsh, but the impact elsewhere in the community is too negative to keep those toys in universal circulation.
shakaZ XIV Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.23 21:15:00 - [134] Edited by: shakaZ XIV on 23/10/2006 21:20:19 Just to re-iterate (at the risk of sounding like a stuck record): Originally by: Shin Ra The problem is its chanced based. There we have it. TomB screwed jamming by making it chance based. Having it as point-based was balanced and much less cause for frustration. You were either jammed, or you had backup arrays and you weren't. After all this time I still don't see why it should be random. :\ If some random elements are added to pvp, it's no problem... as long as there are enough dice-rolls for it to balance out IN ONE FIGHT, like for example: weapons firing and getting "barely scratches" and "excellent hits". That's fine, but the ECM dice rolls every 20 seconds, it decides the outcome of the whole fight. -edit- Apologies if something like this has already been suggested, but I don't have time to read the whole thread at the moment. Will do so tomorrow. :P If ECM absolutely has to be chance based, the cycle time should be much shorter, maybe 5 seconds or so, and the effect should not be that the target's lock breaks, but that his weapons temporarily can't be activated. That would also fix most problems?
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 21:18:00 - [135] Regarding effectvely restricting ECM to a handful of specialised Caldari ships, how is that unbalanced? None of them can be fairly described as being solo pwnmobiles, so the worst thing you will see is fleets with ECM mounted on these Caldari ships only. Few alliances, except the Minmatar vs Amarr role-players, will even blink at fielding a few more Scorps in place of a few Ravens. So what is really being affected, is small gang combat, featuring ECM, between non-ECM specialised ships? I admit that has been immense fun, but having seen the state of ship setups these days, that's a sacrifice I am now prepared to make. Start using mixes of the other forms of EW before someone goes and gives celebrity endorsement to ECM drones on Ishkurs.
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.23 21:24:00 - [136] The imobilized thing your decribing will only happen if the gang that engages you are really big. And if it is you will die anyway. What are you suggesting? Remove the place for cruisers as without ECM they will get one vollied by the ships their trying to catch? And dont assume I havent been jammed.. I`Ve been pvping for 3 years in this game. First year I used ECM and different kind of EW a lot.. last two years I`ve flown minmatar.. but allso flown gallente and amarr as I use all races. Tank and dps being the only dominating factor in a battle means the one with the higher skillpoints will win. it will tilt the game towards blobbing as the number of ships will make even more difference. As for fleet support role.. yeah sure.. But if you havent noticed for time being ECM or any Ewar in general are useless in fleet and is not used because none of it works at 200km. (optimal range of the standard sniping mega is 210km) And what do you mean with that last statement? I simply dont understand what you were trying to say. That there should be no way for new players to kill old ones? only by blobbing? dunnu about you but with my 40 mill skillpoints I and 3 years in this game I dont want it to depend on skillpoints.. I dont want to KNOW that I will win becasue I got lvl5 in all skills that matters. I want a game where there is a challange forming tactics in pvp and where noobs can give me an adrenalin rush because they can kill me..
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.23 21:54:00 - [137] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 23/10/2006 22:03:09 Edited by: Tasty Burger on 23/10/2006 22:01:25 Originally by: Cmdr Sy Regarding effectvely restricting ECM to a handful of specialised Caldari ships, how is that unbalanced? None of them can be fairly described as being solo pwnmobiles, so the worst thing you will see is fleets with ECM mounted on these Caldari ships only. Few alliances, except the Minmatar vs Amarr role-players, will even blink at fielding a few more Scorps in place of a few Ravens. So what is really being affected, is small gang combat, featuring ECM, between non-ECM specialised ships? I admit that has been immense fun, but having seen the state of ship setups these days, that's a sacrifice I am now prepared to make. Start using mixes of the other forms of EW before someone goes and gives celebrity endorsement to ECM drones on Ishkurs. It isnt fair because ECM is definitely the most useful EW. It COMPLETELY eliminates a ship from the picture. Tracking disruptors and sensor damps don't, and they only work on certain ships. By the way if this ECM change goes through (It shouldnt, there should just be a general ECM nerf involving making it only break locks), there must be a module that affects missiles just like tracking disruptors. At the moment the only way to stop a missile ship is to jam it with caldari jammers. If caldari are the only one with overpowered ECM, then... Basically, once again, here are MY suggestions for ECM: a. remove multispecs b. make them either only break locks, or only jam for 10 seconds and cycle for 20 (meaning the target can relock after 10 seconds). The fact that you need to take a while to relock means once you are jammed, you probably will be jammed the whole fight. c. boost ECCM in some way to make it worth fitting over your own ECM. The reason you see ECM on non-caldari ecm boats is because ECM is OVERPOWERED. Removing it from these ships is a nerf to these ships, while the ECM boats still have the absurdly unfair ECM. Tracking disruptors and sensor damps just arent as good. ECM affects the entire ship and makes it useless with just one slot, while you need 2 or 3 TD/SD to cripple a single ship, and that only affects certain ships. This is fine, ECM needs to be brought down to TD/SD levels. Oh and let me repeat that ECM is the only way to disable a missile ship at close range. Missile disruptors kplzthx
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:12:00 - [138] ECM is only overpowered if ppl dont use ECCM. Reason being is that ppl favor the agressive ECM being a defence against ecm over the ECCM. now stick a ECCM on a raven. And omg you can throw a silly amount of mods on it and it will be only jammed once a century.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:15:00 - [139] There is a fine line between adding EW to a setup to reduce the full advantage of an opponent's superior skillpoints and equipment, and adding EW to remove all of an opponent's offensive skillpoints. Target painters offer the opportunity of improving your damage, if your opponent favours flying smaller ships. Tracking disruptors offer the opportunity of greatly reducing an opponent's damage, if he relies on turrets for most of it. Sensor dampers allow a close-range ship to get into its optimal without taking a huge amount of damage on approach. If one counts nos/neuts as EW, they can throw out any advantage an opponent may possess by him having specialised in active tanking. You see how these modules (and drones to match) offer the opportunity to negate some proportion of an enemy's capabilities, while still leaving him with enough to put a fight? Of course you do, I bet you have used them all. ECM has none of this subtlety. Once your opponent is tackled, other EW forces him to fight with one hand tied behind his back. ECM ties both hands and shackles the feet. It is a set of dice rolls, where getting a particular score once wins you the fight, unless the ships involved are supertanks. This is why ECM is too dangerous to be allowed on anything that can kill most ships in the same class solo. Until someone figures out a way of giving the damn thing a sliding scale, it is best used as a gang support module by specific role pilots. Younger players can kill older players perfectly well with the tools they have, without being given the additional freedom to drop them all in favour of something that turns everyone into a roid. And let's not forget, it also works the other way around - a new player can have a very good setup, I have been surprised in the past - but made useless by ECM.
DeadRow True Core	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:19:00 - [140] ooo an ECM booster mod, interesting. Thank you tux, good job! /DeadRow, True Core Sig Wanted.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:21:00 - [141] Originally by: Tasty Burger ECM needs to be brought down to TD/SD levels. Oh and let me repeat that ECM is the only way to disable a missile ship at close range. Missile disruptors kplzthx On this I agree, but that's a different bridge to cross. I have not had any good ideas in that direction, and judging by this partial nerf, the Devs are not yet satisfied with whatever ideas they have had either. I think it is better to get halfway there, and contemplate the remainder of the problem, than leave things as they are. This just does not strike me as one of those issues where people can sit back, come up with one holistic fix, and implement it in one package.
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:27:00 - [142] I understand what your saying.. I simply dont agree.. ECM should make ppl loose their lock. Taking it away will remove a factor in the game. how do you suggest gang warfare should be? Like the alliance tournament? you did see it right with the silly tank thing? It will encourage blobs and take the wild card out of pvp. Your talking like you can jam someone with a single mod. no you cant you need a lot of them 4+ to jam a battleship and to not jam it means usually that you will loose anything smaller than a battleship especially against ravens. Last time my group of 4 cruisers got massacred to a raven and a curse. reason was we could not jam the raven and it killed us in 4 volleys. we had 2 caldari racials and 4 multispectrals on it. (I suspect it might have carried eccm)
Tashia Rizti	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:46:00 - [143] I donÆt normally post on these, but I have an Idea about ECM that I have not seen posted... Why not have ECM Jam a High Slot per Success? Each lock cycle has a chance to 'jam' that highslot for 20 seconds, this would require ECM to keep there current strength (or maybe increase it a bit) as the module only locks down a single high slot. Most actual ECM Ships can fit a nice set Cruisers 3-5, Battleship 5-7. It doesnÆt guarantee the lockdown of the high slot, it would still be 'chance based' on sensor strength vs ECM Strength This would give it a middle ground, still devastating but not 100% lockdown as it is now. The high slot would be randomly selected and if successful jammed. This gives the Larger ships a bigger one-up on Smaller ships yes, as the frigate may only have 4-5 high slots, meaning a battleship may jam all of them, but of course this is fairly rare but may happen. Considering how far buried this is, I doubt anyone important will read it, but I wonder what people think. Yes I use EW on EW Ships.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:52:00 - [144] I seem to recall a lot of *****ing about how ECMs were before too, about how only scorps and BBs could jam, and this sucked. Chance based ECM means what you're doing is _on average_ disabling a portion of the enemy ships. Fixed probability is a guaranteed lockdown, and way too powerful. (Try engaging a celestis wolfpack if you want to know what that feels like. It's not fun.) I use ewar a lot. And as 'gang support' ECMs are exactly the right tool for the job - you don't stop an enemy blob (beyond trivial size) from firing 100% of the time, but you do cut their offensive firepower down. That to me, makes it a much more strategic layout than calling primaries and seeing how the gank vs. tank ratio works out. Those making personal attacks on Tuxford? You should be ashamed. That kind of thing is _not_ needed. Every time anything at all gets changed in EVE, especially related to balance _someone_ is going to be unhappy. If you don't trust the Dev team (and no, this isn't just Tuxford, I'm pretty certain that there's like, people who talk to each other at CCP) then YOU ARE PLAYING THE WRONG GAME. I like the fact that the Dev team in EVE are not afraid to make changes that they believe will improve the gameplay, despite the whinging. If you look at it, this isn't actually as brutal a nerf as it seems - you will still be able to use ECMs, and if you fit 'ECM power mods' they might actually be useful. What it will squish is the wolfpack where everyone is fitting an ECM, and it being horrifically powerful. It will squish the ECM nos dominix. It will squish the ECM raven. The current situation is almost everyone who's flying a ship in PvP is fitting an ECM or 5. Some are running an ECCM or two too. That's pretty ludicrous. It should be an option, but .... well clearly if everyone's using a particular option, it's too powerful. This will go some way to redress it. I'm also fairly sure it's up for subsequent tweaks, if it turns out to be unreasonable, but on the face of it it doesn't seem to be - it deals with exactly the problems it was intended to.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:56:00 - [145] There are valid uses for ECM, but this has to be balanced against unintended consequences. And right now, EVE is big on unintended consequences. Your gang tried to overpower a much larger, likely ECCM-fitted ship with distributed ECM. Fair play. But then one of your cruisers can jam another cruiser without resources to sacrifice for ECCM, sufficiently for it to stand no chance whatsoever, irrespective of what else it has fitted. That's your unintended consequence. The challenge is to balance these. Also, in a fleet battle I set 5 heavy tracking disruptor drones on a Typhoon. Enemy drones came off our tacklers, I can tell you that! With the last remaining enemy forces warped out, I activated my Caldari racial jammer on the dying Typhoon just to see what would happen. It got jammed.
Vladimir Norkoff Crimson Knights Trade Federation Thundering Mantis	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:58:00 - [146] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon ECM is only overpowered if ppl dont use ECCM. Reason being is that ppl favor the agressive ECM being a defence against ecm over the ECCM. now stick a ECCM on a raven. And omg you can throw a silly amount of mods on it and it will be only jammed once a century. QFT
Gabriel Karade Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents	Posted - 2006.10.23 22:59:00 - [147] Originally by: Popsikle Originally by: EvilNate I personally don't see a problem in making a ECM ship, pure ECM. They are powerful, but if they fail at what they do, they are screwed. With the change to stabs, people flying scorps will be quite vunrable and we all know these ships go down quick. A ship like a NOS Domi packing ECCM is a real threat. Fail 1 jam on the ship and your cap will likely be gone in seconds, leaving you with no way to defend yourself. Nate. TBH, the problem with this is diversity. Right now, being a scorp pilot is bad, because we get called primary all the time. It leave no imigination for what ship does what, who is ecm, who is dps, ect. I think we need MORE diveristy, not less. The problem with the Scorpion is that it should never have been made into an all-out dedicated EW boat. If it had been given launcher and Hybrid bonuses (RoF like the Typhoon for example) it wouldn't be a case of "OMG GANK ZE SCORP!!11" all the time. ---------- - Office Linebacker -
Denrace Amarr Psykotic Dreams	Posted - 2006.10.23 23:14:00 - [148] What we need is a module that has a chance of breaking a jam cycle once activated. Like the opposite of a jammer. Mid slot probably. ----------------------------------------- ***! Im jammed! activates jam-breaker module* No luck.. Jammed... Activates module again after 5 secs.... No luck.. Activates a third time.. Success! Jam cycle broken after 10 seconds. ---------------------------------------- Lets put in some skills to beef the module up. And lets put in a module that increases its effectiveness, but is stacking nerfed. Low slot probably. I call it WORKING ECCM. Den ________________________________________
Statics A.W.M	Posted - 2006.10.24 00:46:00 - [149] 1. Boost ECCM & Backups 2. Remove multispecs 3. Decrease non-racial jamming strength on racials by 50%-100% 4. Sensor Strength skill(s)? 5. Increase range of ECM Bursts by like 500% 6. Sensor-boosting Rigs? Give people countering-options that work instead of taking away a valid part of warfare from 75% of the available ships in the game. Fitting ECCM or backups should be a standard thing just like fitting an armor or a shield tank. You're "tanking" ECM. It's called ECCM! Oh wait, there's a module in-game for that already, wow. ECM doesn't need to be nerfed per se, it just needs to be removed from the solo pwnmobiles (ie. multispecs). Nobody uses ECCM/backups. Everyone uses friggin WCS, but nobody uses ECCM/backups. Ironic. I almost always run a backup or 2 (or ECCM if I armor tank) and have little to no problems being locked down. Jamming an ECCM'd BS with T2 racials on a Scorp is a pain in the a**. God forbid people drop their "ideal" fittings to adapt and overcome.
Dupac Corsets and Carebears Whips and Chains	Posted - 2006.10.24 02:00:00 - [150] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon ECM is only overpowered if ppl dont use ECCM. Reason being is that ppl favor the agressive ECM being a defence against ecm over the ECCM. now stick a ECCM on a raven. And omg you can throw a silly amount of mods on it and it will be only jammed once a century. QFT Try that with an amarr ship - you don't have a spare mid :(
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.24 02:15:00 - [151] Edited by: Nyxus on 24/10/2006 02:15:35 Originally by: **c Originally by:** Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon ECM is only overpowered if ppl dont use ECCM. Reason being is that ppl favor the agressive ECM being a defence against ecm over the ECCM. now stick a ECCM on a raven. And omg you can throw a silly amount of mods on it and it will be only jammed once a century. QFT Try that with an amarr ship - you don't have a spare mid :( Arma or Raven: it takes 2 named ECCM to see any practical effect on lessening the jamming effect. 2 mids to counter one multispec? But the real issue is that there is no stacking penalty on ECM. 3 dampening drones means that no other dampeners will have any effect. 5 ECM drones and 5 multispecs not only stack, the odds of jamming get better and better the more you use. And thereing lies the problem. Well that and it takes multiple TDs and Dampeners to shut down a ship. With ecm all it takes is one mod and some luck. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Scordite	Posted - 2006.10.24 03:27:00 - [152] Edited by: Scordite on 24/10/2006 03:30:07 ECM needs to nerfed down to, and TP needs to be boosted up to, where TD and SD are now. It's as simple as that. Even if the jam chance is reduced, even if it only works on a handful of ships, you will still need counters to it. The only way to do this is with a mod, logically this would be ECCM. Because ECM ruins a ship to such an extreme extent when it hits, even compared to TD and SD, you WILL need to fit the counter mod if there's even a chance you will run into an ECM boat. And there will always be ships that simply can't do it without sacrifices that renders it next to useless. A good example is the geddon. It can't spare mids, and due to it's low sensor strenght, it would need several lows filled. Not to mention cpu issues. The result is a crippled bs. Mega can arguably spare a mid in long-range setup, but not with blasters. And so on. ECM needs to be a disruption the same way a TD or SD is. There are counter-mods for these two types of EW as well, but in most situation you can get around fighting against them without said counter-mod fitted. Against SD you go closer, against TD you make tracking less of an issue with web or range. You're still at a disadvantage, but you can fight back. There is no real counter-mod for TP, but it's not needed since it doesn't disrupt you in the same way as the other three forms of EW. If anything, the counter is a tank, something many ships already have, and will have more of come hp boost. ECM and TP both need to be changed to be in line with TD and SD. In other words, there must be tactics you can employ to partially work around the effect, and counter-mods you can fit to not have to work around it. In the case of TP, there needs to be a reason for trying to counter it in the first place as well. No matter how few ship-types can fit ECM, the only counter is to fit mods. This is a Bad ThingÖ. I don't see how anyone can argue against making the four racial EW types aproximately equal in power. The trick is how to do it.. On a side note, does anyone else see the irony of only caldari ships being able to use ECM effectively with suggested changes, while the gallente fleet command ship gets a bonus to the effect of the warfare link that increases the strenght of ECM jammers? ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 03:28:00 - [153] Originally by: Nyxus Edited by: Nyxus on 24/10/2006 02:15:35 Originally by: **c Originally by:** Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon ECM is only overpowered if ppl dont use ECCM. Reason being is that ppl favor the agressive ECM being a defence against ecm over the ECCM. now stick a ECCM on a raven. And omg you can throw a silly amount of mods on it and it will be only jammed once a century. QFT Try that with an amarr ship - you don't have a spare mid :( Arma or Raven: it takes 2 named ECCM to see any practical effect on lessening the jamming effect. 2 mids to counter one multispec? Backup arrays being underrated is a lie also. with a sensorstrenght of 10 and a jammerstrenght of 10.5 it fails to jamm you 5% of the time, while with a backup array or ECCM(sensorstrenght increasing to 15 or 20) will increase the survivability of your lock by a factor of 40. I study math&science, I am convinced I can fake statistics better than you do ; P A Raven has VERY high sensorstrenght anyway, so don¦t be sad you only get a lock on a jammingship only 35% of the time for instapwning it with your grand tank and uberdamage. The expensive Rook has to warp out at any slight appearance of trouble(if it makes it not instapopping), the Falcons third lowslot won¦t svae it either(the rook could at least fend off tacklers with it¦s missiles) while you in your relatively cheap insured Raven just ignore being jammed, stay in battle and continue fighting later. Originally by: Nyxus But the real issue is that there is no stacking penalty on ECM. 3 dampening drones means that no other dampeners will have any effect. 5 ECM drones and 5 multispecs not only stack, the odds of jamming get better and better the more you use. And thereing lies the problem. Well that and it takes multiple TDs and Dampeners to shut down a ship. With ecm all it takes is one mod and some luck. Nyxus Nosense in my opinion. Weapons firing at the same ship don¦t get a stacking penalty either(they could hit the same part of a wing for example, making second shot do no damage). Dampeners decrease locking speed and range, not totaly annihiliating it. If ECM was to get stacking penalty, you should rather give your ship¦s sensors a stacking penalty: for every successfully fended off ECM they get nerfed for 20 seconds. The fact that "other stuff has" and "this stuff does not" has only little to do with balancing and logic im my opinion. We don¦t nerf weapons that hit the same spot at the enemy ship either. Suggestions: -Make Drones jammable like they used to. -The planned changes are good in my opinion and futher changes should wait until we see how ECM develops with all the other changes that Kali will bring. -Make ECM Bursts chance-based with much greater radius of effect; cycletime 3 minutes. They should have twice the jamming probability(not increase jammingstrenght, but decrease the difference of jammerstrenght-sensorstrenght by 50%(introduce a single new multiplier in the formula). kind reagards, Skeltek
Flabida jaba	Posted - 2006.10.24 03:35:00 - [154] Well I think that the proposed changes are definately a step in the right direction. A small step in the right direction is better than nothing and we will be able to see the changes in action and re-evaluate. The fast food/spoilt brat culture breed's ("I want it my way and i want it now") forum warrior syndrome..but thats to be expected Me....I'll pay my sub to see how this small step turns out As it turns out its just one of the thing i love about Eve...... it constantly changes. never stagnant, there is always a tweak there and a adjustmet here........ alot of other game's just stay the same month after month..year after year
Ephemeron Crimson Crusaders Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2006.10.24 04:03:00 - [155] I like the direction Tux has chosen with ECM. But I still want stronger ECCM. ECCM either should be rethinked completely or boosted by another 25~ %
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 04:40:00 - [156] Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 04:40:34 btw: you could make ECM strenght modules make ECM Capusage increase. That would make the initial Blackbird bonus something actualy worth getting. Also other EW pilots would have more leeway to increase their efficiency otherwise with skills, instead of just having ECM related skills trained up. For example training cap-related skills enabling them to use more ECM strenghtmodules and still increase their other shiptype efficiencies they fly with. Still, dedicated EW skilltraining should still be better than the non-specialized alternative. Skel ps: there goes my specialized shortrange jamming Basilisk ;_;
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 04:48:00 - [157] Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 04:53:15 Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 04:49:21 Originally by: Ephemeron I like the direction Tux has chosen with ECM. But I still want stronger ECCM. ECCM either should be rethinked completely or boosted by another 25~ % It is difficult to balance that. Making ECCM so strong to have a SIGNIFICANTLY big difference on BS, would mean overpowering them for Frigate-sized ships. If ECCMs were to give any more bonus than 100% like it is now, a Raven wouldn¦t feel much difference, getting jammed 30% of the time instead of 35%. A frigatte on the other hand would multiply the chance of not getting jammed by 10-60 times. If you¦d like to find a new balance to EW-ECCM relation, you would either have to change most the ship¦s sensorstrenghs or just introduce a new multiplier to the jammingchancecalculation which affects the "real" jammingchance instead of the overall values. Currently ECCMs do not change the chance of getting jammed, but instead change the overall values, which in the end can vary the jamming chance by either 0.05 or a hundredfold, depending on the starting values of the shipclass. and ECM is NOT overpowered imho, every dedicated EW pilot knows, how fast you get blown up if they don¦t work. They can proove to be "no defence at all". Even now it is quiet a risk of engaging BS in a ship that can get blown up in one volley by and halfway skilled BS-pilot. I dislike people asking to addapt jamming to make a flock of enemy BS able to kill an EW ship more than 50% of the times. Even if fighting against "only" 2 Ravens with dedicated racial ECMs, the chance of them getting a lock and killing you insanely fast is pretty big.
Scordite	Posted - 2006.10.24 04:54:00 - [158] Originally by: Skeltek If ECCMs were to give any more bonus than 100% like it is now, a Raven wouldn¦t feel much difference, getting jammed 30% of the time instead of 35%. A frigatte on the other hand would multiply the chance of not getting jammed by 10-60 times. It doesn't matter if a single ECCM decreases your chance of getting jammed by 200 times if it's still 15% or whatever. Because it WILL happen, and it WILL make you lose the fight (as opposed to TD and SD which will stack the odds against you, nothing more, and TP wich will make very little difference in most situations). ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.24 06:48:00 - [159] Originally by: Statics Nobody uses ECCM/backups. Everyone uses friggin WCS, but nobody uses ECCM/backups. Ironic. I almost always run a backup or 2 (or ECCM if I armor tank) and have little to no problems being locked down. Jamming an ECCM'd BS with T2 racials on a Scorp is a pain in the a**. God forbid people drop their "ideal" fittings to adapt and overcome. I have seen it done, and I have started to do so lately. I can confirm that an ECCM on a Dominix is annoying, but backup arrays could be better.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.24 07:12:00 - [160] Originally by: Skeltek Backup arrays being underrated is a lie also. with a sensorstrenght of 10 and a jammerstrenght of 10.5 it fails to jamm you 5% of the time, while with a backup array or ECCM(sensorstrenght increasing to 15 or 20) will increase the survivability of your lock by a factor of 40. You can significantly improve a ship's chances of surviving a jam cycle, without improving its chances of surviving a fight by much. Check out my Thorax example. I have showed that in a 60 second fight, the chance of a ship with a 15-point sensor strength surviving all three 5-point jam cycles (and hence avoiding automatic loss of the fight), is 30%. The pilot can easily replace his damage mod with the best backup array, giving a 48% increase to his sensor strength. Sounds good? It is now at 22.2 points! And yet his chances of not automatically losing the same fight rise to only 46.5%! Pilot skill comes meaningfully into play only in the other 53.5%, so in a same ship 1v1 with one multispec on one side and one backup array on the other, the ship with the backup array will usually die. Food for thought there. Yes, people are now desperate enough to fit ECCM and backups, but that does not mean to imply they are good enough. I will repeat, I love ECM in a fleet support role, and ECCM/backups make sense in that environment too, and feel all that belongs there. But not on any cruisers.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:04:00 - [161] Originally by: Scordite Originally by: Skeltek If ECCMs were to give any more bonus than 100% like it is now, a Raven wouldn¦t feel much difference, getting jammed 30% of the time instead of 35%. A frigatte on the other hand would multiply the chance of not getting jammed by 10-60 times. It doesn't matter if a single ECCM decreases your chance of getting jammed by 200 times if it's still 15% or whatever. Because it WILL happen, and it WILL make you lose the fight (as opposed to TD and SD which will stack the odds against you, nothing more, and TP wich will make very little difference in most situations). Yes, you should decrease Jammingstrenght so much, that my friend Scordite gets at least a 86% chance of no getting jammed at all during a fight by a dedicated EW ship. Come on, you can¦t be really serious? This thread is about nerfing ECM on non-EW ships; you shouldn¦t be able to instapop dedicated EW ships with 85% of your lockingattempts. The thing about EW is RANDOMNESS and fights are decided by influence from the skillfullness of the player. I think the problem you see here is not the fact that ECMs are too strong, but you do not like the randomness-factor ECM has on battles like a large artillery wrecking might also have. Complaining about a 15% chance to get jammed in a fight just once and your target getting away... sorry, but I can¦t share your opinion.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:13:00 - [162] Originally by: Cmdr Sy Originally by: Skeltek Backup arrays being underrated is a lie also. with a sensorstrenght of 10 and a jammerstrenght of 10.5 it fails to jamm you 5% of the time, while with a backup array or ECCM(sensorstrenght increasing to 15 or 20) will increase the survivability of your lock by a factor of 40. You can significantly improve a ship's chances of surviving a jam cycle, without improving its chances of surviving a fight by much. Check out my Thorax example. I have showed that in a 60 second fight, the chance of a ship with a 15-point sensor strength surviving all three 5-point jam cycles (and hence avoiding automatic loss of the fight), is 30%. The pilot can easily replace his damage mod with the best backup array, giving a 48% increase to his sensor strength. Sounds good? It is now at 22.2 points! And yet his chances of not automatically losing the same fight rise to only 46.5%! Pilot skill comes meaningfully into play only in the other 53.5%, so in a same ship 1v1 with one multispec on one side and one backup array on the other, the ship with the backup array will usually die. Food for thought there. Yes, people are now desperate enough to fit ECCM and backups, but that does not mean to imply they are good enough. I will repeat, I love ECM in a fleet support role, and ECCM/backups make sense in that environment too, and feel all that belongs there. But not on any cruisers. I must admit, you are totaly right. Even improving sensorstrenght by 300% would not totaly eliminate the fact of you getting jammed at least once during a fight. This is all this thread is about... nerfing ECM on non-EW ships. I think you didn¦t get the point: Boosting ECCM by 200% will not make much of a difference for larger ships, but only have the effect of Frigates being almost as hard to jamm by dedicated EW ships as a Battleship class would be hard to jamm. It¦s just math, plain and simple.
Cheese999	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:14:00 - [163] EWar is NOT randomness. Target Painters, Tracking Disruptors, Sensor dampeners, even Webbers and warp scramblers are NOT chance based. Only ECM is chance based. It is an anomaly. And it should be treated as such.
Ione Hunt Celestial Fleet Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:22:00 - [164] Edited by: Ione Hunt on 24/10/2006 08:21:51 Originally by: welsh wizard Praise the lord they do listen! I always maintained that ECM strength needed nerfing with a bonus on dedicated ships! The introduction of a low-slot module is debatable though... It's not really going to spell the end for the lame Domi is it? Heh, Vamp-Nanodomi with a few lowslot jam support modules instead of a tank ________________________________________________
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:27:00 - [165] Originally by: Cheese999 EWar is NOT randomness. Target Painters, Tracking Disruptors, Sensor dampeners, even Webbers and warp scramblers are NOT chance based. Only ECM is chance based. It is an anomaly. And it should be treated as such. Every thing in this game is non-random with two exceptions: ECM and T2 lottery. All things can be predicted, even though they've got a random characteristic, and countered by tactics and hard work. ECM and T2 lottery can not. Those two are also the two most hated things in EVE (along side WCS and instas ), but let's focus on ECM. The problem with ECM is that it is not unique. In EVE we've got THREE electronic warfare systems: ECM - targets locking absolutely Damps - targets locking incrementally Disruptor - targets turrets incrementally Target Painters are not electronic warfare, they are a support module! To a degree you can say that warp jammers are electronic warfare that targets warping absolutely, but due to the nature and need for such modules they should not be discussed in this context. So we have three warfare systems, two of which targets the same attribute. One of these two are fine, the other one is ECM. We've got a system that reduces lock efficiency. We've got a system that reduces turret efficiency. Make ECM target something unique. But what is there to target in a ship? There are no counter measures to the following: * Missiles * Energy drainers * Remote enhancers * Local enhancers * Local repairers There's probably more fun ways you can affect a ship, but I must say that the binary situation of ECM is not fine. You can't work with that sort of system. It must be changed so that ship manoeuvring can be used as a lesser counter counter measure, the way it can with tracking disruptors and sensor disruptors. As Naughty Boy (by the way, read his twin post, it's REALLY good. Much better than this one) sublimely would have you know: don't work with the current system - it's broken. - What am I listening to?
Amira Silvermist Yazata Spenta	Posted - 2006.10.24 08:52:00 - [166] Edited by: Amira Silvermist on 24/10/2006 08:53:13 Originally by: Cheese999 EWar is NOT randomness. We've got a system that reduces lock efficiency. We've got a system that reduces turret efficiency. Make ECM target something unique. But what is there to target in a ship? There are no counter measures to the following: * Missiles * Energy drainers * Remote enhancers * Local enhancers * Local repairers There's probably more fun ways you can affect a ship, but I once read a great post in the E-War thread with a similar idea: ECM should be a general purpose module, it should affect turrets a bit (for example increased sig. resolution, less rof), missiles a bit (less rof, higher explosion radius) ,Drones a bit and maybe something else. Racial ECM should roughly be as strong as specialised systems (TD vs. Geddon ~= Radar ECM vs. Geddon) but Multi ECM should be rather weak. Then we only have 2 systems left without a specialised counter: Drones and Missiles For Missiles we should get working Defenders and against Drones? ECM Bursts maybe....
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:22:00 - [167] Originally by: Shin Ra I have officially lost faith in Tuxford. Bring back TomB. While I agree with what you said in a later post that the problem with ECM is that it's chance-based (basically a chance to shut down a ship 100%) you forget that it was in fact TomB that brought that system to us. "When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14)
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:32:00 - [168] ECCM is pointles to fit because.. well, DUH, you can just aswell fit ECM instead. idiots still trying to argue that forcing everyone to fit ECCM is somehow supposed to balance the game... what a bunch of short sighted and obviously clueless noobs
Distrans The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:39:00 - [169] Originally by: Trac3rt Personally, I think the problem would be better resolved one of two ways: - Remove Multispecs completely. ECM ships have to choose which racial jammers to take, and if they pick incorrectly the jammers are about as usefull as a Tracking Disruptor on a Raven. Pilots would have to choose between specialisation in a certain race and risking being vunerable to more ships, or spreading their racials out and losing the ability to put multiple jammers on a single target. This keeps ECM more powerfull against the right targets, yet more specialised in what it works against. - Give ECM strength bonuses to specific races only. Instead of a static 20% bonus to jam strength, you would get 20% bonus to magnetometric jam strength (Gallante ships). Making ECM usefull but not 'I-Win' against some ships, and more powerfull against Gallante ships. The same way that TD's and SD's work better against some races over others. I much prefer the first suggestion over the second. ECM is fundamentally unbalanced and broken in comparison to the other EW, and limiting its use to a specific race is not addressing the core problem. Very good suggestions. Damage dealers must choose their damage types / range too vs. specific targets. Also I think 20s is to long a cycle, together with relocking 1 jam often = death.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:43:00 - [170] Edited by: welsh wizard on 24/10/2006 09:44:42 Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Jenny Spitfire You can still shoot but not effectively if you do not have appropriate mods and skills. If you can target a maximum of 6 targets and fit an ECCM mod, you will lose 4 targets randomly. If you lose Blackbird/Primary/Secondary because you are jammed, too bad. Thing is, with this sort of ECCM you'd only lock your two primary targets and jamming could NEVER effect you.. Ever.. You are completely immune to jamming.. One million Blackbirds all attempting to jam you at the same time? Doesn't matter! You have your one Jenny-ECCM mod. You can always lock a primary and secondary target! It doesn't matter how much jamming is brought to bear on you, or how powerful it is - you can ALWAYS lock two targets.. And frankly, do you ever really need more than two targets? Focused fire = dead opponents.. Split fire = dead you.. Pop first target, move to the second, and start locking the next.. This ECCM completely negates jamming.. This ECCM is an immunity.. Immunites always break a game.. There has to be a chance of success or failure, regardless of how remote.. Otherwise there is no fear and it just becomes a stacking numbers game.. 99% of the time the Apoc should pwn the Griffin, but there should always be that 1% chance for the Griffin to get it's revenge.. I share this opinion. You're in danger of leaving Caldari with 5 or 6 ships which just wouldn't cut it or be fun to fly anymore. Remember they're ships people enjoy to use, they're not just an extended form of module. Personally I think the whole ECM thing has improved considerably with the recent ECCM changes. I think Tux's new idea will bring further specialization to an area of the game that should be specialized. I personally think damps are just as useful as ECM now, I rarely get jammed anymore in my ECCM bs but I'm always getting bloody damped. The other problem with Jennys idea still hasn't been answered either. You'll be invulnerable to ECM in a 1v1, even a 2v1! Originally by: anonymous If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that.
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:45:00 - [171] Originally by: hydraSlav - If a frigate jams a frigate, the jammed duration is 20 seconds (no change) - If a frigate jams a cruiser, the jammed duration is 10 seconds (because the cruiser has higher sensor strength than the frigate) - If a frigate jams a battleship, the jammed duration is only 5 seconds (cause the battleship has a high sensor strength) - If a BS jams a frigate, the jammed duration is 20 seconds (no change, cause the BS has overpowering sensor strength) - If a cruiser jams a frigate, the jammed duraction is 20 seconds (no change again, cause the cruiser has overpowering sensor strength). Now this is an idea worth considering. At the moment the game has 2 major problems that effect pvp drastically. 1. The random effectiveness of ECM units in 1vs1 or very small gangs. 2. Instapoping in larger gangs. The random factor is a good thing in larger gangs, as the more iterations you get on jamming cycles the more it evens out to meet the propabilities. However. The solutions in the blog only address the first issue (solving 1vs1 problems) while aggravating the second issue. The reason [u}why fights last as long as they last at the moment is due to EW interference in large gangs. If the performance of EW is hindered in fleet battles, the HP boost won't do anything to make the fleet battles last longer as more and more firepower is available in fights, due to them not being jammed.[/u] Yes, it solves one problem, but not the issue that is most in need of attention. Mind control and tin hats
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 09:55:00 - [172] Originally by: Cheese999 EWar is NOT randomness. Target Painters, Tracking Disruptors, Sensor dampeners, even Webbers and warp scramblers are NOT chance based. Only ECM is chance based. It is an anomaly. And it should be treated as such. Not quite true. Damps a sad optimal, and a longish falloff, so you have quite a lot of chance there of not being able to "hit" with the damp. Mind control and tin hats
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:03:00 - [173] Originally by: Nyxus But the real issue is that there is no stacking penalty on ECM. 3 dampening drones means that no other dampeners will have any effect. 5 ECM drones and 5 multispecs not only stack, the odds of jamming get better and better the more you use. And thereing lies the problem. Well that and it takes multiple TDs and Dampeners to shut down a ship. With ecm all it takes is one mod and some luck. Nyxus ECM is chance based and this only presents problems in 1 vs 1 or very small gangs. In larger fleets the chance based system is good, since due to multiple iterations, the number of ships jammed is very close to the "base chance" and "luck" rather plays itself out. Now, what would be the point of introducing a stacking penalty to ECM units? It would mean that there would be no point in using multiple units on the same ship. Or on the same ship, if the stacking penalty is applied by the number of modules you have on your ship. Scorps with 1 or 2 nber stron ECM units and a 6 slot tank? Both of which have enough str to trivially lock down a BS? Sounds like the whole thing isn't really been thought through yet. I hope they read this thread. Anyways, going back to the old system would propably be best. Mind control and tin hats
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:11:00 - [174] Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 10:11:58 agrees Btw: ECM overpowered? Wether stuff is overpowered or not, you can see by the amount of people using it. I see many gangs without EW and sometimes large fleetbattles take place with just a hand full of Scorpions. Winning Electronic Superiority is not considered that great a thing to achieve by most; if it was, a fleet would consists 1/3 of EW ships. Even in a 3vs3 fight, there is quiet a big chance of the jammer not being able to jamm 1-2 of the enemy ships and him getting killed almost immediately. Like I said earlier, the problem is not ECM being overpowered, but the people having a problem with it¦s randomness. If they kill a Rook, they get fond of it. If they get scrambeled&killed by a Cruiser/Battleship without any chance of victory, they want scramblers to become chance-based. If they get jammed, they just complain jammers were chance based. Dissatisfied people will always scream louder than people who are totaly happy about how it currently is.
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:13:00 - [175] Originally by: Skeltek Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 10:11:58 agrees Btw: ECM overpowered? Wether stuff is overpowered or not, you can see by the amount of people using it. I see many gangs without EW and sometimes large fleetbattles take place with just a hand full of Scorpions. Winning Electronic Superiority is not considered that great a thing to achieve by most; if it was, a fleet would consists 1/3 of EW ships. Even in a 3vs3 fight, there is quiet a big chance of the jammer not being able to jamm 1-2 of the enemy ships and him getting killed almost immediately. Like I said earlier, the problem is not ECM being overpowered, but the people having a problem with it¦s randomness. If they kill a Rook, they get fond of it. If they get scrambeled&killed by a Cruiser/Battleship without any chance of victory, they want scramblers to become chance-based. If they get jammed, they just complain jammers were chance based. Dissatisfied people will always scream louder than people who are totaly happy about how it currently is. Very true. Mind control and tin hats
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:42:00 - [176] Originally by: Ithildin The problem with ECM is that it is not unique. In EVE we've got THREE electronic warfare systems: ECM - targets locking absolutely Damps - targets locking incrementally Disruptor - targets turrets incrementally Target Painters are not electronic warfare, they are a support module! To a degree you can say that warp jammers are electronic warfare that targets warping absolutely, but due to the nature and need for such modules they should not be discussed in this context. So we have three warfare systems, two of which targets the same attribute. One of these two are fine, the other one is ECM. We've got a system that reduces lock efficiency. We've got a system that reduces turret efficiency. Make ECM target something unique. But what is there to target in a ship? There are no counter measures to the following: * Missiles * Energy drainers * Remote enhancers * Local enhancers * Local repairers There's probably more fun ways you can affect a ship, but I must say that the binary situation of ECM is not fine. You can't work with that sort of system. It must be changed so that ship manoeuvring can be used as a lesser counter counter measure, the way it can with tracking disruptors and sensor disruptors. As Naughty Boy (by the way, read his twin post, it's REALLY good. Much better than this one) sublimely would have you know: don't work with the current system - it's broken. QFE This is also a reason why "ECM is balanced by ECCM" comments are totally wrong. The other EW systems have countermodules, too. But, unlike ECM, are also far more limited in their use. The balance of the EW systems vs each other is broken.
Axristos EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:44:00 - [177] ok lets practice the new changes and see First we all need to see how it works and whats the difference between EW dedicated ships and others. test server ppl just go in there and give a shot Then we can post Now is easy for everyone to say what he feels after 2-3 days of testing we gonna have facts i find the change good ew shiips have to be fitted with ecm rest ships can have eccm Ive been jammed a lot of times and i used also ecm on other ships so I know the feeling of not beeing able to lock and the joy to make someone blind I ve also lost ships when i couldnt jamm well so far so good go to test server and practice then prob we can change things (UK)
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.24 10:57:00 - [178] The real crux of the problem with chance based ECM is the too small sample size in small gang fights (which are imho the most enjoyable PvP in EVE). And of course the fact that a single 'win' for the ECM user is a lot more valuable than multiple wins for the ECM target. This could be fixed by ECCM activation getting a chance to break the lock. This would double the amount of ECM checks, and reduce the value of the ECMer's win. Maybe reduce ECCM cycle time to 5 secs to quadruple it. Maybe then ECCM would be the ECM counter it should be. Right now it is very subpar in performance. And that is not statistics, but experience. Statistics don't really apply very well with these small sample sizes. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Citizen X Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.24 11:04:00 - [179] Been reading this thread and the whining is fantastic and has made my day. OMG its changing!! I'm no CCP cheerleader but you have to admit Tux reads and listens to the forums - except for you Amarr slaving scum. Down with the slavers! I'm sure your time will come AGAIN - Remember how good pulse lasers where for so long? Right to the task at hand. I'm a long time ECM pilot and my initial reaction was a bit of quiet pre-change concern. Missile generally suck at the moment and now our ECM is under fire. So letÆs look at Caladri EW boats. We shield tank and use our mids for ECM. So its very rare to see a Scorp or BB or even a rook, hunting solo, as all the mids required for EW or you gimp ECM which was the point. We have always been the wingman of the wolfpack or fleet. The real issue is those ships that try to act as ECM boat, while maintaining their damage output - raven / domi come to mind. I hope these changes will work but think they will not unless the ecm strength bonuses are increased massively and the ECM mod strength lowered significantly. The Blackbird has been gimped by this change affectivily is placing it it the same class as all non- ecm strength boosted ships, maybe worst as we will affectively be limited to 2 strenght mods. Take a high slot and give a new low slot or give us a strength bonus please. Otherwise any non-ew boat can be just as affective in close and medium range and then whatÆs the point of flying a BB with no tank? Stacking bonus doesnÆt bother me, as I only use racials, multis stuck in terms of range / cap and price. A racial jammer can jam a small incorrect race ship pretty good. 2 goes at it sounds fair. Strange no talk of ECM drones, which can be affective on small ships. Now it was stated we would losing our armour tanking.. At the end of the day I will lose one maybe 2 jammers and be forced into a limited shield tank. I find managing 4-5 targets to be enough anyway generally - lack of brain power on my behalf maybe. Examples ship layouts I will be looking at: Scorp top To fit what is below mids 2 x Large shield extenders II 1 x EM harder 1 x 100mn MWD or ECCM backup array 4 x tech II racial jammers lows 1 x ECM strength mods 1 x damage control 1 2 x low slot sensor boosters ----------------------------- Rook top heavy Launchers + mids 2 x large shield extender II 1 x 10MN AB II 4 x named racial - one of each lows 1 x ecm Strenght 1 x BCU II or PDU II (might have grid issues) All in all looking forward to playing with the changes this weekend. Please save our Blackbird!!!!!!!!
Nicholai Pestot Gallente Havoc Inc	Posted - 2006.10.24 11:10:00 - [180] Originally by: Tranklukator The proposed changes don't fix ECM, they restrict it to Caldari, and that breaks the balance even more. So here's the possible solution. Split the 3 ECM subsystems: Multispec Jammer. Low slot. Reduces the sig. radius of using ship by 20%. So enemy miss more, missles do less damage, but still there is a chance to hit. Racial Jammer. Med. slot. The same as Multispec, but affects the enemy ship, so that it does less damage to everyone, not the user only. ECM burst. High slot. Breacks locks of anyone inside blast radius, including the user (chance based effect). Disables drones and guided missles. Has a small chance to offline sensor\EW modules on each ship being hit by it, or disable it's sensors for 30 sec. Scorpion\Blackbird gets bonuses to racial jammers, some faster Minmatar ships to Multispec jammer instead of damage, Apocalypse gets bonus to ECM bursts. So Scorpion remains good for fleet combat, reducing incoming damage greatly (smaller sig, fewer wrecks, more misses). But now jammed ships may at least pretend that they are doing something :) Minnies get something defensive to put in the low slots instead of WCS. And Apocalypse gets it's unique role as a half-kamikaze EMP bomber, assaulting sniper blobs and gatecamps. Woo, i like the way this is going. The only real problem is that the racials in this suggestion are just sensor damps with another name. Keep working on it ________________ What you do is you store up the rage, let it fester while you gain strength, then use it to gank those weaker than you... and so the circle of life is complete
Mallick Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 11:44:00 - [181] 4 different things to turn ECM into. 1. Make ECM more of a rapid weapon destabilizator - turns off and/or jams weapons. 2. Make ECM give -1 to maximum targets allowed and a chance to disable locks randomly as long as the ECM is activated on target. So when you try to lock, you lose lock after a few shots and have to relock again, repeat. 3. Simple, make ECM disable all locked targets and add a 10 sec addition to locking time when trying to relock again. 4. Make ECM make all locked targets invulernable for the entire ECM cycle. You can get a lock on the target, but due to the heavy electrical interference you can not really get a weapon lock, and as such not fire your weapons.
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.24 12:06:00 - [182] Originally by: Skeltek Edited by: Skeltek on 24/10/2006 10:11:58 agrees Btw: ECM overpowered? Wether stuff is overpowered or not, you can see by the amount of people using it. I see many gangs without EW and sometimes large fleetbattles take place with just a hand full of Scorpions. Winning Electronic Superiority is not considered that great a thing to achieve by most; if it was, a fleet would consists 1/3 of EW ships. Even in a 3vs3 fight, there is quiet a big chance of the jammer not being able to jamm 1-2 of the enemy ships and him getting killed almost immediately. Like I said earlier, the problem is not ECM being overpowered, but the people having a problem with it¦s randomness. If they kill a Rook, they get fond of it. If they get scrambeled&killed by a Cruiser/Battleship without any chance of victory, they want scramblers to become chance-based. If they get jammed, they just complain jammers were chance based. Dissatisfied people will always scream louder than people who are totaly happy about how it currently is. QFT
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.24 13:05:00 - [183] ECM is overpowered? Lol. 1. Put good ECCM in med and enjoy. 2. ECM ship is dead when ECM miss jam cycle. For example, all other electronic warfare modules work with 100% probability. Racial ECM is not very usable in real world. May be bi-racial ECM modules? Strength ECM must be slightly increased for ECM ships(or revamped from the scratch) and left unchanged(or slightly decreased) for the usual ships. ECM is just alternative tanking method. Not good, but reasonable for jamming pesky ceptors and frigats. ECM diversifies the game. Nos diversifies the game. Nerfing stabs, ECM, nos, missiles, covert ops, etc will convert the Eve into most stupid MMORPG where exists only DamageDealing tanks. Good luck, CCP, it is really innovative.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.24 13:13:00 - [184] And do not forget, that BBirds are poor corporation only weapon. It helps rarely, but without BBird poor corp has no chance at all. Are we going to take away only serious weapon from poor noob corporations?
Tanya Kovacs SteelVipers YouWhat	Posted - 2006.10.24 13:38:00 - [185] Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 24/10/2006 13:40:47 Hm, while I see this changes as a good decision and while I see the necessity of changing one bonus (the ECM-capbonus) into a strengthbonus, this will make best named jammer even more necessary and T2-jammers even more useless. Even if you fit racial jammers you will run out of cap in a "long" engagement (read: some few minutes) when running the jammers all the time - and no I'm no new player with relating skills at 1, 2 or 3. I guess cap injectors will be a must have for frig-/cruisersized ECM-ships like Griffin, BB or even Rook (I guess the recons will also suffer by the "remove capbonus"-change). -- All my postings reflects just my personal opinion and my lacking knowledge of proper english. There is no lag in EVE \o/
Soraya Silvermoon Never'where	Posted - 2006.10.24 13:46:00 - [186] Zixxa u forgot Webs... Their crying for a web nerf.. I bet its because the minmatar recons manage to kill something (frigs) oh and their own****abonds :D
Scarlet Pimpernel Clan Eshin	Posted - 2006.10.24 14:06:00 - [187] Read it but didnt really understand if he meant that the ECM ships would also need to use the boosting low slot jobbie, if he did I only have the following to offer Griffin only has 1 low
Scordite	Posted - 2006.10.24 14:14:00 - [188] Originally by: Skeltek Yes, you should decrease Jammingstrenght so much, that my friend Scordite gets at least a 86% chance of no getting jammed at all during a fight by a dedicated EW ship. Come on, you can¦t be really serious? I'm not your friend, I don't even know you. Also, my point was not that I wanted people to have a really low chance of jamming me, but rather that the factor of which resistance to jam is increased by fitting ECCM is a useless stat. You have to look at the resulting jam chance, that's what matters. Keep in mind that a sensor booster makes being hit by a sensor damp trivial, and a tracking comp means you'll hardly feel a tracking disrupter. With ECCM fitted, you will STILL lose the fight when the jam hits. Restricting ECCM with current effectiveness to dedicated EW boats is not a bad idea, but with the introduction of ECMdmgmods, you should still be able to get close to current effectiveness on certain ships (domi for example), at the cost of tank, which you won't need anyways if target is jammed. ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.24 14:35:00 - [189] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Zixxa u forgot Webs... Their crying for a web nerf.. I bet its because the minmatar recons manage to kill something (frigs) oh and their own****abonds :D Yes, you are right! Nerf these hatred webifiers!
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.24 14:39:00 - [190] Originally by: Tanya Kovacs Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 24/10/2006 13:40:47 Hm, while I see this changes as a good decision and while I see the necessity of changing one bonus (the ECM-capbonus) into a strengthbonus, this will make best named jammer even more necessary and T2-jammers even more useless. Even if you fit racial jammers you will run out of cap in a "long" engagement (read: some few minutes) when running the jammers all the time - and no I'm no new player with relating skills at 1, 2 or 3. I guess cap injectors will be a must have for frig-/cruisersized ECM-ships like Griffin, BB or even Rook (I guess the recons will also suffer by the "remove capbonus"-change). Now let count number of med-slots. For example 6 1 - AB/MWD. It is your safety and sometimes is just an order of your commander. 1 - Sensor booster. Must be just to be first and sometimes you need distance. 1 - cap injector. Have 3 slots free for what? For ECM! Yes, it is really dangerous ECM platform with 3 ECM modules. Which one to be racial?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one 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.

KR GIRLY SIDE / WTS PILGRIM + CURSE + T2 DRONES PACKS

KR GIRLY SIDE / WTS PILGRIM + CURSE + T2 DRONES PACKS