EVE Search - So much for the ECM nerf...

All Channels

Ships and Modules

So much for the ECM nerf...

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Vathar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:13:00 - [91] Honestly, everybody complains that ECCM is useless when nobody tries to jam you and everybody agrees that in most fight, you'll face at least one jamming ship. What's da pwoblem? If you expect to get jammed, fit ECCM, if you think you can do without, don't bother! Regardless of what everybody says, I use ECCM quite often and seldom get jammed! Somebody mentions a Domi fitting 3 Multispecs and having a High chance of Jamming, yeah, fit at least 1 ECCM and suddenly, he wastes 3 slots and his chances aren't that high! He sacrificed 3 slots, drains his cap and still, it doesn't work that well does it? ___________________________________________ Originally by: Stamm Minmatar are kind of like going down a flight of stairs on an office chair firing
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:14:00 - [92] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Originally by: Reatu Krentor in 1v1 current ecm system(on TQ) is quite powerfull, but the old system was even worse. In the old system once you were jammed you would only get unjammed if the jamming ship died. But how are you going to manage that in a 1v1 if you're jammed? New system there is a chance that the jamming will fail(jamming chance right now is pretty high on TQ, on sisi it's approx. half of that atm). Exactly. It's easy to forget that chance also works in your favor, at times. There's a huge difference between 5% chance of jam failing and zero chance of jam failing, on both sides. Its still luck based. No combat system should be based on luck. LEAST OF ALL a system which entirely shuts down your weapons for 20 seconds plus relock time! ECM needs to be brought into line with the other EWAR modules, none of which are luck based. The question is, how.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:16:00 - [93] Originally by: Lakotnik Originally by: Dark PIne This effect could be reduced if the length of jamming was based on the same formula as the success of jamming: Time of jamming = (Jammer's cycle time) * (Jamming strength) / (Target ship's sensor strength) What if we take this system and make ECM hit every single time? But after that time of jamming is gone, ship relocks instantly (or takes the same time for locking it was jammed without requiring to press anything). Or we can take current chance based system with or without instant - or auto - relock ... Anyway, i like your idea. One ECM wont be the I-win button, but if you fit some on any ships with several mids to spare, it is quite effective. This is a good idea, definately would be a step in the right direction as it removes the 'dice roll' element.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:20:00 - [94] Originally by: Butter Dog Its still luck based. No combat system should be based on luck. LEAST OF ALL a system which entirely shuts down your weapons for 20 seconds plus relock time! Bah, all warfare is partly based on luck. ECM is based on luck the same way gun hits are based on luck; you can fit modules and skills to improve your chances, but some of your shots will always miss. Sure, the ECM effect is huge, so it needs careful balancing. But I suspect the new nerf is pretty close to the right ballpark. The old deterministic system sucked and was totally boring. Imho, of course. There's nothing more stupid than a ship that can 100% always jam you.
Imhotep Khem Vortex.	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:22:00 - [95] For those who were not around, the old system was not chance based but simply who had the bigger strength. The only chance was if the enemy had backup arrays fitted or not. In the old days, some things that worked on players did not work on NPC. CCP wanted to change this so that all things worked on all ships. ECM did not work on NPC. When CCP made it so ECM did work on NPC, they had to make it chance based else ECM ships can easily just stack on the strength and sleepwalk through all missions and ratting exercises. So do not expect ECM to go away from chance base unless you can propose something that will work well with NPC. ____ "If your not dyin' your not tryin'." "Are you prepared to go all the way, Alexi?" DuGalle
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:22:00 - [96] I still dont get why people hate dice roll? there isa lready one in damage. And its not like its rolled once and gone. Its rolled every time so on avarage you have a reasonable prediction of the behavior. If fight was 100% deterministic, why bother to fight it? Eve is already too few skill needed on 1Vs1 (after the engagment get to its apex). A little ranomness just brings up surprise and that is fun!! If I wanted to play something 100% deterministic I would play rock paper and scissor where I see what the enemy do then I choose my option.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:22:00 - [97] ECM is nerfed totally and will slowly die. For usual ship you need to fit 3 best ECM(20kk) to have 40% jam chance against BC. It is too expensive. One ECCM, one sensor booster and one warpscramler is much more useful replacement for useless ECM multijammers. ECM is fully dead as tanking ability for transport ships too. Dedicated ECM ships at the moment nerfed(and I do not know anything about unnerf). But, imagine and dedicated ECM ships will be unnerfed, but with ECCM fit in the med slot(instead of dropped EC) effectivity of the ECM ships will be effectively halved. Add, that ECM ships are far to be useful in combat, being constructed from the paper , having too little slots and low damage power(Falcon - zero dps, Rook low dps, Scorp low dps). The only positive moment with ECM ships in the fleet is for enemy - easier to call primary. /Me (personally) am switching to dampeners.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:26:00 - [98] Originally by: Lakotnik What if we take this system and make ECM hit every single time? But after that time of jamming is gone, ship relocks instantly (or takes the same time for locking it was jammed without requiring to press anything). Or we can take current chance based system with or without instant - or auto - relock ... Anyway, i like your idea. One ECM wont be the I-win button, but if you fit some on any ships with several mids to spare, it is quite effective. Imagine you are sitting in built from toilet paper Falcon, jamming juicy BS. Jamming is gone BS relocks you instantly. Your stupid idea removes ECM recon ships from the game. Any except BBirds and Scorpions. Due to such ideas our game is becoming as stupid and straightforward as WoW or LA2.
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:26:00 - [99] In a non chance based system. You in 1 vs could have both ships ECM each other and sicne there is no chance, no one would leave the lock and we have an infinte fight with zero shots.. not my idea of fun. Fun is about taking risk, taking risk is about not knowing the outcome.. not knowing the outcome is about taking chances!
Gurii Minmatar	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:27:00 - [100] Perhaps drop ECM Multispectrals? Then you need to think about what the enemy might bring to the battle. And change Racial ECM:s to only affect Racial Sensorsystems. ----- I just love eve-o login errors: The character you've selected does for some reason not belong to you! CONCORD has been notified.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:31:00 - [101] Originally by: Gurii Perhaps drop ECM Multispectrals? Then you need to think about what the enemy might bring to the battle. And change Racial ECM:s to only affect Racial Sensorsystems. Don't be so ***. Get "racial dampeners" and feel the difference. Or racial warpscramblers. Racial ECM is only good addition(bonus for your intel and pure luck), but workhorse is multi.
Isyel Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:33:00 - [102] I remember a certain ECM idea that came up once in some chat channel. Basically ECM could still be rather random (but you could influence what it does to a certain degree), but random in the sense of having certain detrimential effects on the targeted ships beyond braking lock. Let me explain. It would break your lock, you could relock just slower than your usual lock time. It would also be chance based on how many of your locks it breaks, so you could for example have 5 ships locked, you loose 2 locks. There you relock, BUT. You, for example, have now trouble hitting the enemies (turret tracking distrupted, missile warheads scrambled) or your sensors are way weaker (like a dampener) or other possible fun effects. When i said you could influence. You could for example increase the cap need of the scrambler and make it to something better (like increasing lock time) or make the cap stay the same but the scrambler will have less chance of doing things other than the one you want it to do. Would even take us to another idea. The ability to, for example, redirect some of the power to sensors (loose cap but make sensors more powerful to reduce those detrimential effects) etc. Sounds a little complicated but it sure would be more fun. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I be needin' some sig love. sigh
Jacob Holland Gallente FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:33:00 - [103] Looking at the EWar systems (and not including Stasis Webs, Warp Scramblers or Nosferatu as they aren't EWar, they target the enemy's engines, warp drive or power systems not electronics (and yes, I realise that the Painter doesn't target the opponent's electronics either, I'll come to that later)) the ECM stands out. It is the only chance based EWar, but it is also the only module which eliminates rather than reduces a function of the enemy vessel. If tracking disruptors had a 30% chance of preventing a turret ship firing entirely you'd see more of them about, if sensor damps had a 30% chance of reducing any ship's lock range to 0 they'd be ECM, if Painters had a 30% chance of increasing a target's sig rad to infinity more Ravens would be loading Rage Torps, a webber and Painter and going interceptor hunting. Every one of those effects would be seen as overpowered. However, in the old system ECM effectively degraded your sensor strength and that didn't work either. So let's take inspiration from the message which flashes up every time you attempt to get a lock while jammed. Quote: You are currently managing 0 targets, as many as your ship's electronics are capable of. Rather than degrading Sensor Strength how about it degrades the number of targets you can lock. ECM Multi knocks off one target, racial ECM vs the wrong race knocks off half and racial ECM vs the right race knocks off two. To compensate you have ECCM modules and Backup Arrays, if these added targetting slots (regardless of skill or ship, so a character without targetting might be able to manage 3 targets with a backup array or 4 with an ECCM (both modules being slightly renamed)). A Scorpion should be able to lock down a couple of Battleships which aren't running defenses (most are Max locked 8 IIRC) or at the least force them to remanage their targets if they're running some form of defence. However a solo Vampadom would no longer fit a single ECM multi "because there's a slot free" (the fact that noone considers fitting ECCM immediately there's a slot free - but instead tries to jam a Multi on there is perhaps telling). Yes you might well find that Every ship in a fleet would fit an ECM to lock down the primary - but they'd be just as likely to fit damps to reduce the primary's lock range to 0 or tracking disruptors to reduce his optimal range and tracking to nothing... Tweak things slightly more by saying that ECM (or Damp, or TD) cycles in place before the activation of ECCM, Sensor Boosters or Tracking computers didn't effect them - your whole fleet may jam the primary, but if he's fitting ECCM he'll have a chance at a couple of shots every now and then with which to fight back, or at least run Nos to fuel his tank. Originally by: cordy Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
Gurii Minmatar	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:34:00 - [104] Originally by: Zixxa Originally by: Gurii Perhaps drop ECM Multispectrals? Then you need to think about what the enemy might bring to the battle. And change Racial ECM:s to only affect Racial Sensorsystems. Don't be so ***. Get "racial dampeners" and feel the difference. Or racial warpscramblers. Racial ECM is only good addition(bonus for your intel and pure luck), but workhorse is multi. It was just a suggestion, chill. ----- I just love eve-o login errors: The character you've selected does for some reason not belong to you! CONCORD has been notified.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 12:51:00 - [105] Originally by: Zixxa Originally by: Lakotnik What if we take this system and make ECM hit every single time? But after that time of jamming is gone, ship relocks instantly (or takes the same time for locking it was jammed without requiring to press anything). Or we can take current chance based system with or without instant - or auto - relock ... Anyway, i like your idea. One ECM wont be the I-win button, but if you fit some on any ships with several mids to spare, it is quite effective. Imagine you are sitting in built from toilet paper Falcon, jamming juicy BS. Jamming is gone BS relocks you instantly. Your stupid idea removes ECM recon ships from the game. Any except BBirds and Scorpions. Due to such ideas our game is becoming as stupid and straightforward as WoW or LA2. No, because you could cycle your jammers on one target. What you could not do, is stick all 6 jammers on different targets and hope your dice roll is a lucky one. Equally, I could ask you, what good is a toilet paper falcon when the jam fails completely on a BS? A non-chance based system benefits everyone, including ECM ships, because they know what their capabilities are.
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:02:00 - [106] No.. anon chance only bennefits those that want fights that are competely resolved before they start.
JoCool Caldari Cataclysm Enterprises	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:15:00 - [107] Add a cool down time of 20 seconds to ECMs, after each cycle, regardless of if the jam worked or not. Give ECM ships a hidden bonus to remove the cool down time to 0. There you have a module, even if chance based, that would be ineffective to use on other than ECM ships. So if a non ECM ship tries to jam you and succeeds, you'll still have 20 seconds after the jam where you can fight back. This nerfs 1 and 2 ECM setups on non-ECM ships. However, if you dedicate 4 or 5 slots to it, you might be able to keep a single ship constantly jammed by applying multiple jammers one by one covering each others downtime. _______________________________________________________________________ Trey Azagthoth > Youre my idol Jocool. I wanna be like Jocool jr. or Jocool the sequel! Oveur > ohnoes jocool
Ranger 1 Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:20:00 - [108] As has been (correctly) pointed out, normal combat has a fairly large dose of dice rolling as it is now... it just isn't as obvious. If you can't see that when you look at your damage results that pop up on your screen, then you are not really thinking things through. The old system sucked. In many instances there was virtually no reason to even play a fight out... the computer could have determined the winner before the combat actually began. Without a doubt Jammers are the most powerful of the jamming tech, and Multi's the most useful of the Jammers. It would not break my heart to see Jammers in general, and Multi's in particular, have a fairly drastic reduction in effective range. It would keep them out of longer range and fleet battles all together (unless you risk a squadron of jamming ships jumping in close). Then we would be forced to rely on the more specific, less generally crippling, forms of ECM for large engagements.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:23:00 - [109] How about we first test the new ECM system before we suggest too many weird tweaks? As someone noted, the old system isn't coming back, it would make it too easy to zero-risk solo any NPC. I'd venture to bet that the old method of fitting 1-2 ECMs in mids isn't that useful anymore. Fitting 3+ will probably work now and then, but a lot less reliably than before, you'd really need a sensor damp in addition to that -- and at that point we're already talking 4 midslots dedicated to ECM -- that should start to have some effect. 4 sensor damps is equally bad or worse news, if you want to compare. And they work 100%, as long as you can keep range.
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:26:00 - [110] In fcat I think the oposite would be nice. To make it like in RL (where jammers are not uber). Jammers only work at longe range (at short range the radar burn throught the jamming signal). This would make jmmaers effective for close range ships be safe until aproach and diminish long range fight. Also like in RL there should be weapons that attack specifically ship emmiting jamming. Usually in RL missiles have Home on Jam capablity.. a mod where its 99.9% sure they will hit the jammer. So a quite powerfull weapon, that can hit only jamming ships would be nice. Or a module that allows you to swith your targeting exclusively to the ship jamming you in a Home on Jam mode). That would allow BS to kill jamming frigs etc... (while still being disrupted from firing at its original targets).
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:27:00 - [111] Originally by: Polinus No.. anon chance only bennefits those that want fights that are competely resolved before they start. i'm failing to see a problem here No other combat EWAR module is chance based, why should ECM be exactly?
Rastam3n	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:27:00 - [112] Originally by: Alex Harumichi How about we first test the new ECM system before we suggest too many weird tweaks? Did you actualy read the OP? This WAS with the new system...
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:32:00 - [113] Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus No.. anon chance only bennefits those that want fights that are competely resolved before they start. i'm failing to see a problem here No other combat EWAR module is chance based, why should ECM be exactly? Because the other systema effect are not binary ON OFF. They are percentage and reductions... not simply DENY. ECM could be non chance based if it was not simply your lock works or does not work.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:37:00 - [114] Originally by: Polinus Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus No.. anon chance only bennefits those that want fights that are competely resolved before they start. i'm failing to see a problem here No other combat EWAR module is chance based, why should ECM be exactly? Because the other systema effect are not binary ON OFF. They are percentage and reductions... not simply DENY. ECM could be non chance based if it was not simply your lock works or does not work. This makes it EVEN WORSE though, as its the most powerful EW system (no weapons for 20 seconds plus relock time). No other EWAR is chance based. What if, for example, tracking disrupting had a chance to cut your tracking to ZERO for 25 seconds? At the moment its way out of line with other EWAR modules. The chance-based nature of it is what makes ECM so ridiculous in its current form. What we need to do is think of some ideas which improve this situation. There are some gerat suggestions already in this thread.
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:42:00 - [115] Originally by: Butter Dog This makes it EVEN WORSE though, as its the most powerful EW system (no weapons for 20 seconds plus relock time). No other EWAR is chance based. What if, for example, tracking disrupting had a chance to cut your tracking to ZERO for 25 seconds? At the moment its way out of line with other EWAR modules. The chance-based nature of it is what makes ECM so ridiculous in its current form. What we need to do is think of some ideas which improve this situation. There are some gerat suggestions already in this thread. indeed. failing to nerf ECM, i demand my tracking disruptor's to shut down turrets for 20 seconds. then it will still not be as good as ECM, but it will at least be close.
Lakotnik	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:42:00 - [116] Originally by: Zixxa Imagine you are sitting in built from toilet paper Falcon, jamming juicy BS. Jamming is gone BS relocks you instantly. Your stupid idea removes ECM recon ships from the game. Any except BBirds and Scorpions. Due to such ideas our game is becoming as stupid and straightforward as WoW or LA2. Heh if a BS manages to lock you u re doing something terribly wrong. Suggestion was about relocking (or autolocking) targets you already had lock on be4 ECM hits you, not instalocking anything after ECM effect wears off. And you need to be in a fleet combat or have a terrible case of lag not to lock and jam a BS be4 it locks you. Anyway, with 2 racial jammers (lets say 10 str, vs 20), BS is still jammed for 10s per jammer, if it doesnt have ECCM. Well i think jammers still have to miss, 2 would manage to permajam a bs with numbers above. 4 with 1 midslot eccm. But still, there wont be so many frigs using 1 multispec - "in case i get lucky". It is just not that useful anymore.
Ranger 1 Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:48:00 - [117] Originally by: Rastam3n Originally by: Alex Harumichi How about we first test the new ECM system before we suggest too many weird tweaks? Did you actualy read the OP? This WAS with the new system... You mean the one that is being tested and tweaked? One brief combat does not = a good test.
Ranger 1 Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:57:00 - [118] Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus No.. anon chance only bennefits those that want fights that are competely resolved before they start. i'm failing to see a problem here No other combat EWAR module is chance based, why should ECM be exactly? Because the other systema effect are not binary ON OFF. They are percentage and reductions... not simply DENY. ECM could be non chance based if it was not simply your lock works or does not work. This makes it EVEN WORSE though, as its the most powerful EW system (no weapons for 20 seconds plus relock time). No other EWAR is chance based. What if, for example, tracking disrupting had a chance to cut your tracking to ZERO for 25 seconds? At the moment its way out of line with other EWAR modules. The chance-based nature of it is what makes ECM so ridiculous in its current form. What we need to do is think of some ideas which improve this situation. There are some gerat suggestions already in this thread. Your arguement contradicts itself. And you need to get over your hang up with "chance based". Skills and equipment affect your chances just like with everything else in EVE. Key word being chances. Damage is chance based, including the possibility of doing zero damage. You've been playing a "chance based" game all along, but evidently did not comprehend this fact. Absolute certanty (if you have enough jammers) of absolute jamming is bad, mmmkay. Just like if getting a hit with any of your weapons always meant ship destruction of your target. Bad, boring, and the death of a great game.
Bobby Ogata	Posted - 2006.10.27 14:09:00 - [119] The main problems with the new system are the chance of it working are too high and the time it takes to recover (lose lock, jammed, lock) is too long. So... Create small, medium and large ECM modules to counter the frigate jamming the carrier forever. Have ECM modules increase your sig radius when used, reducing the time it takes to lock jammers. Reduce the time you're jammed to 5s.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.27 14:18:00 - [120] Originally by: Rastam3n Originally by: Alex Harumichi How about we first test the new ECM system before we suggest too many weird tweaks? Did you actualy read the OP? This WAS with the new system... I'm quite aware of that. I mean "properly test". One isolated case does not prove much.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.