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)
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 14:57:00 - [121] Originally by: Alex Harumichi 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. Actually it does. It proves that a chance-based system is every bit as broken as it was before.
Rastam3n	Posted - 2006.10.27 14:59:00 - [122] Originally by: Alex Harumichi 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. Well, it proves that the chance based system is a flawed system in general. It doesn't matter if a jammer has a strength of 10 or 2.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:01:00 - [123] Edited by: Butter Dog on 27/10/2006 15:02:28 Originally by: Ranger 1 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. While there are ELEMENTS of chance in weapon systems, DPS will average out over time. Skills, circumstances, experience, and the decisions a pilot makes all effect this. This is true for every combat module EXCEPT for ECM. ECM is purely chance based, and either works 100% or 0%. Not only that, but its a ridiculously powerful module in itself. I'm not saying 'go back to the old system', I'm saying that ECM needs to change, and that the change implemented in the Kali test build has not worked. Non-ECM ships can still fit a multispec or two, get 'lucky', and win fights based on pure dice rolls, and nothing more.
Metis AT	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:14:00 - [124] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire @ Butter Dog. Bad luck? It is hard to cry foul when you have a stroke of bad luck. If the jammer did not work, you would have killed him in seconds and not posted about it. ECM abuse will be over and the next flavour will be dampeners. very true about the dampers but to be effective you have to fit a few of them. Amarr still getting the short end of the EWAR stick to be honest as they dont have enough mids to damp effectively. On a side note, Gallente should be clamoring for a sensor damping BS instead of another blaster boat.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:17:00 - [125] Originally by: Butter Dog Edited by: Butter Dog on 27/10/2006 15:02:28 Originally by: Ranger 1 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. While there are ELEMENTS of chance in weapon systems, DPS will average out over time. Skills, circumstances, experience, and the decisions a pilot makes all effect this. This is true for every combat module EXCEPT for ECM. ECM is purely chance based, and either works 100% or 0%. Not only that, but its a ridiculously powerful module in itself. I'm not saying 'go back to the old system', I'm saying that ECM needs to change, and that the change implemented in the Kali test build has not worked. Non-ECM ships can still fit a multispec or two, get 'lucky', and win fights based on pure dice rolls, and nothing more. I think you need more then 1 fight to be able to have a 'chance' at judging the changes. Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:45:00 - [126] Also chance is not somethignas simpleas most think. Pura X percent change only work in an uniform distribution. If you dice result for example is the summ of N dices you have a fat bell distribution where teh final behavior will be far different, even with same average chance, since the normal deviation will be far different. So most probably a tweak in the chance calculation is the issue. Chance stuff is soemthng great to be in an MMO since it adds expecation on the result, not "bahh I already know who is gonna win"
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:05:00 - [127] Originally by: Reatu Krentor I think you need more then 1 fight to be able to have a 'chance' at judging the changes. no, I don't, because what I dislike is the very fact is IS chance based waiting to 'get lucky' does not change this fact
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:07:00 - [128] Originally by: Polinus Also chance is not somethignas simpleas most think. Pura X percent change only work in an uniform distribution. If you dice result for example is the summ of N dices you have a fat bell distribution where teh final behavior will be far different, even with same average chance, since the normal deviation will be far different. So most probably a tweak in the chance calculation is the issue. Chance stuff is soemthng great to be in an MMO since it adds expecation on the result, not "bahh I already know who is gonna win" thats all very well, but with a module as powerful as ECM it just doesnt work anyone with spare mids would be stupid not to fit them, now or post-Kali The point here is that ECM was nerfed to stop non-ECM ships fitting them all the time as an 'i-win button'... but the very fact it is based on the roll of a dice means the change is ineffective people can still 'get lucky' and win a fight because of that Fights should be won based on tactics, decisions, experience and skills - NOT the roll of a dice
Sonho	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:16:00 - [129] Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Reatu Krentor I think you need more then 1 fight to be able to have a 'chance' at judging the changes. no, I don't, because what I dislike is the very fact is IS chance based waiting to 'get lucky' does not change this fact Guns are chanced based too.... And this systeam really is balanced more cap use and lower ECM streangth. And the old systema was POS a scorp was able to lock down 5 BS ,that is why they changed it.
VekkTor Legionari Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:33:00 - [130] the only thing i'd just ask is to leave the jammed ship's targets targeted, but being unable to activate any mods on it. re-targeting is something added to the ECM success imho
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:50:00 - [131] Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus Also chance is not somethignas simpleas most think. Pura X percent change only work in an uniform distribution. If you dice result for example is the summ of N dices you have a fat bell distribution where teh final behavior will be far different, even with same average chance, since the normal deviation will be far different. So most probably a tweak in the chance calculation is the issue. Chance stuff is soemthng great to be in an MMO since it adds expecation on the result, not "bahh I already know who is gonna win" thats all very well, but with a module as powerful as ECM it just doesnt work anyone with spare mids would be stupid not to fit them, now or post-Kali The point here is that ECM was nerfed to stop non-ECM ships fitting them all the time as an 'i-win button'... but the very fact it is based on the roll of a dice means the change is ineffective people can still 'get lucky' and win a fight because of that Fights should be won based on tactics, decisions, experience and skills - NOT the roll of a dice Disagree.. Once Erich hartman greates fighter pilot of all times (more than 320 kills) was asked (after war) if he considered himself the best pilot of all. He said. "Not at all, there were many piltos that were better than me, I was just the luckiest one. you know, it is always better to be the luckyiest of all incompetents, than being the luck chalanged ace" Tht was a cear reference to Marseiles considered the best pilto of all but who died when ejecting its plane (due to a broken oil pipe on its engine) because his head colided with plane tail. Luck is part of life anc ombat!! That is what makes it fun! A really good pilot is the one that can negate the luck disadvatage and use best the advantage when it arises.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:52:00 - [132] Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Polinus ... thats all very well, but with a module as powerful as ECM it just doesnt work anyone with spare mids would be stupid not to fit them, now or post-Kali The point here is that ECM was nerfed to stop non-ECM ships fitting them all the time as an 'i-win button'... but the very fact it is based on the roll of a dice means the change is ineffective people can still 'get lucky' and win a fight because of that Fights should be won based on tactics, decisions, experience and skills - NOT the roll of a dice it's a tactical choice to bring ecm or not, same with most other things in eve, right now on TQ ecm is too powerfull I'll agree with that. But the proposed changes look like they'll bring it in line with other ew, stacking penalty and halved jam chance are a step in the right direction. Maybe it needs more but that can only be judged after extensive testing, not 1 fight. turn your sweeping statement around: people can be "unlucky" and lose a fight despite fitting ecm. Don't whine about something after 1 fight, go on to sisi and test it longer, use it yourself, get skilled in it, breathe it... Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:08:00 - [133] Originally by: Reatu Krentor it's a tactical choice to bring ecm or not, same with most other things in eve, right now on TQ ecm is too powerfull I'll agree with that. But the proposed changes look like they'll bring it in line with other ew, stacking penalty and halved jam chance are a step in the right direction. Maybe it needs more but that can only be judged after extensive testing, not 1 fight. turn your sweeping statement around: people can be "unlucky" and lose a fight despite fitting ecm. Don't whine about something after 1 fight, go on to sisi and test it longer, use it yourself, get skilled in it, breathe it... slightly less "lucky" ecm is still the old ecm. only difference is, now you might manage to lock me now and then as opposed to being perma jammed 25-30 seconds of lost DPS is hard to catch up to, even with superior SP. in the end, one ECM hit is all i really need for you to lose any engagement. even if no ECM hits, i still have decent chance at winning, simply because ECM does not affect my tanking or my DPS. lucky ECM really only ensures my victory. and yeah, everyone will continue to fit ECM. the nerf is insignificant as it didn't address the actual problem of ECM being so much better than anything else you can fit in your mid. Make ECCM viable!
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:10:00 - [134] In fact other stuff as painters should be boosted. If you are fighting something BIG TP help nothing.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:12:00 - [135] Originally by: Nahia Senne and yeah, everyone will continue to fit ECM. the nerf is insignificant as it didn't address the actual problem of ECM being so much better than anything else you can fit in your mid. Oh? I personally am fitting tracking disrupters, sensor damps or painters if I only have 1-2 slots to spare for EW. Much better bang for the buck after the change, imho. Which one(s) to fit depends totally on the ship and tactics. Wish there was a "missile tracking disrupter" module...
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:25:00 - [136] Edited by: Butter Dog on 27/10/2006 17:25:48 Originally by: Sonho Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Reatu Krentor I think you need more then 1 fight to be able to have a 'chance' at judging the changes. no, I don't, because what I dislike is the very fact is IS chance based waiting to 'get lucky' does not change this fact Guns are chanced based too.... And this systeam really is balanced more cap use and lower ECM streangth. And the old systema was POS a scorp was able to lock down 5 BS ,that is why they changed it. Guns are NOT soley chance based. Tracking, transversal, distance, damage mods, ship type etc ALL effect guns, and are ALL controllable by pilots. DPS averages out over time. ECM is the ONLY 100% chance based module used in PVP.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:28:00 - [137] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 27/10/2006 17:31:14 Originally by: Butter Dog DPS averages out over time. Precisely the same way the ECM jamming success rate averages out over time. Look, this discussion is going round and round: you don't like the fact that there's a random element. Fine. Many others like that fact. Arguing about it degrades into an "is good" / "no, is bad" thing. The random nature of ECM isn't going away. The important question here is: does the ECM nerf do enough to stop people automatically filling up their mids with ECM? The jury is still out on that one.
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:40:00 - [138] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Precisely the same way the ECM jamming success rate averages out over time. yes, it will perfectly average out few minutes after you're long dead in the mean time, you are fighting someone with equally good tank and with equally good DPS. only difference is, you get to sit still and roll your thumbs for a while. in a blob, sure it might be iffy. in engagements involving just a few people, good luck with your potentially useless mods. Make ECCM viable!
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:40:00 - [139] Edited by: Polinus on 27/10/2006 17:53:30 Originally by: Butter Dog Edited by: Butter Dog on 27/10/2006 17:25:48 Originally by: Sonho Originally by: Butter Dog Originally by: Reatu Krentor I think you need more then 1 fight to be able to have a 'chance' at judging the changes. no, I don't, because what I dislike is the very fact is IS chance based waiting to 'get lucky' does not change this fact Guns are chanced based too.... And this systeam really is balanced more cap use and lower ECM streangth. And the old systema was POS a scorp was able to lock down 5 BS ,that is why they changed it. Guns are NOT soley chance based. Tracking, transversal, distance, damage mods, ship type etc ALL effect guns, and are ALL controllable by pilots. DPS averages out over time. ECM is the ONLY 100% chance based module used in PVP. aa now you are making yourself clear. This can be solved by adjusting the chance by the amount of exceding ECM force aboce sensor force.
kessah Caldari Veto.	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:44:00 - [140] i agree old system 4tw. -------------------------------------------------------- Forever Pirate 2
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:45:00 - [141] Edited by: Derran on 27/10/2006 17:51:00 Originally by: Butter Dog winning a fight by chance, a roll of the dice, is ridiculous. Always has been and always will be they could change the strength to 0.5 and it would still be a crappy system I HATED the old system because it was crap. You fit multiple jammers and he slaps on just one good ECCM and your 6 med slots are useless so you die and there is nothing you can do about it since ECM fitted ships are made of paper. At least with the way the system is now you can get into a skirmish and be greatly outnumbered and still have some chance of winning or at least getting away because I sure as hell ain't fitting the new WCS on an ECM ship after the patch.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:49:00 - [142] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 27/10/2006 17:31:14 Originally by: Butter Dog DPS averages out over time. Precisely the same way the ECM jamming success rate averages out over time. Look, this discussion is going round and round: you don't like the fact that there's a random element. Fine. Many others like that fact. Arguing about it degrades into an "is good" / "no, is bad" thing. The random nature of ECM isn't going away. The important question here is: does the ECM nerf do enough to stop people automatically filling up their mids with ECM? The jury is still out on that one. No, it doesnt. Don't you get it? ECM is the ONLY combat module which works based purely on luck. Its 20 second cycle time makes sure that when it works, its the 'i-win' button as few fights last longer than a minute or two. Guns etc are NOT based on luck. They will always, given the same circumstances, hit harder if you have damage mods, better transversal, optimal range etc. Other EWAR mods have clearly defined effects which are not based on luck.
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:52:00 - [143] Originally by: Derran I HATED the old system. You fit multiple jammers and he slaps on just one good ECCM and your 6 med slots are useless so you die and there is nothing you can do about it. At least with the way the system is now you can get into a skirmish and be greatly outnumbered and still have some chance of winning. what, you think you should be invincible instead? - do you think dampener boats have any better chances at winning solo? - do you think that target painter boats have any better chances at winning solo? - do you think that target disruption boats have any better chances at winning solo? each of these ships will die if they make a single mistake. you have been on the easy street for way too long. Make ECCM viable!
Polinus	Posted - 2006.10.27 17:59:00 - [144] I still think ECM should be a reversed TP. Reduce signature enormously. Just think on the following concept.. in RL a big BS is being attacked by a jet fighter and tries to lock on it to use its AA guns. If the fighter has ECm it will be hard to lock and ECm would be ffective (in fact to be true, no plane ECM is match for a ship radar, but for the sake of example...) now if another BB tries to ECM to protect itself from the other one.. what the first BB captain wil do? He would say. Wtf is that guing trying to do.. My radar can't see him but my art officer eyes are good enough to bring my gus upon that 250 meters ship moving like a crab. So ECM would be useless.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:04:00 - [145] Edited by: Derran on 27/10/2006 18:06:54 Originally by: Nahia Senne what, you think you should be invincible instead? Who said that? I could have blown up a couple of ECM ships night since they failed a couple of cycles. I fly missile and drone ships because of how they work well against ECM. I wouldn't even be a little concerned about ECM under the old system. Just need my FoF and/or drones and they'd need a whole crapload of ECM ships to even try to take me. Originally by: Nahia Senne - do you think dampener boats have any better chances at winning solo? They often can't anyway. Not against multiple opponents. One sensor booster negates most if not all of the effect and often people use one. So if you are facing 2 opponents, you might be able to remove one of them from the fight but the other one will likely kill you. It doesn't make me like my Lachesis or Arazu any less though. Originally by: Nahia Senne - do you think that target painter boats have any better chances at winning solo? No matter what anyone says, there is NO WAY anyone can convince me target painting is EW. It is utter crap. Minmatar 'ECM' sucks. Originally by: Nahia Senne - do you think that target disruption boats have any better chances at winning solo? This one isn't too bad so they could most likely depending on skills. Curse and Pilgrim and Arbitrator being the ones to use for this because of all the advantages. Caldari missile ships are used, sure, but there are still alot of ships with turrets. Originally by: Nahia Senne each of these ships will die if they make a single mistake. you have been on the easy street for way too long. The same can be said for regular ships if you get stuck at fighting at the wrong range. And I am not on easy street. I just tend to fly everything and tried the ships personally because I have 53M skill points with 17.2M in spaceship command.
Nimwa	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:07:00 - [146] I think ECM should be reworked to work completly different. Instead of affecting the ship's targeting it should affect specific weapon systems. You could create 2 or more categories for that: Weapons that use optical targeting system Weapons that use electronical targeting systems I.e. railguns could be part of the electronical targeting group, while blasters use optical targeting. Torpedots electronical, rockets optical, etc. Then by using an ECM you get the ability to stop weapons in the electronical targeting group from working either completly or place a malus on their accuracy. It might not even have to be larger than targeting disruptor's malus, as it affects other weapon systems that TD does not, i.e. torpedos. You can fit ships not to be dependant on one targeting group type or fit ECCM to get a bit more security. ECM ships have to chose targets more carefully and a successful "roll" doesn't guarantee a helpless target. There are "ECM-Counter-Ship Builds" avaible that are not effected by ECM at all without having to fit ECCM, by only using optical weapons. You could go one step further and change TD to only affect optical systems and create counter-balance that way. Though then we might need a TD-Counter module like ECCM, too.
Dixon Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:09:00 - [147] Quote: I HATED the old system because it was crap. You fit multiple jammers and he slaps on just one good ECCM and your 6 med slots are useless Well I HATE the current system because it is crap. I fit multiple lasers on my geddon and some asshat fits one good multispec and my 8 high-slots and 3 meds are useless. - - - - - - I have no strong feelings one way or the other...
Nahia Senne Fortunis Novum	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:13:00 - [148] Originally by: Polinus I still think ECM should be a reversed TP. Reduce signature enormously. Just think on the following concept.. in RL a big BS is being attacked by a jet fighter and tries to lock on it to use its AA guns. If the fighter has ECm it will be hard to lock and ECm would be ffective (in fact to be true, no plane ECM is match for a ship radar, but for the sake of example...) now if another BB tries to ECM to protect itself from the other one.. what the first BB captain wil do? He would say. Wtf is that guing trying to do.. My radar can't see him but my art officer eyes are good enough to bring my gus upon that 250 meters ship moving like a crab. So ECM would be useless. awesome idea really. maybe ecm should be changed as projected signature reduction system that affect targeted ship? so if you ecm someone, you reduce the sig radius of his targets. Originally by: Derran ...i sense e-peen0ring... construct an argument. i should add that curse is totally awesome because of ecm, same as nosdomi. once nos is nerfed as well, it wont be so overpowered. Make ECCM viable!
LoKesh Amarr InQuest Ascension Vertigo Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:34:00 - [149] Originally by: Butter Dog Edited by: Butter Dog on 27/10/2006 15:02:28 While there are ELEMENTS of chance in weapon systems, DPS will average out over time. Skills, circumstances, experience, and the decisions a pilot makes all effect this. This is true for every combat module EXCEPT for ECM. ECM is purely chance based, and either works 100% or 0%. Not only that, but its a ridiculously powerful module in itself. I'm not saying 'go back to the old system', I'm saying that ECM needs to change, and that the change implemented in the Kali test build has not worked. Non-ECM ships can still fit a multispec or two, get 'lucky', and win fights based on pure dice rolls, and nothing more. You said it exactly - the chance evens out over time. Weapon DPS averages over time. So does ECM. If you have a chance of jamming 25% of the time - over large data sets (ie time and encounters) you will jam people 25% of the time. Luck comes into other bits of Eve as well - were you blinking when that covert ops ship decloaked? did the server lag as your pod came out of your crumbling ship? Did your six 1400mm artillery cannons land four wrecking shots and demolish your opponent before he could warp? Did you jump into the system and land on the far side of the gate from the interceptor, or right on top of him? Did rats spawn on the gate and distract you or your opponent from changing the outcome of the fight? What modules get destroyed with your ship? When do you get given a storyline mission that gives you a huge payoff?
Friedrick Psitalon The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc. Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2006.10.27 18:55:00 - [150] Edited by: Friedrick Psitalon on 27/10/2006 18:58:38 Anyone who thinks luck isn't part of a military engagement has clearly never been in one. There are things you can do: - To lower the likelihood of bad luck (ECCM) - To minimize the effect of that luck (Sensor Booster for relock) - To reduce the effectiveness of bad luck (FoF, Drones) - To partially ignore the effectiveness of bad luck (TEAMMATES?) All of those have a downside; slots used, or less damaging missiles, or relying on something you have low skills in, or splitting the spoils of war. If you choose to lessen the impact of luck (bad luck) on your fights, you choose to accept the downside as well. If you choose to stick solely to your strategy with all guns blazing, you enjoy the benefits of a streamlined attack, and risk having bad luck smack you firmly in the nose. That's what we call balance, and a balanced choice. Combat isn't chess. Luck is real. Allow for disruptions in your own plan, or pay the price. The Dead Parrot Shoppe: always hiring the intelligent/mature, ubernoob or vet. Experience we can give you; brains, we can't.

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.