| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thelonious Blake
Lethal Intent.
157
   |
Posted - 2015.06.11 21:03:31 -
[1] - Quote
ECM should reduce the number of targets your ship can lock to a minimum of 1 target.
Ship's sensor strength acts as a buffer against ECM:
Number of locks = Ship sensor strength - ECM jam strength
In small gang it would be more meaningful to jam the logi and split the DPS, so the logi can't rep all targets, or can't keep up locking newer and newer targets.
In large fleets the scan resolution of logi ships would play far greater role if the enemy desides to bring ECM.
Some ships could get bonuses like having the minimum number of targets locked increased to more than 1.
Cheers
PS: As I think more of it in retrospective when I started the game I wondered why ECM didn't work that way. |
Wynta
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 21:22:58 -
[2] - Quote
Thelonious Blake wrote:ECM should reduce the number of targets your ship can lock to a minimum of 1 target.
Ship's sensor strength acts as a buffer against ECM:
Number of locks = Ship sensor strength - ECM jam strength
In small gang it would be more meaningful to jam the logi and split the DPS, so the logi can't rep all targets, or can't keep up locking newer and newer targets.
In large fleets the scan resolution of logi ships would play far greater role if the enemy desides to bring ECM.
Some ships could get bonuses like having the minimum number of targets locked increased to more than 1.
Cheers
PS: As I think more of it in retrospective when I started the game I wondered why ECM didn't work that way.
Someone suggested in a reddit thread to make a similar calculation but instead of targets have it reduce # of available remote reps/turrets/launchers/drone bandwith based on relative jam to sensor strength. What weapon system it affected would be a seperate module or script. The calculation could be percentage as in 15 jam strength to 30 sensor strength would need a 50% chance to reduce access to 50% of remote assist modules/launchers/turrets/bandwidth (either rounding up or down). Or doing Sensor-Jam to a minimum of 1 |
Nana Skalski
Poseidaon
196
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 21:37:01 -
[3] - Quote
I would like to see ECM modyfying way the target see other targets signature radius. Percentage modifier, like -10% per one ecm applied. With different meta item levels having other values. Caldari ships have a lot of signature radius when buffer tanked with shields and it would make up for defensive purposes. As it should be. |
Thelonious Blake
Lethal Intent.
157
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 21:38:29 -
[4] - Quote
Wynta wrote:Thelonious Blake wrote:ECM should reduce the number of targets your ship can lock to a minimum of 1 target.
Someone suggested in a reddit thread to make a similar calculation but instead of targets have it reduce # of available remote reps/turrets/launchers/drone bandwith based on relative jam to sensor strength. What weapon system it affected would be a seperate module or script. The calculation could be percentage as in 15 jam strength to 30 sensor strength would need a 50% chance to reduce access to 50% of remote assist modules/launchers/turrets/bandwidth (either rounding up or down). Or doing Sensor-Jam to a minimum of 1
I don't like this because it doesn't allow you to apply DPS or rep your target.
There is no other EWAR system that fully denies you your role in fleet. Tracking dusrupting negates your guns locking speed, but theoretically you would be able to hit perfectly should you and your target be motionless. Sensor dampeners can be ignored if you go close enough. Ofcourse with tracking disruptors your target will try to keep its high angular velocity and with damps it will try keep its range. That's where the player's experience come - the better one wins, not the one having more luck. I feel that by just reducing incoming damage/reps would be somewhat in the spirit of what ECM is today.
The description of ECM burst says: "Emits random electronic bursts which have a chance of momentarily disrupting target locks on ships within range."; description of targeted ECM modules says: "Projects a low intensity field of ionized particles to disrupt the effectivenes of enemy sensors.". From lore perspective (which doesn't matter really for most of us, but I feel we shouldn't ignore it either) I don't see how disrupting a ship's sensors would reduce the control it has on its turrets/launchers/reps.
I don't keep track on reddit, so I have missed that and any possible comments it would have. |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam
Disturbed Acquaintance
1460
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:02:11 -
[5] - Quote
Both Gallente Recons are faster than the Falcon
And sensor Damps have a longer range than ECM
If your getting jammed, your playing the game wrong.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
209
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:13:45 -
[6] - Quote
I'll just leave this here, relevant reply from relevant thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5786500#post5786500
Insert snarky search function comment here.
Have an informed day.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, you're just the game
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
261
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:52:03 -
[7] - Quote
Thelonious Blake wrote:ECM should reduce the number of targets your ship can lock to a minimum of 1 target.
Ship's sensor strength acts as a buffer against ECM:
Number of locks = Ship sensor strength - ECM jam strength
In small gang it would be more meaningful to jam the logi and split the DPS, so the logi can't rep all targets, or can't keep up locking newer and newer targets.
In large fleets the scan resolution of logi ships would play far greater role if the enemy desides to bring ECM.
Some ships could get bonuses like having the minimum number of targets locked increased to more than 1.
Cheers
PS: As I think more of it in retrospective when I started the game I wondered why ECM didn't work that way.
Generally, I have mixed feelings about ECM. Both from delivery and receiving end. I hate the random aspect of it (missing with perfect skills drives me nuts) but then again... being perma jammed... ouch.
That said: I don't like the execution of this idea: if you are jammed, you should be jammed out, not a few but all. For an ECM ship, jamming the target is often times their only defense... and that assumes their drones don't eat you for lunch.
That said something to remove the random aspect of it would be nice to see while at the same time improving the effectiveness of ECCM modules and skills. Maybe rework it as a diminishing returns - first hit is 100% effective, after that, skills, ship type, and modules come into play to diminish effectiveness and conversely reduce the rate of the diminishing returns. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |