| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ben Ishikela
64
   |
Posted - 2015.09.30 05:48:33 -
[1] - Quote
Greetings Traveler,
i recently went brainstorm on some ideas. So here it is. I am curious about what you have to say. Please let me know how to dismantle it.
What if, "ECM cancels the ability for the victim to receive remote assists/reps on a successful jam".
Implications:
1) ECM useless to counter Solo,MicroGang (without logi) Gameplay. RIP FalconAlt *sniff* (unless the logialt comes in  )
2) Fleets of DPS/Reps 50:50 is more likely to have losses when engaged by a similar fleet that has ECM.
3) ECMships are very fragile by now, this is a good balance for its power. However unbonused ECMstrength might need to be nerfed so that armorDoctrines with ecm in midslots are not totaly OP.
4) Jams can still fail and then the target can catch reps before buffer is down.
5) ECM ships allow for more interesting counterplay than just "reps vs. dps vs. alpha". (example: kill that kitsune with your claw already)
6) Ships will die faster and fleet engagements might be over quicker. This might be a really bad thing, as provoking escalations are way harder without some investment.
7) ECCM becomes an important active module. A ship might have enough buffer to survive 20sec and then it is (very likely to be) saved. So therefore targetswitching is still a thing.
8) The narrative of Caldari Ships (that they can stay on field longer and tank/protect stuff), is going to change to something way more agressive.
9) Armor Doctrines with their repair effect at the end of cycle might be hit more by this. But on the other hand they have those midslots to compensate with ECCM.
10) probably more engagements for pilots who like to bring ECM to their roams in lowsec.
So here we go. TLDR: I am predicting a nerf to medium fleets and a buff for micro ones. Or does it make Fleets suddenly more engageing? But however there are soooo many ways of gameplay that i cant cover them all. Have i missed something?
I do not yet know if that is something i want to see implemeanted. What are you thoughts about it?
Side note: Sensor Strength and ECMstrength can be tweaked very seperately from almost any other Ship's Stats. (exept Probing).
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden
Workers Trade Federation
484
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 08:48:59 -
[2] - Quote
So if proposed ECM is using on me, then I cannot recieve RR from another ship? How does that work in a scientific manner? |
Shana Matika
Perkone
Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 09:49:02 -
[3] - Quote
I think ECM is powerful enough.
But what if remote repair are tied to other factors?
For example (not possible at the moment I guess but the direction should be clear) why not "buff" existing Ewar that is not on as popular as ECM? I know, you wouldn't be able to use your favorite ECM but we want to find a solution to your proposed problem with remote repair,eh?
Let's take remote sensor damps. When used they reduce the effektivnes of remote repairs by x percent. Diminishing return or only highest effekt is used?
Lore may be that cause of the magnetic fields of the damps emit all remote repairs disturbed.
Off course such a powerful weapon need a drawback. The effekt will count to both ships. Attacker and victim.
Maybe a script? Normal Damp would have 0% effekt but res. and range damp. With script you can chose either range or resolution is switched with this effekt. |
Seliah
Repo.
207
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 10:07:22 -
[4] - Quote
I actually like the idea - at least it's an original way to adress some very redundant issues. Would have to be analyzed in depth to see if the concept is valid though.
Shana Matika wrote:
I think ECM is powerful enough.
I think his proposal would replace the current ECM effects.
Shana Matika wrote:
For example (not possible at the moment I guess but the direction should be clear) why not "buff" existing Ewar that is not on as popular as ECM?
Let's take remote sensor damps.
Damps are very popular too, and their mechanic is quite interesting, whereas the ECM jamming mechanic has some flaws (the fact that it's fairly boring for the victim, for example).
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2548
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 11:20:45 -
[5] - Quote
Remote Reps can not be nerfed in this way.
As this just simply makes everything F1 blob warfare with survival of any individual pilot being pure luck on who gets targeted by the enemy fleet.
If you want to nerf remote reps, you have to also nerf F1 blobs DPS stacking on targets also. So that fleets no longer put all reps and all DPS on a single target but have to split it between lots, both in attack and defence.
This splitting then creates a degree of chaos meaning pilot skill in knowing who their DPS/Rep targets are comes into play rapidly and fleets have to stay very disciplined or ships will explode in the midst of it due to reps going wrong ways.
This is then good game play as players feel they have effects both good & bad based on actions.
Magic 'Haha, you can't get reps and 50 of us just shot you' effects however, do not make for good game play |
Leto Aramaus
Spiritus Draconis
Spaceship Bebop
260
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 11:42:06 -
[6] - Quote
-1
don't like this idea
The UI update we deserve
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1198
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 12:04:37 -
[7] - Quote
i wouldn't mind ecm ships becoming more of a target painting drone e-war ships, so drone e-war being essentially ecm on drones so, you ecm the mothership and the effect makes its drones idle for say 15 seconds and then there is a couple of seconds delay whilst the drones reconnect too the mothership and then that ship is immune too the ecm for another cycle or the drones can at least get a volley off on the target before being jammed again..
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name, remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
2050
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 12:30:27 -
[8] - Quote
You balance remote reps by stopping logi being able to lock so many targets at once. Thus the enemy FC needs to be active and smart in primary calling for the switches.
It's literally that simple.
Small gang: unaffected.
Large blobs: suddenly massively vulnerable to well coordinated target switching and scan res damps thus making it a game of skill whilst still avoiding crazy reworks and redesigns. It also means the logi not relying on cap chain become more attractive (more spare target slots), thus opening neuts back up again as a cap chain is stupid hard to break in terms of effort provided from the competing sides.
Optional: Slightly increase armor logi scanres to compensate for reps landing at cycle end.
Summary: Cap lockable targets of logi to around 5 and declare OP SUCCESS. |
Anthar Thebess
1316
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 12:32:20 -
[9] - Quote
Reduce sensor strength of logistic ships, so jamming will be much easier.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 13:18:15 -
[10] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:So if proposed ECM is using on me, then I cannot recieve RR from another ship? How does that work in a scientific manner?
From Modules that have similar effects: "Due to the ionic field created by the siege module, remote effects like warp scrambling et al. will not affect the ship while in siege mode. This also means that friendly remote effects will not work while in siege mode either."
From Logistic Modules: "This module uses nano-assemblers to repair damage done to the hull of the Target ship. "
==> The ECM module "creates an unstable ionic field around the target. If it happens to be strong enough, any nano-assembler technology or shield transfers will be filtered out. Other remote Assists are still going to pass, because remotly increasing the ionic field is not effective enough that way."
However, ... if you are referring to the Name "electronic counter meassures" and its analogies, well ... maybe it needs a new one. but hey, it counters the Triage's meassures.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
|
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 13:24:54 -
[11] - Quote
Shana Matika wrote:I think ECM is powerful enough.
But what if remote repair are tied to other factors?
For example (not possible at the moment I guess but the direction should be clear) why not "buff" existing Ewar that is not on as popular as ECM? I know, you wouldn't be able to use your favorite ECM but we want to find a solution to your proposed problem with remote repair,eh?
Let's take remote sensor damps. When used they reduce the effektivnes of remote repairs by x percent. Diminishing return or only highest effekt is used?
Lore may be that cause of the magnetic fields of the damps emit all remote repairs disturbed.
Off course such a powerful weapon need a drawback. The effekt will count to both ships. Attacker and victim.
Maybe a script? Normal Damp would have 0% effekt but res. and range damp. With script you can chose either range or resolution is switched with this effekt.
imho damps are fine. they have enough counterplay and for micro solo are not a "cancerous problem" like ecm is. Their effects are well balanced (not speaking about numbers here). When being damped pilots can still come up close and brawl (given speed). While ecm forces them into passiveness, thats a very bad feeling for my victims.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 13:28:50 -
[12] - Quote
Seliah wrote:I actually like the idea - at least it's an original way to adress some very redundant issues. Would have to be analyzed in depth to see if the concept is valid though. Shana Matika wrote:
I think ECM is powerful enough.
I think his proposal would replace the current ECM effects.
Exactly.
I really would like to see a professional game designer take a look at this and analyse it. I am curious, what he would have to say.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 13:33:20 -
[13] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:i wouldn't mind ecm ships becoming more of a target painting drone e-war ships, so drone e-war being essentially ecm on drones so, you ecm the mothership and the effect makes its drones idle for say 15 seconds and then there is a couple of seconds delay whilst the drones reconnect too the mothership and then that ship is immune too the ecm for another cycle or the drones can at least get a volley off on the target before being jammed again..
Sorry, does not solve the "forced-passivity problem". At least drones/droneboats offer some counterplay, but its mostly immunity.
Ewardrones is a whole new topic. My favorite so far is to make ewar drones the size of 25/50/125 and therefor negate all stacking penalty problems. But .... meh ... another topic. not going deep here with it.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 14:05:43 -
[14] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You balance remote reps by stopping logi being able to lock so many targets at once. Thus the enemy FC needs to be active and smart in primary calling for the switches.
It's literally that simple.
Small gang: unaffected.
Large blobs: suddenly massively vulnerable to well coordinated target switching and scan res damps thus making it a game of skill whilst still avoiding crazy reworks and redesigns. It also means the logi not relying on cap chain become more attractive (more spare target slots), thus opening neuts back up again as a cap chain is stupid hard to break in terms of effort provided from the competing sides.
Optional: Slightly increase armor logi scanres to compensate for reps landing at cycle end.
Summary: Cap lockable targets of logi to around 5 and declare OP SUCCESS.
Yes, that might help with logisitcs a little. I also like the point about capchainless ships getting an indirect buff.
But i am not sure, if it solves the "buffer / dps - lockspeed =? reps"-problem. I want more diversity with supportskirmishes.
........
Now that i thought about it longer, it affects small gang drastically and large fleets less.
In large fleets of 20+, logi has to new-lock most victims anyway.
In small gang of ca.12, logi would not be able to have everyone locked. So their strenght is drastically reduced. (example: there was a video of a gang of 2tornado+2cerberus+scimitar+keres+someother < 12 dudes from the logi perspektive. Cant find it now. That gameplay would be hurt, but its absolutely not broken. In contrary, imho it needs help.)
In micro gang of ca.5, logi would be as affective as before. but then most gangs are better off with another dps/ewar.
....
There you have it, does not work. Sorry. Small gang is important.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 14:15:17 -
[15] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Reduce sensor strength of logistic ships, so jamming will be much easier.
Does not solve the "forced passiveness"-problem.
---
also: Isnt going to shake the meta enough.
Can be countered by ("lazy"/unagile) remote eccm. Benefits the large fleets and armor more.
Therefor still 50:50 dps:logi fleets without any losses for the winning side.
Therefor does not solve the "investment"-problem of fleet fights.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 14:37:51 -
[16] - Quote
I really would like to hear what flaws the OP idea has. So that i understand why it isnt in the game already.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1303
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 16:07:39 -
[17] - Quote
So what about Incursion Communities if this became a thing? When they get jammed out by the Niarja they can't get reps (Looking at your TCRC!) ?
As for my personal opinion EWAR is fine as it is. If you want to disrupt logistics, which is essentially what you're saying, then take on the logi-squad and disrupt the whole squad.
Can't get behind this idea at all.
Updated:
So you want all ships to pack ECCM? The purpose of gangs, I think especially small gangs, is that each ship plays to it's particular strength: You've got DPS, ECM, Logi and they should be fitted appropriatley. What you're asking is to nerf something (that has no logic in it) because you want to force people into fitting ECCM just so they can receive RRs?
RRs have no business being impacted by ECM unless the logi RRing is jammed out\damped and out of range\capped out etc. Just my thoughts.
[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee"
Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b]
Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
|
Persephone IX
Symbolic.
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 16:36:36 -
[18] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:I really would like to hear what flaws the OP idea has. So that i understand why it isnt in the game already.
ecm currently denies you everything, you get jammed, you cannot point, do damage or RR anything. Thats the reason most ppl say ecm is too powerful.
Ecm has to change imo, but CCP reluctance is justifiable. You need to weight the pros and cons. Somehow you propose for ecm to deny RR. Thats not a bad idea, but then the Falcon and the Rook become Anti logi platforms. If the ship isnt equipt with RR, then falcon is useless. Rest of Recon can still perform flawlessly.
Currently ecm is employed as a Lock-break mechanism, you get pointed, you jam the target and you flee. Ecm could shut down points (scrams, dusruptors and focused points), keeping this lock breaking mechanism to its core. If that happens, then again the falcon becomes job specific and will get employed in specific situations.
So ecm is a problem child, and needs to be revamped to a point that it is not all powerful or all crap. The only thing i see in the short run, is to reduce the optimal and falloff of ecm, bringing falcons and rooks closer to harms way. But then again falcons were never designed to to get close to the fight.
Better off keep it as is, till a suitable compromise is found.
CCP, Can I Haz My Stuff?
|
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
460
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 16:57:54 -
[19] - Quote
As long as the chances of a hit are quite drastically cut this might be workable, not sure making ECCM a mandatory module would improve the game at all. Still prefer the idea of it killing drone bandwidth but anything that stops ECM ruining small scale stuff would be welcome.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Bobb Bobbington
The Cult of the Rare Pepes
54
|
Posted - 2015.09.30 19:41:09 -
[20] - Quote
I don't get it, why do people seem obsessed all of a sudden with spamming F&I with nerf logi threads? They don't seem too OP to me. |
|
|
Ben Ishikela
64
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 10:44:33 -
[21] - Quote
Yeah, ECCM might become a mandatory thing. But what about ...
...changing the scimitar's/oneiros's "remote tracking comuter" bonus to a "remote eccm"-bonus.
... nerf local eccm modules. Buff remote eccm.
Quote:If the ship isnt equipt with RR, then falcon is useless.
"j'adoube": if the "hostile fleet", ...
Quote:Currently ecm is employed as a Lock-break mechanism, you get pointed, you jam the target and you flee. Ecm could shut down points (scrams, dusruptors and focused points), keeping this lock breaking mechanism to its core. If that happens, then again the falcon becomes job specific and will get employed in specific situations
I'd like that.
What about (one of the following) :
1) the OP effect of ECM and the lockbreak like the burst does. without the 20sec.
2) the target looses all Ewareffect (like points)+Assists for 20sec. It can still shoot and lock. (now falcon can act as a bail-out helper again.). But oh it has so many flaws that need readjustment (see highsecwarfare).
Quote:Better off keep it as is, till a suitable compromise is found.
I dont disagree. Its also why i write this topic as a Question. I dont know if its better, but i have to test.
Remove JumpFreighters/CloakHauler/CloakTrick and make a new T2Freighter(mjd&LotsOfCargo&moreTank, but no JumpDrive). Because we need more opportunities for piracy, escorts and decentralised economy! ...also Convoys.
|
SecretService
Secret Services
4
|
Posted - 2015.10.02 11:30:30 -
[22] - Quote
Basically ban reps on primary target.. brilliant idea. Several ships with this proposed ECM on primary will render Logistics useless.
aka: Breaking Logi for dumbs. |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
311
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 02:44:50 -
[23] - Quote
Why limit it to just RR?
Tweak it to apply to every form of targeted module. Include e-war and weapons.
Then ECM have the added task of juggling between jamming DPS off blues as well as jamming RR off the primary.
The way I see it is this: Caldari, Gallente, and Amarr all have ewar that limits offensive modules against your fleet, spread out in a nebulous manner.
Minmatar, being the red-haired stepchildren that they are enhance offensive modules used by your fleet. Both of the Minmatar ewar types are focused down against the primary.
What's missing is a way to focus ewar power in a defensive manner. |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
670
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 03:48:17 -
[24] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:So if proposed ECM is using on me, then I cannot recieve RR from another ship? How does that work in a scientific manner?
I think what we're looking at here is a case for remote target spectrum breaker - you bombard the target vessel with ewar that creates false flags for ships targeting it. Tgis means target locks fail and need to be reacquired without veing jammed out completely.
Advantages include synergy with neuts, damps and TD as well as not locking someone out for 20s outright. Mostly for use on enemy logi directly - by remote TSBing the logi you help break cap chains and reduce the effectiveness of spider tanking.
Your dps primary is different from RTSB primary. The more RTSB on a target makes no difference - as hostile locks are also jammed out and this is a meta itself where having the whole red fleet target logi and then RTSB applied also helps to break locks. Alternatively logi RTSB themselves so that incoming RTSB from reds get dropped automatically.
There's all kinds of crazy meta **** you could do with the relatively benign TSB if it was in remote form.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1782
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 06:33:25 -
[25] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You balance remote reps by stopping logi being able to lock so many targets at once. Thus the enemy FC needs to be active and smart in primary calling for the switches.
It's literally that simple.
Small gang: unaffected.
Large blobs: suddenly massively vulnerable to well coordinated target switching and scan res damps thus making it a game of skill whilst still avoiding crazy reworks and redesigns. It also means the logi not relying on cap chain become more attractive (more spare target slots), thus opening neuts back up again as a cap chain is stupid hard to break in terms of effort provided from the competing sides.
Optional: Slightly increase armor logi scanres to compensate for reps landing at cycle end.
Summary: Cap lockable targets of logi to around 5 and declare OP SUCCESS.
While I think the problem with Logistics ships is mostly empty hyperbole, this is the best solution I have seen proposed yet.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 08:23:18 -
[26] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:You balance remote reps by stopping logi being able to lock so many targets at once. Thus the enemy FC needs to be active and smart in primary calling for the switches.
It's literally that simple.
Small gang: unaffected.
Large blobs: suddenly massively vulnerable to well coordinated target switching and scan res damps thus making it a game of skill whilst still avoiding crazy reworks and redesigns. It also means the logi not relying on cap chain become more attractive (more spare target slots), thus opening neuts back up again as a cap chain is stupid hard to break in terms of effort provided from the competing sides.
Optional: Slightly increase armor logi scanres to compensate for reps landing at cycle end.
Summary: Cap lockable targets of logi to around 5 and declare OP SUCCESS. While I think the problem with Logistics ships is mostly empty hyperbole, this is the best solution I have seen proposed yet.
Logistics in large blobs could do with some tweaking to move away from the all-or-nothing nature they currently have. Either you break their logi and wipe the whole fleet off the field, or you don't and you don't kill a single ship. I would prefer that it isn't through an arbitrary limit such as a damage / repair cap but that player skill is more heavily involved.
Decreasing max locked targets is a good option to weaken logistics however they may just compensate with sensor boosters to decrease lock time and be back to where we started. Spreading damage through AoE weapons is an option that I personally like that I think will weaken logi in large fights. I believe problems with large scale combat should be dealt with through mechanics that also will only affect large scale fights. See my sig for my proposal.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |