Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13725
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:41:21 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone! We're planning a huge set of module tiericide in our March release and this thread will serve as the feedback location for changes to ECCM, Sensor Boosters, Remote ECCM, Remote Sensor Boosters, Sensor Backup Arrays and Signal Amplifiers.
These changes are pretty huge, and include a complete merger of all ECCM into their respective Sensor Booster modules.
One of the worst things about the ECCM, Remote ECCM, and Sensor Backup Array modules is that they feel terrible for the user when nobody tries to jam you (or when you get jammed anyways since there are no guarantees with randomness). To solve this problem we are adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules. Existing ECCM modules and blueprints will be converted on patch day into their closest sensor boosting equivalent.
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
This change also has the added benefit of reducing the number of modules a new player needs to learn about by over 100 (we actually had 72 kinds of Sensor Backup Arrays in the game alone, it blew my mind).
As for the non-ECCM part of the Sensor Booster tiericide, we are increasing fitting costs a bit and adding new Rogue Drone faction and officer varieties. The new faction RSBs intentionally provide a very small benefit for scan resolution over T2, as we don't want to significantly buff instalock camps at this time. They provide some great targeting range and sensor strength however.
Here's the most recent iteration of the numbers: http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67557/1/SensorBoosters.jpg
We're very interested in your feedback on all these changes. We'll be releasing them to Singularity next week if all goes well, so that you can try these and all the other module changes planned for the March release. Please use this thread for passing along your feedback, and we'll be reading.
Thanks!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13725
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:41:26 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Sydious
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
27
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:48:41 -
[3] - Quote
Clear Skies had you beat on this by a few years. |
Ashterothi
Aideron Robotics
350
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:56:32 -
[4] - Quote
Help me understand:
Your problem statement is "One of the worst things about the ECCM, Remote ECCM, and Sensor Backup Array modules is that they feel terrible for the user when nobody tries to jam you (or when you get jammed anyways since there are no guarantees with randomness)."
However your solution is " adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules."
While this does decrease the number of modules that is necessary, it doesn't rightly address the issue you stated. It solves a *different* issue, that of needing to collect too many extra modules for your different ships, but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds.
Can you help me understand how this connection was made?
Listen to Hydrostatic Podcast for all your Empyrean needs!
|
Gremk
The Red Island Foundation Shadow Cartel
20
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:57:09 -
[5] - Quote
This is a good change. Nice job CCP. |
Papazoglou
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
6
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:01:13 -
[6] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:Help me understand:
Your problem statement is "One of the worst things about the ECCM, Remote ECCM, and Sensor Backup Array modules is that they feel terrible for the user when nobody tries to jam you (or when you get jammed anyways since there are no guarantees with randomness)."
However your solution is " adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules."
While this does decrease the number of modules that is necessary, it doesn't rightly address the issue you stated. It solves a *different* issue, that of needing to collect too many extra modules for your different ships, but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds.
Can you help me understand how this connection was made?
I think the point is if you're not facing enemies with ECM there is still a benefit of extra sensor strength or targeting range. Its not just a useless module that takes up a slot. |
Jazz Caden
Convicts and Savages Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:02:08 -
[7] - Quote
Well Played CCP,
Really nice change. |
Arla Sarain
750
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:06:26 -
[8] - Quote
Yep, The future is now. |
Jack Hayson
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
353
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:08:29 -
[9] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote: but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds. It does. If you are not under jam pressure you can switch out the script and get your sensor strength or lock range boosted. |
stg slate
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:09:19 -
[10] - Quote
About time, awesome work goodsir! |
|
Suodemon
Errant Endeavours Sev3rance
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Doing the numbers on the T2 SEBO, and the scripted sensor strength comes out at 76.8 assuming 60% like the scan res and targeting range scripts. Current ECCM modules provide 96%. Did I just do the math wrong? |
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
557
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:18:15 -
[12] - Quote
This is the change ECCM/ECM has needed so people will stop complaining about ECM being OP so much. Give value to the module that isn't niche so people will actually have a module that gives them a bonus while on grid when they are not being jammed.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Dunk Dinkle
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
127
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:19:45 -
[13] - Quote
Looks great.
As a logi pilot, the flexibility to adapt to the situation with scripts is wonderful.
Thanks! 7o |
Albrecht Patrouette
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
19
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:21:26 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks!
So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"?
By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too? |
Ashterothi
Aideron Robotics
350
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:24:13 -
[15] - Quote
Jack Hayson wrote:Ashterothi wrote: but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds. It does. If you are not under jam pressure you can switch out the script and get your sensor strength or lock range boosted. That's the part I didn't latch onto, Thanks!
Listen to Hydrostatic Podcast for all your Empyrean needs!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13740
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:27:18 -
[16] - Quote
Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too?
Those both depend on collecting or predicting information that may be unknown or may change (what race of ship you'll be facing and what damage type you're receiving (PVE is a known quantity but that's a different issue)). What ship you are currently flying is always information that is available to you.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Seymarr
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
8
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:29:53 -
[17] - Quote
Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? Yes, because whereas your choice of which jams to fit lets you prepare to counter different threats or have different opportunities as the battlefield evolves (fit more Amarr jams to counter guardian support, fit more Caldari for counter-jam work, etc.), there is no reason to ever fit an off-race ECCM. You don't counter a different type of setup by fitting the wrong ECCM, you just waste a slot. It's not a "choice" if there's only ever one correct decision. |
Kosetzu
Aeons Multiplied
152
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:32:19 -
[18] - Quote
Seymarr wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? Yes, because whereas your choice of which jams to fit lets you prepare to counter different threats or have different opportunities as the battlefield evolves (fit more Amarr jams to counter guardian support, fit more Caldari for counter-jam work, etc.), there is no reason to ever fit an off-race ECCM. You don't counter a different type of setup by fitting the wrong ECCM, you just waste a slot. It's not a "choice" if there's only ever one correct decision. Would be really awesome if ECM had scripts for different sensor types instead of different modules. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra Gallente Federation
373
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:33:51 -
[19] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:This is the change ECCM/ECM has needed so people will stop complaining about ECM being OP so much. Give value to the module that isn't niche so people will actually have a module that gives them a bonus while on grid when they are not being jammed. What I think people don't like about ECM that many have pointed out is it has no counter play. If you are jammed, that's it. You can no do absolutely nothing of value for the next 20 seconds in addition to the time it takes to relock targets. Oh and heaven help you if you had someone tackled and they vomited out some light ECM drones on you and escaped. ECM drones are the most produced drone for all the EW drones than all other drones combined. The reason is very obvious. They are super cheap and turns any ship with a drone bay into a Kitsune.
ECM is not a fun game mechanic. It is a dice roll to see if players are allowed to play the game or not. Merging these modules initially sounds good and does help the situation some, but still does absolutely nothing to address the fact being jammed offers no counter play what so ever. ECM is just a terrible game mechanic that is a relic from old game design philosophy. |
Jayden Thomas
Manson Family Advent of Fate
15
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:36:45 -
[20] - Quote
Excellent. A much needed improvement, and CCP didn't have to break anything to make it work. |
|
Denidil
Cascade Crest
647
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
I like it
Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
|
Ezekiel Marr
The Real OC ROC.
15
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:44:19 -
[22] - Quote
So... now there's one module to counter damps and ECM. Meanwhile damps and ECM are represented by two(or five, if you count racial ECM as different) modules.
How is this fair to ewar pilots? |
xPredat0rz
Grey Templars Fidelas Constans
123
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:44:53 -
[23] - Quote
Seems like a huge nerf to OGBs.
Most fits require at least 2 ECCMs to get where they need to be. With these proposed changes you might have to upgrade to high grade talons to deal with the nerf to Sensor strength.
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
557
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:48:14 -
[24] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:This is the change ECCM/ECM has needed so people will stop complaining about ECM being OP so much. Give value to the module that isn't niche so people will actually have a module that gives them a bonus while on grid when they are not being jammed. What I think people don't like about ECM that many have pointed out is it has no counter play. If you are jammed, that's it. You can no do absolutely nothing of value for the next 20 seconds in addition to the time it takes to relock targets. Oh and heaven help you if you had someone tackled and they vomited out some light ECM drones on you and escaped. ECM drones are the most produced drone for all the EW drones than all other drones combined. The reason is very obvious. They are super cheap and turns any ship with a drone bay into a Kitsune. ECM is not a fun game mechanic. It is a dice roll to see if players are allowed to play the game or not. Merging these modules initially sounds good and does help the situation some, but still does absolutely nothing to address the fact being jammed offers no counter play what so ever. ECM is just a terrible game mechanic that is a relic from old game design philosophy.
I guess I will bite here...
You can still launch and assist drones (or have them set to aggressive. F.O.F. missiles (yes, they do actually work in some situations)
And with tracking disruptors and sensor damps, they only give you the illusion you can still do something. Sorry, but if someone has any kind of meaningful EWAR applied to you, you will not be able to do anything.
One of the main reasons why so many people would complain about ECM is because they would refuse to fit ECCM. Jamming a ship that has ECCM equipped is not reliable. Meanwhile Tracking Computers and Sensor Boosters directly counter unbonused tracking disruptors and unbonused damps, but they still give you a useful on grid bonus that isn't niche.
ECM drones are used more then the other EWAR drones because the other EWAR drones are useless because they give a very small bonus, but they also apply stacking penalties to each other, so by the time you get to your 5th drone, its just hanging out in space. This is while the ECM drones only give each other diminishing returns because if 2 drones land a jam at the same time, one of them is effectively wasted.
A fix for the other EWAR drones that has been brought up before on the F&I is to simply make them into super drones that require more bandwidth, and give a larger bonus.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Barrett Fruitcake
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:48:42 -
[25] - Quote
Sydious wrote:Clear Skies had you beat on this by a few years.
Heh, I thought the same thing when I saw that.
|
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force IT'S ONLY PIXELS
229
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:51:42 -
[26] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:Help me understand:
Your problem statement is "One of the worst things about the ECCM, Remote ECCM, and Sensor Backup Array modules is that they feel terrible for the user when nobody tries to jam you (or when you get jammed anyways since there are no guarantees with randomness)."
However your solution is " adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules."
While this does decrease the number of modules that is necessary, it doesn't rightly address the issue you stated. It solves a *different* issue, that of needing to collect too many extra modules for your different ships, but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds.
Can you help me understand how this connection was made?
If I understood the blog correctly, if you're not running a script you'll still get sensor boosting and targeting range bonuses from the module even if the ECCM bonus fails due to randomness. Sounds like a sensible change to me.
12 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
|
Drazer Emolite
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:57:38 -
[27] - Quote
So the omni effect will be of the same strength as the racially-specific ECCM modules i'm assuming?
I like it, it bring a real reason to fit that mid slot so that even when you aren't fighting against the stupid strong ecm in this game its still useful, even if only a little. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2917
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:57:48 -
[28] - Quote
Any concerns that this will make almost every ship with a sebo, significantly more difficult to probe scan? |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1459
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:01:37 -
[29] - Quote
Looking at the numbers provided, your new ECCM options show a flat bonus to all sensor types. 50 for meta 0 and 60 for T2. Is this an intentional flat additive bonus, or should those be some sort of percentage?
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
1985
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:01:59 -
[30] - Quote
Good thing, but shouldn't ECM be tweaked, if not outright buffed due to this change?
Since it would be unreasonable to expect a complete remap of the ECM mecanic right now, even though that's what we really need, couldn't you like make ECM racially scriptables or something?
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Retired Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - Ex-BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
178
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:06:32 -
[31] - Quote
xPredat0rz wrote:Seems like a huge nerf to OGBs.
Most fits require at least 2 ECCMs to get where they need to be. With these proposed changes you might have to upgrade to high grade talons to deal with the nerf to Sensor strength.
Since the passive modules have the same boni as the old backuparrays my guess is you still get a +50% base script you can load into your SeBo to get the same benefit as before.
But it really looks like a huge nerf to jammingships as eccm will be way more common. Also kinda nerf to combatscanning since there are still f.e. many guardiansetups that do not run eccm but Sebos. |
Drazer Emolite
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:07:13 -
[32] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Good thing, but shouldn't ECM be tweaked, if not outright buffed due to this change?
Since it would be unreasonable to expect a complete remap of the ECM mecanic right now, even though that's what we really need, couldn't you like make ECM racially scriptables or something?
Why would we buff ECM before you even see what the state of the game will be like with these changes, ECM is broken right now, there is no denying it.
That being said, im not entirely against ECM modules having scripts, but i think they should work like ammo, so you cant LITERALLY perma-jam somebody |
Esnaelc Sin'led
The Unchained Club
61
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:08:49 -
[33] - Quote
@CCP Fozzie : +1 |
thebarry
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
17
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:19:16 -
[34] - Quote
This sounds like a great idea!
What about rigs that affect sensor strength, e.g. Ionic Field Projector, have you thought about adding eccm to those as well? |
Danetta Valens
Phayder Research
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:25:55 -
[35] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:Help me understand:
Your problem statement is "One of the worst things about the ECCM, Remote ECCM, and Sensor Backup Array modules is that they feel terrible for the user when nobody tries to jam you (or when you get jammed anyways since there are no guarantees with randomness)."
However your solution is " adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules."
While this does decrease the number of modules that is necessary, it doesn't rightly address the issue you stated. It solves a *different* issue, that of needing to collect too many extra modules for your different ships, but it doesn't address the fact that an ECCM module that is fit feels like a waste when you are not under jam pressure, or when the jam still succeeds.
Can you help me understand how this connection was made? Probably, the better solution is: Module with charges and comparable long reload time. Once you jammed, you can use an active charge to drop jam from you. It can be a big step from randomness. |
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
172
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:30:42 -
[36] - Quote
It's like somebody has been listening to what I have been saying about how useless fitting the current ECCM modules.
I like this change |
Anthar Thebess
1452
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:32:01 -
[37] - Quote
I noticed that you are missing pirate lp store version of modules.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Carneros
Ancient Hittite Corporation The Bastion
24
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:34:55 -
[38] - Quote
Suodemon wrote:Doing the numbers on the T2 SEBO, and the scripted sensor strength comes out at 76.8 assuming 60% like the scan res and targeting range scripts. Current ECCM modules provide 96%. Did I just do the math wrong?
This might be a key point. Can we get this math clarified?
Thanks. |
Arla Sarain
752
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:42:17 -
[39] - Quote
Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too? They have membranes which cover all resists.
T2 ships frequently only need 2 hardeners, because of racial resist profiles.
None of these examples warrant the sarcasm. ECM is a dumb mechanic. It's not a dumb EWAR variant. It's just executed poorly and immaturely (as in archaic game design). |
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
131
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:57:56 -
[40] - Quote
Noice. |
|
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Northern Army
2726
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:07:26 -
[41] - Quote
Ezekiel Marr wrote:So... now there's one module to counter damps and ECM. Meanwhile damps and ECM are represented by two(or five, if you count racial ECM as different) modules.
How is this fair to ewar pilots? Doesn't really change all that much tbh.
There's basically two cases where people complain about ecm. (1) When a falcon alt uncloaks and turns a 1v1 into a 2v1 and (2) When CFC/Horde/Brave run "**** you fleet" and bring ungodly amounts of damping/jamming/ewar frigates and cruisers.
For (1), nothing really changes. If you bring sebo's to a 1v1, you're either giving up tank (hardeners, shield boosters) or damage application (webs, tracking computers) putting you at a disadvantage. Further, even 3-4 sebos won't stop a falcon with 5-6 jams from keeping you locked out of half of a fight. In the small gang case, people "lose" to falcons because there's another ship in play that they didn't expect - not because ecm is "broken". It doesn't really matter whether that ship is a falcon or something like a pilgrim/curse/rapier/proteus/neutral logi.
For (2), the sheer number of griffins and maulus's in play is what makes ewar difficult to fight. The sebo change is a drop in the bucket.
Basically, nothing really changes for ewar pilots. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2917
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:26:42 -
[42] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Good thing, but shouldn't ECM be tweaked, if not outright buffed due to this change?
Since it would be unreasonable to expect a complete remap of the ECM mecanic right now, even though that's what we really need, couldn't you like make ECM racially scriptables or something? There's little to no point in making it scriptable or making it separate tbh. It's not like there is an interesting or niche use trade-off for fitting the wrong ECCM. Which starts to add needless complexity to the module. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1202
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:28:06 -
[43] - Quote
scan res sebos / scan res rigs / sharpshooter t3ds ruin solo pvp so hard. would prefer some kind of scan res dampening resistance, or make it so you can't go above your base scan res or something idk |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2917
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:28:26 -
[44] - Quote
Ezekiel Marr wrote:So... now there's one module to counter damps and ECM. Meanwhile damps and ECM are represented by two(or five, if you count racial ECM as different) modules.
How is this fair to ewar pilots? No, there was ever only 1 module that your ship could use to counter ECM. Use any other racial ECCM and you received literally no benefit. It has always been one module. Unless you ran into some poor newb who didn't realize he was fitting the wrong module. |
Mr Hyde113
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
278
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:39:05 -
[45] - Quote
"THIS IS HUUUUUUUUUUUUGGEE" - Donald Trump
Mr Hyde - Candidate for CSM XI
Youtube Channel
Twitter
|
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:55:35 -
[46] - Quote
I suppose this makes ECCM near unprobable a thing of the past? |
FT Cold
The Scope Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:57:49 -
[47] - Quote
This is a positive change. Good stuff. |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Just let it happen
428
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:03:14 -
[48] - Quote
Suodemon wrote:Doing the numbers on the T2 SEBO, and the scripted sensor strength comes out at 76.8 assuming 60% like the scan res and targeting range scripts. Current ECCM modules provide 96%. Did I just do the math wrong? Aren't the scan res and targeting range scripts +100% primary stat -100% secondary stats? This means that the sebo should give 48% unscripted, 96% scripted ECCM and 0% scripted range/scan res. IIRC 96% is the same as current modules, but you can get half strength with 30% range and scan res on an unscripted.
xPredat0rz wrote:Seems like a huge nerf to OGBs.
Most fits require at least 2 ECCMs to get where they need to be. With these proposed changes you might have to upgrade to high grade talons to deal with the nerf to Sensor strength.
1: shouldn't change anything if my numbers are right. 2: I don't think they care since they're still trying to get rid of OGBs. |
Keo Makue
Sutoka
1
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:03:16 -
[49] - Quote
What happens to our current stocks of our modules that are getting eliminated?...well besides being eliminated. Which modules magically turn into what exactly? |
Wayne Caderu
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
10
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:09:47 -
[50] - Quote
This is cool and all, don't get me wrong, the new stuff looks great. That being said could we address how strong even an off-racial jammer is? like, just damn. |
|
Avon Salinder
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:26:32 -
[51] - Quote
An excellent change, hitting two things at once. Love it. |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
307
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:37:40 -
[52] - Quote
Great stuff. Blends two modules that are rarely useful outside some very specific fits (compared to losing tackle or tank) into something that is really interesting to use. Will be interesting in an Alliance Tournament setting too. |
Captain Campion
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
13
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:50:17 -
[53] - Quote
good change, thanks ccp |
Mad Abbat
Talon Swarm
35
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:55:21 -
[54] - Quote
Well done Fozzie! That is a really welcome change. |
Krevnos
Back Door Burglars The Otherworld
56
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:28:32 -
[55] - Quote
I am happy to see the rather redundant ECCM module being merged into a more useful combined module finally.
Would you be able to confirm whether these new modules will still take scripts and indeed whether there will be a script made available for sensor strength? |
Sturmwolke
680
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:38:25 -
[56] - Quote
Buff one of the signal amplifiers for +3 targets please Atm, the only choice is high slot T2 Auto Targeter. |
Alexis Nightwish
406
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:10:15 -
[57] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:These changes are pretty huge, and include a complete merger of all ECCM into their respective Sensor Booster modules....
...we are adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules. I'd ask for a refund of my ECM skills, but I'm sure you'd just tell me to give you money so I can extract them and re-inject at a significant loss. t( " t)
CCP Fozzie wrote:As for the non-ECCM part of the Sensor Booster tiericide, we are increasing fitting costs a bit A 60% increase is NOT "a bit"!
Also if the "all sensor strength bonus" is a raw number and not a percentage I'm gone as not only will that **** ECM to hell and back, it would have MASSIVE effects in WH space by making a LOT of ships unprobable.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
368
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:18:03 -
[58] - Quote
Oh yes. Oh hell yes! I and other solo PVPers have made this very suggestion in the past, and let's just say that this will probably be one of my favorite small changes CCP has made in recent years. One of my biggest complaints about ECCM modules is that they provide no real use unless you are facing ECM, and the use they provide when you do face ECM is purely chance based and is not worth the slot for the module. This change also makes signal amps slightly reasonable to fit on certain battleship setups for solo and small gang.
ECM is still terrible game design, there's no gameplay or skill involved in it, and the range at which ships worth less than 1m isk can perma-jam virtually any other ship in the game is absurd, but this is a small step in the right direction.
The only downside to this change is that it is a stealth buff to the arty svipul. Now it gets another buff, an extra resistance to ECM. To be honest, with the added functionality of sensor boosters, their CPU should probably be quite a bit higher. 16 CPU for a Tech 2 sebo is still insanely cheap given the added functionality it will be receiving. I would suggest more like 20 CPU and the other meta versions adjusted from there. |
Zetakya
Echelon Research SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:35:43 -
[59] - Quote
The SEBO fitting reqs just doubled for the same effect on a given stat (as mostly a SEBO is fitted for one stat only). Old F90 was 30% boost, to get that now you need a Tech2, which with the increased fitting costs per module has pushed CPU need from 8 to 16. That's going to be a problem for some fits (thankfully, not mine).
I do like the merging of ECCM with these modules, it makes for a good tactical choice on the field of what to script, rather than a strategic choice before you leave dock. |
Cyrek Ohaya
Blazing Sun Group
21
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:54:28 -
[60] - Quote
Fozzie you're basically applying a free ECCM bonus to Sensor Boosters, I can't simply agree to that, on live we will now have a solution to both ECM and Sensor Dampener modules, two birds with one stone, we can't have that. Let's go over what we have now:
-ECCM (Racial) I - II = Low Slot, Local Active, 96%,Overheats for 30% bonus. The standard for some Logistic cruiser fits.
-ECCM Projector I - II = Medium Slot, Remote Active, 120%, Overheats for 30%. Less Range and Heavier CPU requirement than Sensor Boosters. Niche strongly lies in Logistic chains or for a Marauders immensely irrational weakness to ECM.
Your job should be to make the least interesting choice, the Signal Amplifier more appealing to your players rather than make a streamlined Sensor booster be able to deal with EWAR issues more effectively.
There is some inconsistency with your Remote Sensor Booster proposal is that you're adding the ECCM bonus from a module which takes 55 CPU to one that costs 22, 55 being a cost more suitable for Battleships and some Battlecruisers, 22 something passable for certain frigates and easily fitted on cruisers. Don't take me wrong but I like the remote assistance modules, you are just making them too easily accessible, and in turn splitting the odds against dedicated ECM pilots. |
|
Lauren Vaille
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
5
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 06:36:24 -
[61] - Quote
Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too?
Comparing ECM to hardeners is a more apt comparison than you realise - you either bring the multi spec jams for a more uniform encounter AKA energized adaptives / adaptive fields or you make some bets that you'll be fighting caldari and end up having a harder time fighting minmatar when you bring kinetic hardeners to an explosive fight.
At leat ECM of the wrong race still has a chance to work, and besides, all hardeners are doing is plugging the holes in your ship's resists. If you're doing it to boost your already high resists and leaving big holes, then that's the interesting gameplay choice you made.
|
Lilli Tane
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
24
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 11:20:24 -
[62] - Quote
Interesting changes, this will simplify a lot the fittings of ECCM and SBOS,
ThatGÇÖs a great change
However, Pay close attention to Logistics ships whit this change
For logistics ships, especially the cruiser size hulls, right now an ECCM is mandatory, with the changes we will be using the more fitting requirements intensive SEBOS, well, right now Logistic cruisers already have very intensive CPU fittings, so unless something is changed on this ships we will again have to nerf logistic cruisers tank.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2273
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 12:27:40 -
[63] - Quote
I really like this change.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
561
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 14:08:11 -
[64] - Quote
logi even more op.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
178
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 14:22:02 -
[65] - Quote
I just realized we were finally able to reverse engineer the tech from clear skies. Blackbird jammign you? Fire up the sensorboosters. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1557
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 02:11:10 -
[66] - Quote
Sturmwolke wrote:Buff one of the signal amplifiers for +3 targets please Atm, the only choice is high slot T2 Auto Targeter.
There is also the low slot +1 that always goes forgotten
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Helene Fidard
CTRL-Q
37
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 18:53:18 -
[67] - Quote
Will sebos use the ECCM visual effects when sensor strength scripts are loaded?
Hey! I don't know about you
but I'm joining CTRL-Q
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
379
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 01:32:33 -
[68] - Quote
Lilli Tane wrote:For logistics ships, especially the cruiser size hulls, right now an ECCM is mandatory, with the changes we will be using the more fitting requirements intensive SEBOS,
You're going from... 1 MW, 16 tf meta 4 eccm to... 1 MW, 16 tf T2 sebo. I don't see the problem. |
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
227
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 08:02:53 -
[69] - Quote
Making lots of Vanilla, losing lots of flavour.
Decreasing the variants (tiericide) is good. Merging the sebo/eccm is not.
Combat scanning took a great big nerf... |
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
24
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 12:43:32 -
[70] - Quote
Lauren Vaille wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too? Comparing ECM to hardeners is a more apt comparison than you realise - you either bring the multi spec jams for a more uniform encounter AKA energized adaptives / adaptive fields or you make some bets that you'll be fighting caldari and end up having a harder time fighting minmatar when you bring kinetic hardeners to an explosive fight. At leat ECM of the wrong race still has a chance to work, and besides, all hardeners are doing is plugging the holes in your ship's resists. If you're doing it to boost your already high resists and leaving big holes, then that's the interesting gameplay choice you made.
You misunderstand guys,
choosing the "right" kind of ECCM for your own ship is not interesting gameplay as you know your ship and it's sensor type beforehand. There is no choice to make at all, you always pick your ship races own sensor type and buff it with the respective ECCM mod. For remote ECCM that would be entirely different though. That choice would determine which other ships you can protect from jams. |
|
Desiderya
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
1103
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 16:52:59 -
[71] - Quote
Fozzie,
What about the four sets of racial sensor strength implants?
Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1562
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 17:12:15 -
[72] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:wheres the imperial navy sebos?
allegedly the 2 most advanced races in the game. and imperial navy cant make jack ****.
amarr used to have 2nd best sensor strength then got nerfed... just cuz. used to have 2nd best scan res then nerfed to 3rd and 3rd.
Iirc the amarr have the most out dated navy woke the caldari have the most advanced
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2152
|
Posted - 2016.02.15 11:07:08 -
[73] - Quote
May as well just remove ECM from the game at this point.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Krevnos
Back Door Burglars The Otherworld
61
|
Posted - 2016.02.15 16:07:18 -
[74] - Quote
Hi Fozzie, I was just making a second review of the new stats after going through the comments here. One thing stuck out as someone mentioned that the low slot modules are uninspired and a poor alternative to the mid slot version.
I understand that one module should be generally preferable to the other, but the mid slot, in this case, is both superior in every way and scriptable. Since these modules are almost never used, I think it would be nice to give them something to help at least make them a viable choice, such as high sensor strength. Even with this they will rarely be employed, but at least it gives e-war paranoid pilots another fitting choice.
Certainly these modules need something more if you are expecting players to use them. |
Lilli Tane
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.15 17:24:34 -
[75] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Lilli Tane wrote:For logistics ships, especially the cruiser size hulls, right now an ECCM is mandatory, with the changes we will be using the more fitting requirements intensive SEBOS, You're going from... 1 MW, 16 tf meta 4 eccm to... 1 MW, 16 tf T2 sebo. I don't see the problem. (For that matter I don't see any problems with these changes, the cap usage changes even make the enduring sebo and resebo useful, and these modules did indeed use too little capacitor.)
Yes, mid slots donGÇÖt concern me for now, (those numbers might be changed so there resides my concern), but we also use Low slots for sensor compensation in some fits.
The Meta zero Backup array goes from previously 10 CPU to 20 CPU on the Signal amplifier. ThatGÇÖs 100% more CPU used The T2 Backup array goes from previously 18 CPU to 24 CPU on the Signal amplifier. ThatGÇÖs 33.33% more CPU used
I understand that the new SEBO-¦s and signal amplifiers are more powerful than the previous ECCM and Backup arrays so it makes sense they will use more fitting requirements,
I am in fact surprised that the SBOS have exactly the same fitting requirements than the previous ECCM. after all they do a lot more.
However, as stated before and I will state it again, Logistic cruisers right now, donGÇÖt have enough CPU for planned modules changes, or will have to sacrifice ether tanking ability or repping ability, unless off course another logistics nerf is planned |
Cartheron Crust
Matari Exodus
188
|
Posted - 2016.02.16 23:27:56 -
[76] - Quote
Lilli Tane wrote:However, as stated before and I will state it again, Logistic cruisers right now, donGÇÖt have enough CPU for planned modules changes, or will have to sacrifice ether tanking ability or repping ability, unless off course another logistics nerf is planned
Good. Logistics are too strong anyway. More ships need to die. |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
564
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 00:39:09 -
[77] - Quote
i demand federation navy sebo's be replaced with imperial navy sebos. fed navy has litterally everything right next to winmatar.
so glad the 2 most advanced races in the game keep to their RP grounds when it came to warfare links. federation navy get skirmish and armor, and yet... they keep the eccm and sensor module. while amarr navy get information and armor. and yet, cant make anything.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Knapstein
Skywalker Express
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.19 19:40:02 -
[78] - Quote
I use both ECCM unprobable PvE ships and combatscan PvP ships. So I wish for small change.
Sensor Booster II SensorStrengthBonus 48%, script 96% (+100%), > Bonus 4.8%, script 96% (+1900%) |
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2016.02.23 19:18:32 -
[79] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too? Those both depend on collecting or predicting information that may be unknown or may change (what race of ship you'll be facing and what damage type you're receiving (PVE is a known quantity but that's a different issue)). What ship you are currently flying is always information that is available to you.
Or you just wanted to buff T1 Logi. Unscripted they will have a bonus to sensor strength and targeting range for the price of one module eliminating ewar that could be placed against them, only sensor damps or ecm on the field? swap a script if it is T2, if its a T1, you should still be good unscripted.
any range kiter/sniper just loved you for this too.
So im going to lump this in to you or whoever was in a Logi ship that got jamed out "Because of Falcon!". |
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2016.02.23 21:01:02 -
[80] - Quote
Lauren Vaille wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? By the way, I really hate having to choose the right hardeners based upon the weapons I think might be used against me. It sucks so much having thermal used when I planned on kinetic. So . . . gonna lump those together now, too? Comparing ECM to hardeners is a more apt comparison than you realise - you either bring the multi spec jams for a more uniform encounter AKA energized adaptives / adaptive fields or you make some bets that you'll be fighting caldari and end up having a harder time fighting minmatar when you bring kinetic hardeners to an explosive fight. At leat ECM of the wrong race still has a chance to work, and besides, all hardeners are doing is plugging the holes in your ship's resists. If you're doing it to boost your already high resists and leaving big holes, then that's the interesting gameplay choice you made.
But you also know what your going to get with hardners. RNG will beat you every time you really need it in your favor. |
|
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2016.02.24 19:57:19 -
[81] - Quote
Seymarr wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? Yes, because whereas your choice of which jams to fit lets you prepare to counter different threats or have different opportunities as the battlefield evolves (fit more Amarr jams to counter guardian support, fit more Caldari for counter-jam work, etc.), there is no reason to ever fit an off-race ECCM. You don't counter a different type of setup by fitting the wrong ECCM, you just waste a slot. It's not a "choice" if there's only ever one correct decision.
This is correct, but lumping it in with Sebo's makes the Sebo an obvious choice, as opposed to have a single ECCM module. now its a no brainer to fit the SEBO, because you now counter both damps and ECM.
If a celestis fits one, he will totally counter a blackbird every single time now, however, it seems that if a blackbird put one on, he's still getting his range cut harder than his jam chance from that module because even with a sebo, if a celestis has one as well, he can target and land his damps from farther out. |
Darkwing Fiftytwo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 17:35:04 -
[82] - Quote
Only guys complaining are the ones that use the cheesy OP jams in the first place.
CCP Just gave all the Sebo cheesers another excuse to fit a sebo to whore on kills.. love it. LOL
|
Darkwing Fiftytwo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:18:16 -
[83] - Quote
Not sure where to put this.
I would suggest tweaking some implant bonus' Example the implants that increase your scan res only do 1,2,3,4,5% which is almost nothing.
Any implants where 3% essentially adds very little benefit to the user should be increase to 2,4,6, etc or even 5,10,15. or maybe by a fixed amount 25,50mm, etc... to not over buff insta-gate campers.
vs a damage implant increasing 3% is pretty accurate. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1643
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 20:27:33 -
[84] - Quote
Darkwing Fiftytwo wrote:Only guys complaining are the ones that use the cheesy OP jams in the first place.
CCP Just gave all the Sebo cheesers another excuse to fit a sebo to whore on kills.. love it. LOL
Jams are the hardest e-war to use unlike the rest it isn't lock the target and activate you constantly have to be manipulating rng and you are far easier to kill when using them. Not to mention damps do jams jobs better only difference is when you are damped you think you still have a chance.
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Wimzy Chent-Shi
Unkindness Incorporated Who Dares Wins.
41
|
Posted - 2016.03.06 09:11:35 -
[85] - Quote
Jayden Thomas wrote:Excellent. A much needed improvement, and CCP didn't have to break anything to make it work. RIP sebo, favourite mid to almost-full fits with little spare cpu. I had to turn it off on the Nemesis I jumped into in middle of null already because of the sneaky compact MWD change, this did not help one bit.
Let me go look for it (it's menacing to quickly check facts when EVElopedia is down. Can't even find one single page at eve uni to check the old/current fitting req, let me start up the game... ) ok the old T2 sebo is 10 CPU, the new one is 16, that is 60% difference which makes or breakes frigates, which essentially should not be using them at all but are. I usually end up fitting a sebo on certain armor ships with tons of mids with nothing else to put there due to limited fitting space. It breakes ECM burst which was a wild card to begin with, now I lock you on heat then switch out for eccm, it brings more rewards through micromanagement, though, which is always nice, to keep clicking, especially at 90% tidi you want something to do... So no, the change is not harmless.
Others call me weak for not condescendingly speaking to plebs, but they are those speaking to plebs at all fortunately only those in "imperium" are plebs.
|
Cometopappa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2016.03.07 15:51:02 -
[86] - Quote
Does this mean one ECCM module is not as good as they were before? ECCM right now gives 96%. How much sensor strength will an ECCM scripted sensor booster give after the patch? |
Ecrir Twy'Lar
Federation Navy 3rd Fleet
25
|
Posted - 2016.03.07 15:51:46 -
[87] - Quote
Kosetzu wrote:Seymarr wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? Yes, because whereas your choice of which jams to fit lets you prepare to counter different threats or have different opportunities as the battlefield evolves (fit more Amarr jams to counter guardian support, fit more Caldari for counter-jam work, etc.), there is no reason to ever fit an off-race ECCM. You don't counter a different type of setup by fitting the wrong ECCM, you just waste a slot. It's not a "choice" if there's only ever one correct decision. Would be really awesome if ECM had scripts for different sensor types instead of different modules.
I really like this idea. |
Cometopappa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2016.03.07 16:58:41 -
[88] - Quote
Ecrir Twy'Lar wrote:Kosetzu wrote:Seymarr wrote:Albrecht Patrouette wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:H
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Thanks! So . . . does that mean that having to choose the right ECM for the target ship is an "interesting choice or valuable gameplay"? Yes, because whereas your choice of which jams to fit lets you prepare to counter different threats or have different opportunities as the battlefield evolves (fit more Amarr jams to counter guardian support, fit more Caldari for counter-jam work, etc.), there is no reason to ever fit an off-race ECCM. You don't counter a different type of setup by fitting the wrong ECCM, you just waste a slot. It's not a "choice" if there's only ever one correct decision. Would be really awesome if ECM had scripts for different sensor types instead of different modules. I really like this idea.
ECM doesn't need such a huge boost. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1697
|
Posted - 2016.03.09 11:51:33 -
[89] - Quote
Cometopappa wrote:Ecrir Twy'Lar wrote:
I really like this idea.
ECM doesn't need such a huge boost.
ECM doesn't need such a big nerf to its gameplay
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Vailen Sere
Ixian Machines TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.10 21:16:04 -
[90] - Quote
FT Cold wrote:This is a positive change. Good stuff.
Knew you'd like the changes. |
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2351
|
Posted - 2016.03.10 21:41:07 -
[91] - Quote
Cometopappa wrote:Does this mean one ECCM module is not as good as they were before? ECCM right now gives 96%. How much sensor strength will an ECCM scripted sensor booster give after the patch?
I believe it is 100%.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Tassadar Gantrithor
Easy Co. Get Off My Lawn
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 09:59:20 -
[92] - Quote
HIGH-lariousGǪ
The point made of reducing the EVE universe complexity so someone new doesnGÇÖt have to learn a vast system of modules to choose from is completely ridiculous. Those "72 different" ECCM modules each had their own specific role to fulfill. The whole premise that EVE is built on is that it is a game not for the average casual player. One needs to be invested and be able to learn a large scale system to interact with the game to the absolute fullest. If they wanted something simple and a one-click-win system they go play WOW, GÇ£You have this class, with these items, and you win.GÇ¥ EVE was meant to be for those who are looking for a challenge. EVE wasn't meant for an instant win button.
And the whole argument about using the wrong module on your ship is a line of complete stupidity. If you arenGÇÖt looking at which ECCM module to fit on your ship and just pick one you arenGÇÖt paying attention to the game and trying to learn it, thus youGÇÖre just wanting to one-click-win. If you donGÇÖt understand the intricate workings of how each ship works and functions you will declare yourself dead the moment you decide to undock. Yes fitting a Gravimetric ECCM onto a Stabber Fleet Issue will not do you any benefit. Well, why did you fit that module in the first place? Are you protecting yourself against something? If you are then what are you protecting against? YouGÇÖre protecting yourself from a certain type of attack or you are trying to do a certain type of damage. ItGÇÖs no different than fitting for a specific tank on a ship. You know you are going to go up against an Amarrian fleet, therefore you just throw an Explosive Armor hardener on your Rokh battleship? NO, you do research. They are using energy weapons which do EM and Thermal damage so you fit for EM and Thermal resists. YouGÇÖre a shield focused ship so you fit for shield modules not armor. You are a turret based ship so you donGÇÖt fit a full load of energy neutralizers you fit hybrid turret batteries. YouGÇÖre using a Caldari ship so you train Minmatar industrial to V on the premise that it will boost your abilities in the Rokh, no. These things come from flying and playing EVE and learning the game. If youGÇÖre not looking at what a module does and what it affects then why are you fitting it? If you don't look into how things work and aren't willing to learn, why are you playing?
What was the problem with ECCM modules? GÇ£ItGÇÖs hard to use.GÇ¥ GÇ£No one uses the modules.GÇ¥ ItGÇÖs hard to use because you have to work with a ship that is sacrificing its offensive capabilities to become more defensive with its power. No one uses it because GÇ£the big leagues donGÇÖt use ECM.GÇ¥ Even as a member in the great Imperium, I will very often straight up disregard their GÇ£required fittingsGÇ¥ because I know my style of play and how to fly certain ships. ItGÇÖs their opinion of how to use the ship but itGÇÖs my ship to use so I will fit it the way I think is right. If you build to counter against a ship jamming you, you will want an ECCM module. It is no different than using a Signal Amplifier to counteract a Remote Sensor Dampener. It is no different than using a Tracking Computer or Enhancer to boost your guns to counteract a Tracking Disruptor. These are modules that are designed to be the opposite of EWAR to give each person a chance at defending themselves from everything in the game. You canGÇÖt fit it all to counter everything because there is no GÇ£winGÇ¥ ship. A dreadnaught capital ship may be one of the biggest powerhouses in the game but it will cower in fear in a corner weeping like a child against a single Crucifier with one tracking disruptor. It doesnGÇÖt matter how GÇ£perfectGÇ¥ you fit your ship, someone in the universe is your exact counter and death sentence. You just have to hope itGÇÖs not the person staring at your ship in the moment.
If you are going to make a module that has an effect on three different aspects of a ship [scan resolution/targeting range/ship sensor strength] then as a suggestion, make the module only be able to activate with a charge in it. A turret or missile battery can only function with ammunition in it. This can also be said about all of the boosting modules and offensive EWAR that possess scripts. Each module plays a role with needing a script to run a certain program to enhance a portion of your ship. Without the guidance of the script all you have is a module who is waiting for input to function. Therefore remote sensor dampeners, tracking computers, ect, need a script to activate the module same as weapons. Each mid slot booster module also has a passive low slot you are able to fit if you want more defenses in the aspect of your ship you are trying to protect. It wonGÇÖt be as powerful but thatGÇÖs the difference between the passive and the active modules of EVE. Something you learn while playing EVE Online. Straight numbers yes, an active tank holds better over a passive tank. Put time into the equation and the active tank falls out because it will run out of cap at some point but the passive stays strong. Each mid and low slow module has its own place and usefulness. Same goes for the ECCM passive modules and projected ECCM modules.
Obviously everyone will rip me a new one and most likely this falls on deaf ears. You post the thread for feedback. Here you go; 2 cents.
|
Moloney
Mass Effect Enterprises
201
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 10:54:10 -
[93] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
These new modules will give bonuses to all four sensor strengths, as choosing the right ECCM type for your ship is not and interesting choice or valuable gameplay.
Yes it is. It distinguishes the people that have put time and effort into learning something useful and morons that assume that anything will do.
CCP Fozzie wrote: This change also has the added benefit of reducing the number of modules a new player needs to learn about by over 100 (we actually had 72 kinds of Sensor Backup Arrays in the game alone, it blew my mind).
Just because you are not the sharpest tool in the shed, does not mean that everyone is a dull are you are. You have reduced options, choice, learning, differentiation and quality of game play. Eve is played specifically for its complexity. You are systematically making the game less enjoyable.
|
Vailen Sere
Ixian Machines TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 21:44:25 -
[94] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:This is the change ECCM/ECM has needed so people will stop complaining about ECM being OP so much. Give value to the module that isn't niche so people will actually have a module that gives them a bonus while on grid when they are not being jammed. What I think people don't like about ECM that many have pointed out is it has no counter play. If you are jammed, that's it. You can no do absolutely nothing of value for the next 20 seconds in addition to the time it takes to relock targets. Oh and heaven help you if you had someone tackled and they vomited out some light ECM drones on you and escaped. ECM drones are the most produced drone for all the EW drones than all other drones combined. The reason is very obvious. They are super cheap and turns any ship with a drone bay into a Kitsune. ECM is not a fun game mechanic. It is a dice roll to see if players are allowed to play the game or not. Merging these modules initially sounds good and does help the situation some, but still does absolutely nothing to address the fact being jammed offers no counter play what so ever. ECM is just a terrible game mechanic that is a relic from old game design philosophy.
|
Vailen Sere
Ixian Machines TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 21:47:17 -
[95] - Quote
deleted because of copy |
Saarus
eXceed Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2016.03.12 17:51:20 -
[96] - Quote
Tassadar Gantrithor wrote:HIGH-lariousGǪ
The point made of reducing the EVE universe complexity so someone new doesnGÇÖt have to learn a vast system of modules to choose from is completely ridiculous. Those "72 different" ECCM modules each had their own specific role to fulfill.
I really thought twice about reading the rest of your post after reading those first 2 lines. really? every one of those 72 eccm modules hat their own specific role? you dont really belive that, do you? divide that number by 4 and you maybe get the number of modules "intended to have different rolen". after that you look at the numbers and then tell me you would fit anything other than the meta4 ones or maybe t2 |
Akemon Numon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2016.03.12 21:59:16 -
[97] - Quote
hypocrites
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2530257#post2530257
CCP Greyscale "We're not, in general and with exceptions, fans of multi-function modules. EVE fitting is about trade-offs, not about having your cake and eating it. In this particular case, it was making the decision to take an active hardener over a passive one easier than it otherwise would be, which isn't a particularly good thing. "
So now 4 in one mods are ok, give us back the passive resist bonus on shield/armour hardeners. |
Tassadar Gantrithor
Easy Co. Get Off My Lawn
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.12 23:08:13 -
[98] - Quote
Saarus wrote:
I really thought twice about reading the rest of your post after reading those first 2 lines. really? every one of those 72 eccm modules hat their own specific role? you dont really belive that, do you? divide that number by 4 and you maybe get the number of modules "intended to have different roles". after that you look at the numbers and then tell me you would fit anything other than the meta4 ones or maybe t2
Yes. Yes they all do. Because EVE is a game based around how you fit things. Each one was setup with a different requirement of CPU and PWG. You may not be able to get the absolute max from the mod you could get from a T2 but that's what EVE is... making your ship fit with your skills. The Meta 4 and T2 yes had the highest bonus to your ship but they required the most for fitting. You never say "O, well I can't fit a T2 mod of this screw this fit. New ship." No, you have the options of the T1 series to pick and choose carefully your mod selection. If the meta 2 has the lowest CPU requirements and you have CPU issues then you're going pick that one to still have some bonus to that area you wanted. But if you want to be the elitist person who only fits T2 and refuses to fit T1, whatever go for it. Don't strip another pilots' capabilities to modify their own ships. |
Kasumatsu
Assets and Holdings
4
|
Posted - 2016.03.13 12:16:35 -
[99] - Quote
Looks like this is now active? All my ECCM bookmarks are grey now! |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2673
|
Posted - 2016.03.14 13:23:35 -
[100] - Quote
GetSirrus wrote:I suppose this makes ECCM near unprobable a thing of the past?
Nope. Fit the new SEBO and script it for ECCM. The ugly part is it now makes sniping doctrine who try to run more effective since they get harder to probe just by swapping a script from targeting range to snipe to ECCM to avoid easy probing. |
|
Borg Alexandra
Digital Origami Evictus.
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.16 09:46:46 -
[101] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote: Doesn't really change all that much tbh.
There's basically two cases where people complain about ecm. (1) When a falcon alt uncloaks and turns a 1v1 into a 2v1 and For (1), nothing really changes. If you bring sebo's to a 1v1, you're either giving up tank (hardeners, shield boosters) or damage application (webs, tracking computers) putting you at a disadvantage. Further, even 3-4 sebos won't stop a falcon with 5-6 jams from keeping you locked out of half of a fight. In the small gang case, people "lose" to falcons because there's another ship in play that they didn't expect - not because ecm is "broken". It doesn't really matter whether that ship is a falcon or something like a pilgrim/curse/rapier/proteus/neutral logi.
Basically, nothing really changes for ewar pilots.
This is very accurate, as a solo player I can confirm. |
Fourteen Maken
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
264
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 19:14:20 -
[102] - Quote
Borg Alexandra wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote: Doesn't really change all that much tbh.
There's basically two cases where people complain about ecm. (1) When a falcon alt uncloaks and turns a 1v1 into a 2v1 and For (1), nothing really changes. If you bring sebo's to a 1v1, you're either giving up tank (hardeners, shield boosters) or damage application (webs, tracking computers) putting you at a disadvantage. Further, even 3-4 sebos won't stop a falcon with 5-6 jams from keeping you locked out of half of a fight. In the small gang case, people "lose" to falcons because there's another ship in play that they didn't expect - not because ecm is "broken". It doesn't really matter whether that ship is a falcon or something like a pilgrim/curse/rapier/proteus/neutral logi.
Basically, nothing really changes for ewar pilots.
This is very accurate, as a solo player I can confirm.
insta locking f1 monkeys sitting on gates is by far the biggest problem for solo players |
Fourteen Maken
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
264
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 19:39:08 -
[103] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:i demand federation navy sebo's be replaced with imperial navy sebos. fed navy has litterally everything right next to winmatar.
so glad the 2 most advanced races in the game keep to their RP grounds when it came to warfare links. federation navy get skirmish and armor, and yet... they keep the eccm and sensor module. while amarr navy get information and armor. and yet, cant make anything.
nobody uses faction sebo's anyway so it doesn't make much difference who's name is on it, but faction modules as a whole need a complete overhaul and rebalance because there are too many useuless/overpriced faction modules and all the useful ones are concentrated in the lp stores of minmattar and gallente. It mainly only affects high sec mission runners but I'd still like to see some effort made to balance it all the same. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |