EVE Search - The recent ECM Nerf, a cut too deep?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The recent ECM Nerf, a cut too deep?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:16:00 - [1] Hi, As a previous ECM User, I'm obviously biased on this subject; my opinion is that the recent reduction in the strength of Jamming modules has gone too far and rendered them almost useless. The market for ECM modules has crashed, and it's now rare to see scorpions, rooks or even Blackbirds being used for their intended purpose. I appreciate that the nerf was at least partially to remove the tendancy for many ships to throw on a "get out of jail free" multispec, and while this seems to have worked just fine, it's also to a large extent removed jamming from the battlefield. The addition of the low slot and rig slot items can bring the EW-centric ships up to somewhere approaching their previous level of usefulness, however, it does mean giving up even the token armor tank that was previously available to the caldari jamming ship pilot, and the jamming rigs are frankly too expensive to be used given the minimal improvement they provide and the tendancy for jamming ships (once identified) to be called as primary. So, have CCP gone too far and consigned a class of ships and a large chunk of skill points to the dustbin? Should the nerf have fallen halfway between where it is now and where it was before the revelations patch was implemented? I'd welcome some debate about this as I miss using my rook, but when I can, with all-but maxed out EW skills, and the best mods fitted repeatedly fail to jam even a single battleship target for several cycles, I'd have to say that in attempting to balance these mods, the scales have swung too far the wrong way.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:21:00 - [2] Edited by: madaluap on 24/02/2007 22:18:43 Ok, the entire point of a nerf is simply beause it is ruin gamemechanics. In this case it means you have put some skills (omgskills) into ECM. A corpmate of mine can fly with a rook with high-sp and basically its just the same as before, only now he is trully a elite-jammer. Just like it should be, that my opinion offcourse, but i think jamming shouldnt be the noob-omg-i-win button. jamming is now into the hands of the true focused pvp pilots instead of the random retard in a jamming bb or scorp _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:34:00 - [3] Originally by: madaluap Edited by: madaluap on 24/02/2007 22:18:43 Ok, the entire point of a nerf is simply beause it is ruin gamemechanics. In this case it means you have put some skills (omgskills) into ECM. A corpmate of mine can fly with a rook with high-sp and basically its just the same as before, only now he is trully a elite-jammer. Just like it should be, that my opinion offcourse, but i think jamming shouldnt be the noob-omg-i-win button. jamming is now into the hands of the true focused pvp pilots instead of the random retard in a jamming bb or scorp If you've finished editing to add more "omg you nub" type comments, I'd point out the following 1) I appreciate that nerf are because ccp consider that balance of gamemechanics has been affected, several times in my post I asked if the nerf had gone too far - I never once said it should not have taken place. 2) Your uber corp mate is not 'basically the same as before' there is a significant reduction in jamming strength post patch, even with the lows crammed with hypnos or T2 signal distortions I do agree with you that prior to the patch it was too easy for someone with minimal skills to throw on some Jamming mods and have a significant effect on the outcome of a battle, but my opinion is that the patch addressed this by hitting the whole ECM thing too hard. I used to fit ECCM to my battleships if I didn't want to be jammed and they worked just fine.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:38:00 - [4] serieusly if got ***** jammed by mother***** absolutions and mallers. using T2 signal distortions for the total cause: completely disruption a enemy from fighting. Whats wrong with that? Btw im a bit drunk spelling can be wrong, but still my words stand. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:43:00 - [5] I don't mind losing ships for the cause Mad, It's just that the effect is now so watered down that frankly, its probable that a caldari ECM ship could have a greater effect by fitting a full rack of sensor dampers.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:46:00 - [6] Originally by: Pistonbroke 2) Your uber corp mate is not 'basically the same as before' there is a significant reduction in jamming strength post patch, even with the lows crammed with hypnos or T2 signal distortions I do agree with you that prior to the patch it was too easy for someone with minimal skills to throw on some Jamming mods and have a significant effect on the outcome of a battle, but my opinion is that the patch addressed this by hitting the whole ECM thing too hard. I used to fit ECCM to my battleships if I didn't want to be jammed and they worked just fine. Ok instead of of editing my post ill repost it again. Maybe it has become to hard to jam someone (which i dont believe IMO<--important) and Yes my corpmate effectiveness has decreased, but he remains a guy i would love in my gangs. A bit of skills and a good supporting BS/BB give enough to make enemy bs go crying. Plz give an example from what you have expirienced instead of just rambling about what theoritically is crap. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Lisento Slaven Amarr The Drekla Consortium Kurai Komichi	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:51:00 - [7] I don't believe it has become too hard to jam people. Of course you can not jam as often as before but given the right ship, skills, and mods you will jam people effectively. All you need is 1 cycle of jamming someone to tip the scales in a battle. Using ECM on ships that do not recieve a bonus to ECM is not anywhere near as viable as it used to be. That multispec on my tempest isn't there anymore... I've never seen that many scorps/blackbirds on the field by the way. I see no difference from my end of the spectrum on the availability or activity of such ships. They still make people not want to engage you =P --- Lisento Slaven wants to be a Space Whaler in EVE. Put in space whales!
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:57:00 - [8] I can't log on atm, so ask your mate, he should be able to put you straight. 1) Max ranges before and after 2) Max strength before and after I think you'll find it's far from the same.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:01:00 - [9] Edited by: madaluap on 24/02/2007 22:59:18 Originally by: Pistonbroke I can't log on atm, so ask your mate, he should be able to put you straight. 1) Max ranges before and after 2) Max strength before and after I think you'll find it's far from the same. Well i had a talk about it on TS and he said that yes he did suffer, his jamming strength is lower even with a totally dedicated setup. But he also he said ECM isnt suddenly for guy that just train it random. His skills totally shine. Look im just a guy addicted to gallente since my gankageddon (7 lasers,3sensorboost,8 heatsink) got totally busted by a navy issue megathron by DNA and i can tell you ECM isnt dead on people that sacrifice survivability and DPS for totally disrupting the enemy. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
MasterDecoy Gallente Raddick Explorations	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:03:00 - [10] nah, i would say that the nerf put ecm where it should be: a specialized discipline. one of my corp mates is heavily focused in ecm, if you ever see him, you're jammed. the only times he's having difficulty is against T2 ships, E.G. recon ships. or when the opponents fit eccm - and props to them! if i, with only casual ecm skills, jump into a bb or a scorp, im worthless - and that's the way it should be imo until i spend a few extra weeks to max my ecm skills out. and as far as "[...] repeatedly fail to jam even a single battleship target for several cycles" goes; well, you can't possibly expect to perma-jam every opponent now do you? the reason they nerfed it (or homerun nerfed it, whatever) was because they don't like ecm as an i-win button, after all, there's already plenty of them out there
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:05:00 - [11] Thanks for your input Mad, I will have to revisit my jamming ships. Perhaps now they are rarer out there they'll be less likely to be called as instant primary There is of course the advantage that they are now cheaper to buy, to fit and of course to lose.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:12:00 - [12] Originally by: Pistonbroke Thanks for your input Mad, I will have to revisit my jamming ships. Perhaps now they are rarer out there they'll be less likely to be called as instant primary There is of course the advantage that they are now cheaper to buy, to fit and of course to lose. lol and that all while i was a bit drunk, btw listen to this vid for like 9*times and you get it ubersong _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Pistonbroke D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.02.24 23:17:00 - [13] Originally by: madaluap lol and that all while i was a bit drunk, btw listen to this vid for like 9times and you get it ubersong Now thats* Jammin'
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.25 00:13:00 - [14] It would be nice if the "Signal Dispersion" skill had more of a kick with the ECM mods.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 00:20:00 - [15] Originally by: Pistonbroke I can't log on atm, so ask your mate, he should be able to put you straight. 1) Max ranges before and after 2) Max strength before and after I think you'll find it's far from the same. Max ranges actually INCREASED. With 2 t1 range rigs you can get 230k optimals on racial ECM on the BB, rook, falcon and scorp. Max strength decreased, but if you are using t2 ecm "damage mods" the actual reduction is fairly low. A scorp with 3 of them has 94% of it's old jamming power.
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.25 01:22:00 - [16] Originally by: Pistonbroke have CCP gone too far Njah, I actually consider that the general ECM nerf was actually boost for specialized pilots. I mostly fly small gang support Falcon; it has almost the same level of ECM capacity (even without rigs), and just a bit worse tank (seldom an issue). Yet now that one doesn't need to expect ECM from every ship in Eve, people are far less likely to fit ECCM mods -> jamming is easier fot specialized ships. -Lasse
BlackMoon Thrawn the Organ Grinder and Company Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.02.25 01:36:00 - [17] Trade ya for target painting?
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.02.25 02:10:00 - [18] The main problem now for dedicated ECM boats is the current Nanofad. Pre-Rev a dedicated jammer could warp into a fight at 100km to 120km and jam with relative impunity if they were careful. The only thing they had to worry about moving fast at them were interceptors, which they could handle. Now everyone and thier grandmother flies at what was interceptor only speeds, with TREMENDOUSLY increased firepower and nospower, while also sporting 5 large drones that can't reliably be stopped by jammers. Dedicated ECM ships can't cope with that amount of firepower that can close the distance to them that quickly as they essentially have no tank. As of now, the Falcon can "blink" at range but all other ecm ships are insta primary with only 15 or 20 seconds before a nanoship is trying to hump thier tailpipe while spitting large drones. After the speed nerf, jamming as a speciality should be more viable than it currently is as range will provide the needed buffer. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Neuromandis EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.25 03:15:00 - [19] Edited by: Neuromandis on 25/02/2007 03:12:21 The only thing I disagree about the ECM nerf are the low slot modules. The token armor tank had no reason to be removed, all other EW ships out there more than TOKEN tank, I don't see the reason for the discrimination. Yes ECM are strong, but not THAT stronger than, for example, dampeners. Couple that with their being chance-based, and I cannot say I really believe that creating the need for the low-slot modules were necessary. In fact I think it's just the point that the nerf cut deeper than was needed.
Kaathar Rielspar Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.25 03:38:00 - [20] Originally by: BlackMoon Thrawn Trade ya for target painting? QFEWRE (quoted for even worse racial ewar) ____________________ Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Originally by: Eximius Josari If BS Sized HACs would be overpowered, what are HACs? Overpriced Nos victims.
Rosehunter	Posted - 2007.02.25 03:58:00 - [21] I love my rook (EW specc'ed), even post nerf. For the most part I fly small roving support. x4 multi's and 2 racial's (caldari and gal) In the hands of a skilled pilot they are still nasty buggers to run up against. I would never fly it in fleet or larger gangs as you WILL be called primary but for small gangs and pick and choose fights they are still great ships. -Rosehunter
Sonorra Baki Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.25 04:13:00 - [22] kept 3-4 BS almost permajammed on sisi today in my alt. Just bought a falcon. Training more ew skills. This may not be work safe -Capsicum
Derrys Caldari Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2007.02.25 07:04:00 - [23] My problem with the ECM nerf is that the devs didn't undo the stuff they'd already nerfed to make ECM less overpowered. For example, ECM ships have always had extremely low damage potential compared to other racial EW ships. Compare the DPS from a Blackbird to a Celestis or Arbitrator. That even extends to the recon ships -- a Pilgrim can do, what, twice as much damage as a Falcon? Now they've nerfed ECM so that it's more in line with the other EW types. Okay, that's fine. But give ships that specialize in ECM some punch to make up for it. It's bad enough that they already have to sacrifice their tank if they want to fit distortion amplifiers.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.25 07:52:00 - [24] Sadly you'll never get non-EW pilots to agree with you. They find it easy to kill ew ships and they like that. Near max EW skills here and I won't leave the station in a Scorp fitted w/EW anymore. The problem isn't the strength of the ECM module (I feel this is about right), it's that signal amps are too weak. A griff and a blackbird can never reach pre-kali jammimg levels since you need 4 sig amps to bring you back up (actually 4 will bring you slightly greater, but close enough to matter). Only the Scorp can fit 4 sig amps, but it must forgo everything else - so why bother. As far as rooks and falcons - once again why bother. A damage dealer is better in almost all cases. Obviously tactical battles aren't for eve. For the players that say "Oh my corp mate is a great ECM pilot and I want him along as much as possible," really? So if he left the Scorp in the station and jumped into a blasterthon you would kick him out of the group? If he abandoned the rook, and brought an astarte you'd object? I didn't think so. ECM is only good in situations where you have such an advantage over the enemy that loss of DPS doesn't hurt you. ECM has no counter? Ha put ECCM on your ship and watch how rarely a Scorp w/racials can jam you. Put 2 ECCM on and you are almost completely immune. Yup EW is just fine - as long as you don't try to use it.
Tecron Caldari Black Avatar Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.02.25 08:20:00 - [25] 3 t2 Sig Distortion Amps. With racials gives me just about the same strength as pre nerf. Scorp is my favorite fleet ship tbh under 100m to t2 and insure and only lost one in a fleet battle ever.
Kehmor Caldari PAK	Posted - 2007.02.25 10:49:00 - [26] Jamming has maintained its usefulness in large battles but i fear lost much of it in small gangs. My falcon used to be my favourite ship, but now I rarely fly it. I agree with the guys saying give ecm ships a bit more punch. The rook is about right, the scorp and falcon are way off. We now have ZERO defence outside our jamming if we want to be effective. Now everyone will say "but if they can't lock you they can't kill you". True, but lady luck gives jammers the finger and makes us fail at the worst times, before on my falcon I had about 5k armor to buffer against this, I could survive a round of failed jamming maybe. Now I can't at all.
Trev Kachanov STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.25 11:13:00 - [27] Edited by: Trev Kachanov on 25/02/2007 11:10:24 I agree the ECM nerf was a bit harsh, a 25% reduction in module effectiveness would of been a better reduction. The main problem lies upon the randomness, there should be somewhat of a bell curve to the equation to stop people from using 1 multispec of doom I find your lack of faith disturbing
FraXy 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.25 11:39:00 - [28] Well, if u think ECM modules is b0rked then have a look at ECM-drones. They are not in line with anything. Wasp EC-900 is like a slightly less effective T2 Multispec before skills, but then again some ships can field 5 of them.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:33:00 - [29] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/02/2007 12:34:37 Originally by: Neuromandis The only thing I disagree about the ECM nerf are the low slot modules. The token armor tank had no reason to be removed, all other EW ships out there more than TOKEN tank, I don't see the reason for the discrimination. Yes ECM are strong, but not THAT stronger than, for example, dampeners. Couple that with their being chance-based, and I cannot say I really believe that creating the need for the low-slot modules were necessary. In fact I think it's just the point that the nerf cut deeper than was needed. Range, range, range. With a curse, lachesis or huggin you have to be within 30-40k distance to be effective. With a pilgrim, which has the best tank of the EW ships, you have to be within 12k. A rook and falcon can use it's EW at FULL effeciency at 200k. The other EW ships can mount a better tank because they are in the line of fire far more often than the ECM ships which are used correctly (meaning no warp-to-zero with the rest of the gang). Originally by: Kehmor We now have ZERO defence outside our jamming if we want to be effective. Now everyone will say "but if they can't lock you they can't kill you". True, but lady luck gives jammers the finger and makes us fail at the worst times, before on my falcon I had about 5k armor to buffer against this, I could survive a round of failed jamming maybe. Now I can't at all. Again, range. If you are way outside scramble range nothing stops you from warping out if you are attacked. And neither does anything force you to use 3 ECM mods, due to stacking penalities of them it's not even a very good idea. A falcon with 2 ECM mods has 84% of it's old strength compared to 94% with 3.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:35:00 - [30] Edited by: Skeltek on 25/02/2007 12:34:33 long time since I saw ECMs in Fleetfights... Well, the base strenght was lowered by 50%. The increase of jamming strenght on ECM specialized ships can only be compensated by a fraction, by using ECM-modifiers in lowslots instead of tank. So now ECM specialized ships have lost both: their punch AND their tank. Regarding fleetbattles: Replacing a damagedealing BS with a Scorpion will enable you to keep 1-2 enemy ships partially neutralized for a small amount of time. First: you reduce your firepower a lot by using Scorps. Second: for every Scorp the enemy kills, he regains 1-2 of his BS fightingcapabilities, while you just loose non-tanked BS that didn¦t provide firepower in the first place anyway. Looking at it from a analytical/mathematical point of view, an ECM-BS has to be able to AT LEAST disable 2 enemy BS to compensate the fact, that the enemy draws twice the benefits of killing your ships: reducing your amount of ships and regaining firepower quickly at the same time. The usability of ECM ships was well balanced before the ECM-nerf, and even then I saw MANY fleets without using ECM at all. -Just looking at that fact, makes it most apparent that reducing ECM strenght on ECM ships in any way is not that wise an idea. -reducing ECM strenght on dedicated ECM ships and killing their tank off completely at the same time is an action, that might be at best considered to be the result of most doubtful reasons. But soon there will be possibilities to make ships completely invulnerable anyway I heard, so why reevaluate ECM balancing if there will be a far more dubious aspect of the game anyway? just my 2 cents from my experience...
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:51:00 - [31] Originally by: Skeltek So now ECM specialized ships have lost both: their punch AND their tank. No & no. With 3 damage mods a scorp has 94% of it's old strength. It got a slight nerf - but so got t2 longrange ammo. So for fleet combat it did not get a strength nerf when compared to other ships. It can only mount one 1600mm plate then though, but it got something in exchange too - more range. With 2 EW range rigs (yes, they cost isk, but even with them a scorp is still cheaper than a t2 sniper fitted BS) you can achieve ECM ranges of 230k. If you get primaried there you will get mostly misses by anything but rokhs. It requires a bit more preperation to setup extra spots for your EW ships, but if you do that effort they have a better survivability than before the ECM changes.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:57:00 - [32] Edited by: welsh wizard on 25/02/2007 13:03:41 1. I haven't been jammed for about 2 months. 2. You're generally more use to your colleagues if you fly a different ship. Fleets and gangs used to be based around a strong ECM backbone and it made battles more interesting. Jamming was too powerful in a solo combat sense but in fleets and gangs it made proceedings more interesting. Whats more it was counterable. Caldari have 5 ships dedicate to this task alone, they don't do anything else. Not many people want to fly these ships anymore because a) they're generally more use flying something else and b) it's more fun to fly something else. Jamming needs a slight buff or jamming ship bonuses need to be reworked to offer some other use... Theres 4 things I think they could do: 1. Shield size bonus so they have more staying power? "But they'll be uber solo ships!!" no they won't because they still don't do any damage which is even further exemplified post hit point changes. 2. Give them some combat ability, I'm thinking as drone ships. Give jamming ships sizeable drone bays, not gallente size but large enough to hold 5 drones based on their size. Scorpion - 5 heavy drones with maybe 2 spare, cruisers - 5 medium drones, griffin - 3-4 light drones. 3. Get rid of 2 jamming ships and make them something else entirely. I'd love to see a little variation wrt our recons. 4. Just make ECM stronger for jamming ships across the board, make fitting ECM damage mods a bonus rather than a neccesity so the low slots can be used for other tasks if preffered. Originally by: Aramendel It requires a bit more preperation to setup extra spots for your EW ships, but if you do that effort they have a better survivability than before the ECM changes. Interesting but basically useless, fleet combat doesn't work like that. Range is far too variable for this to be effective which is why you're still better off in a Megathron than a Rokh and anything other than a scorp. Caldari have lots of ships that "Have insane skillz!!" on paper but in practice are little use.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:26:00 - [33] Gatecamping 180km+ from gate is not really considered PvP imho, so I can¦t really believe range to be a very big argument in this matter. Oh, I found an old post from mine in our forum. Me and a few others from our alliance were doing a 10/10 complex in Venal, while we noticed enemy entering local. We had fitted for NPC killing/doing the complex. We were outnumbered 6:8, but decided to stay in the complex anyway. When they jumped in... well, here is our forum entry: "The D2 gang consisted of a Vulture, a Raven, Apocalypse, Armageddon, Typhoon and one Dominix and was attacked by 6 enemy battleships and 2 Rooks. Our force made quick work of ... ; our Raven had to warp out with armordamage, but we had no losses. All enemy pods barely escaped smartbombing." In total 2 of our faction-fitted attackers barely survived(2BS) and escaped. We knew what ships they were coming with and intentionaly ignored the existance of the rooks, winning the fight with quiet ease. Now just please repeat the thing with ECM still being effective often enough and I might start believing it <.< kind regards, Skeltek (Ex-ECM specialist, retrained for giving gangbonuses and tech2 smartbombs(maybe I got sick of getting compliments for being one of the best jamming pilots people used to work with <.<))
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:55:00 - [34] Here's another way to look at it, I'm going to bring a battleship into your gang that does dps equivalent to a good cruiser. However I'll have 10 modules dedicated to stopping 2 enemy ships. However if they each fit a certain module there is a 50% chance I will no NOTHING at all to help you. So in fact you are taking a chance that I will guess correctly on my choice of racials, and that the enemy won't use ECCM for me to help your gang (assuming I stay @ 200k and don't die - since I have no tank) or I can get in a Rohk @ 200k and pour 8xRails with 3xDamage mods into the enemy (and field a very good tank too). So FC, what do you want?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:58:00 - [35] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/02/2007 14:00:02 And we attacked part of a russian gang farming an 10/10 plex in our territory. We outnumbered them 5 to 3. We suffered no losses, but neither did they because their single rook managed to jam our ships so we couldn't keep a target scrambled all the time. You cannot say it's fine or not from a single engagement. Originally by: Veryez Here's another way to look at it, I'm going to bring a battleship into your gang that does dps equivalent to a good cruiser. However I'll have 10 modules dedicated to stopping 2 enemy ships. However if they each fit a certain module there is a 50% chance I will no NOTHING at all to help you. Thats not in any way different to other EW.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:05:00 - [36] Originally by: Aramendel And we attacked part of a russian gang farming an 10/10 plex in our territory. We outnumbered them 5 to 3. We suffered no losses, but neither did they because their single rook managed to jam our ships so we couldn't keep a target scrambled all the time. You cannot say it's fine or not from a single engagement. Primary is always EW, it has not much of a tank. Or for example use drones, they cannot be jammed at all any more and should send any EW Cruiser running sooner or later, even if you don¦t get to insta-pwn him if you get a lock. Sorry for slightly exagerating
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:19:00 - [37] Drone max range is 60k. Even with multies ECM has higher ranges. If they are stupid and go in a point blank combat (or get jumped) they will of cource have a disadvantage - but so has a sniper moa who goes vs a blasterthorax. And, again, you always have to see it in relation to the other EW and the general usability range of other ships. Even if ECM has reduced usefulness in fleet combat, damps and TDs had and still have zero use there. TDs don't work past 100k and damps have an optimal of 45k - although can be used between 50-150k as ECM alternative due to their high falloff. But past 150k - where the majority of all fleetbattles happen - three damps have about the same strength as 1 single multi. A sniperBS is good for large fleets, but rather useless in small gangs. ECM does not suffer a effeciency loss there.
Tanya Kovacs SteelVipers YouWhat	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:20:00 - [38] Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 25/02/2007 14:18:17 Some weeks after release of Rev. I we had a 10(?)-pages thread about this topic, without any dev-response. Yes, ECM was nerfed badly it even killed the Scorps/BB/... I was a dedicated Scorp/BB/Rook-pilot, but I adapted and stoped flying this ships instead of maxing all the skills to be barely as good as before (with decent skills). When flying around in gangs I only barely see BBs anymore. My advice: Fly damage dealer, no point in "maybe I can help my gang for some seconds but I will be primary for sure and can't fit any hp-buffer anymore" -- Boost ECM on dedicated ships. Please.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:29:00 - [39] Edited by: welsh wizard on 25/02/2007 14:26:36 Originally by: Aramendel Drone max range is 60k. Even with multies ECM has higher ranges. If they are stupid and go in a point blank combat (or get jumped) they will of cource have a disadvantage - but so has a sniper moa who goes vs a blasterthorax. And, again, you always have to see it in relation to the other EW and the general usability range of other ships. Even if ECM has reduced usefulness in fleet combat, damps and TDs had and still have zero use there. TDs don't work past 100k and damps have an optimal of 45k - although can be used between 50-150k as ECM alternative due to their high falloff. But past 150k - where the majority of all fleetbattles happen - three damps have about the same strength as 1 single multi. A sniperBS is good for large fleets, but rather useless in small gangs. ECM does not suffer a effeciency loss there. Yes but having 5 ships dedicated to Caldari racial Ewar is a bit different than having 2-3 ships that are barely dedicated and are fantastic ships anyway. Don't bring the other races into this because they don't suffer.
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:35:00 - [40] The ECM nerf didn't affect the real world application of ECM at all. My mates fly rooks/falcons/bbs just like they always did: in a support role at range jamming for a gang. They jam the targets with at least 80% effectiveness, and this is vs. high sensor strength ships (BS and hacs, command ships etc.). ECM just doesn't work like it used to in all the bullsh#t setups like ECM Ravens and Domis etc. I fail to see any problem. Everyone is having a stupid contest, and you're in first place!
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:38:00 - [41] Originally by: Bellum Eternus The ECM nerf didn't affect the real world application of ECM at all. My mates fly rooks/falcons/bbs just like they always did: in a support role at range jamming for a gang. They jam the targets with at least 80% effectiveness, and this is vs. high sensor strength ships (BS and hacs, command ships etc.). ECM just doesn't work like it used to in all the bullsh#t setups like ECM Ravens and Domis etc. I fail to see any problem. I just don't believe you, sorry. I haven't been jammed for about 2 months, to me that suggests noone is flying ECM ships because they're a)boring b)ineffective. Now this wouldn't be such a big deal if it was maybe 1 or 2 ships suffering but five? Five ships with no other useful attributes and you honestly fail to see a problem?
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:51:00 - [42] Edited by: LUKEC on 25/02/2007 14:49:37 ECM is fine. I almost never miss jam cycle on battleships, anything smaller usually gets permajammed. However, you can't really have sick amounts of armor and jam like god. Now you actually have to chose between jamming strength, shield tank, armor tank. As for boring role, if you know who to jam, you can turn insane odds to your favour(I think OP was in EC-P8R when we had some EW) ps. I never bother to use scorp or falcon and have all relevant skills at 5. -------- .....
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 14:55:00 - [43] Originally by: welsh wizard Yes but having 5 ships dedicated to Caldari racial Ewar is a bit different than having 2-3 ships that are barely dedicated and are fantastic ships anyway. Don't bring the other races into this because they don't suffer. Firstly, other races have 4 dedicated EW ships (frig, t1 cruiser, recons). The only difference for caldari is that they have an EW BS in addition to that. And no, they do suffer. Not now, but if ECM is made (again) way stronger than all other EW certainly. The was a reason all non-caldari EW ships used unbonussed ECM pre-kali. ECM is plain out stronger than other EW. Now at least an ECM specced ship has too choose between higher EW effeciency or similar "tank" than the other recons.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.25 15:03:00 - [44] Edited by: welsh wizard on 25/02/2007 15:01:55 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: welsh wizard Yes but having 5 ships dedicated to Caldari racial Ewar is a bit different than having 2-3 ships that are barely dedicated and are fantastic ships anyway. Don't bring the other races into this because they don't suffer. Firstly, other races have 4 dedicated EW ships (frig, t1 cruiser, recons). The only difference for caldari is that they have an EW BS in addition to that. And no, they do suffer. Not now, but if ECM is made (again) way stronger than all other EW certainly. The was a reason all non-caldari EW ships used unbonussed ECM pre-kali. ECM is plain out stronger than other EW. Now at least an ECM specced ship has too choose between higher EW effeciency or similar "tank" than the other recons. Only difference? Other than the fact that our Ewar ships are entirely dedicated to ECM alone? Bonuses, survivability and offensive capability, we don't get any of that. And don't try and twist words, its not like you get 1 less battleship. I'd take the geddon, domi or phoon over a scorpion any day. You're saying ECM is more powerful than the other forms of Ewar? While damps are arguably stronger now I generally agree. Problem is Caldari Ewar is only more powerful on paper. In any realistic everyday Eve sceanrio its underpowered and less use than extra damage. Luke, seriously dude, dont be silly. Players don't fly them, players don't get jammed, players fly something else because its more use and more fun. It's as simple as that.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 15:16:00 - [45] Damperners are slightly more effecient up to 45k (vs battleships, mind you, a lach cannot do much against a 4 frig wolfpack while a rook has good chances to jam all and escape), has about equal effeciency at 45-150k and is utterly useless at ranges above. That is the whole point: yes, other EW can achieve ECM strength or even slightly surpass it, but only in very specific scenarios. If ECM wouldn't be able to work just fine at sniper distances (or alternatively wouldn't work at 40k or below) and wouldn't get more effecient vs smaller ships (other EW gets less effecient) I would agree with you. But as long as ECM has the "works everywhere" attribute ECM is >> other EW if looked from the whole picture. And, as a sidenote, I have been jammed last time 2 days ago and I see regulary falcons, rooks and scorps in the gangs of our alliance.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.25 17:57:00 - [46] Edited by: Trillian Mcmillan on 25/02/2007 17:55:24 I, too, dont remeber being jammed since the patch, certainly not in the last few months. I, too, no longer fly ECM ships. Now, seeing as almost everybody agrees this nerf was done properly, i cant wait for the nano and the nos "balance". Hopefully it will be handeled in a similar manner in regards to what will be left of these modules/setups. :) Have fun...
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.25 18:20:00 - [47] Originally by: Aramendel If ECM wouldn't be able to work just fine at sniper distances (or alternatively wouldn't work at 40k or below) and wouldn't get more effecient vs smaller ships (other EW gets less effecient) I would agree with you. A bit of a derail but i have to disagree here. Dampeners do not always become less effective againts smaller targets. I can see what you are trying to say, ie small ships arent hit badly by the increased lock time and fight at short rng usually anyway. However... A blasterthron will not be seriously hamperd by dampening while a lot of interceptors will. With a base lock rng of about 20-25km an interceptor which is hit by a couple of dampeners will suddenly find itself forced to enter web (and even small nos) range. This often means one very dead interceptor :) And yes i know some ceptors fight at these ranges anyway, but i do belive most try to avoid it when tackling big ships.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 19:08:00 - [48] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/02/2007 19:07:40 Assuming the ship in question has a web, which is not always the case. It is no standard equipment for all ships. Also, one ECM is perfectly able to permajam a frigate. To get a sensorboosted crow (rather common) or an assault frig without SB within web range you need 2 SDs on a ship with SD boni. And then a web... And don't let me start on tracking disruptors... The core functionality of TDs and SDs is to exploit the lower speed of your target, by reducing it's operational range significantly and outdistancing it. If you cannot do this you have a problem unless you have backup. That are problems ECM simply does not face because it has no such loopholes. My point that ECM gets a good deal more effective vs smaller ships stands.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.26 00:29:00 - [49] The fact that there is only one way to fly a ship (jump in last at extreme range) does not mean the ship is fine. We've had this argument before and I'm well aware that you will never listen to any argument that ECM ships have been nerfed into uselessness. So don't waste your time posting here. You think ECM ships are fine. I think amarr ships are fine, but since I don't fly them what does my opinion matter? Only if you fly the ship on a day in/day out basis can you truely be qualified to comment on it. I tried to present an arguement based on flying the ship. No FC I've flown with has wanted to bring a battleship into combat that has a 50/50 chance of doing nothing. But it can perma-jam frigates - so what! Most battleships can kill frigates with secondary weapons. The comparison is not valid. In a 5 on 5 battle, bringing a scorpion is a big risk. It cannot add any damage to the fight at the range it needs to be to survive. So you are starting out down in firepower and tanking. It has the possibility of taking 2 other battleships out of the fight, which would now raise the odds into your favor. However, if the other ships carry one ECCM module, it will fail the jam far more often than it exceeds. If it does not have the correct racials, it's chance of jammimg is well below 50%. Not to mention that since it is fighting deep in falloff, the effective ECM strength is ever lower. Add these odds up and there is a big risk in bringing in the Scorp. On the other hand, the same pilot can fly a rohk with equal effectiveness, who adds firepower and tanking. Most FC's I fly with don't like risks. As I said, you believe they are fine - most others, including those who fly them, don't agree. Oh and Lukec, I don't use the Rook, but at 20% boost per level, so that at level 5, ecm is back to it's former strength. I would tend to agree with you. The fact you don't use Scorps or Falcons actually supports the contention that these ships are underpowered.... What should be done? Leave ECM modules as they are. Make the signal amp a high slot module and boost it's effectiveness to 50% - allow only one to work (like damage controls). Lastly make it's CPU intensive so that only ECM specific ships can fit it (they get a boost to fitting requirements). They would still be weaker than before Kali, but only slightly (for example multispec would be strength 4.5 vs 5). Now if ECM ships want to boost ECM strength higher they can use rigs. Lastly boost T2 ECM modules so they are in ANY way better that their T1 counterparts (Higher fitting, higher cap usage, same range, same strength - but at least they cost less).
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 02:08:00 - [50] Originally by: Veryez Only if you fly the ship on a day in/day out basis can you truely be qualified to comment on it. There are quite a few people in this thread who fly them and who say they are fine. Quote: But it can perma-jam frigates - so what! Most battleships can kill frigates with secondary weapons. The comparison is not valid. BSs are not the only ships in the game. And it's no comparsion, it's a strength ECM has compared to other EW. If it would be the same for ECM as for SDs and TDs cruisers would have 30 sensor strength and frigate 40 sensorstrength. Quote: In a 5 on 5 battle, bringing a scorpion is a big risk. It cannot add any damage to the fight at the range it needs to be to survive. So you are starting out down in firepower and tanking. It has the possibility of taking 2 other battleships out of the fight, which would now raise the odds into your favor. However, if the other ships carry one ECCM module, it will fail the jam far more often than it exceeds. If it does not have the correct racials, it's chance of jammimg is well below 50%. And bringing ANY other non-ECM EW ship would be any different? EW is always risky. It's the tradeoff for it being able to completely wreck an opposite force when it works. Quote: Not to mention that since it is fighting deep in falloff, the effective ECM strength is ever lower. Why on earth would it do that? If you think I said that you should better reread my posts. Quote: Oh and Lukec, I don't use the Rook, but at 20% boost per level, so that at level 5, ecm is back to it's former strength. I would tend to agree with you. The fact you don't use Scorps or Falcons actually supports the contention that these ships are underpowered.... Exept it isn't, basic math. Old ECM strength: 100% * 1.5 (50% bonus) -> 150% New ECM strength: 50% * 2.0 (100% bonus) -> 100% Add a 1600mm plate and a 20% ECm strength rig on it and it has 80% of it's former strength, lower than the scorp and falcon have if they use a plate. With 2 ECM mods (no plate buffer) it's on 94% of it's former strength, about the same as the scrop gets with 3 mods and 1 plate.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.26 03:39:00 - [51] Originally by: Aramendel And bringing ANY other non-ECM EW ship would be any different? EW is always risky. It's the tradeoff for it being able to completely wreck an opposite force when it works. Arbitrators and Celestis can tank, deal damage at the range their EW is effective, and still assist w/EW. The Blackbird can't. It's ECM or nothing. So it might help your group, it might not. Many FC's I work with aren't willing to take that risk. I won't discuss the bellicose - it's a disgrace of a ship. As far as basic math goes, I was refering to the difference between a 10% boost per level and a 20% boost per level. While it doesn't bring the ship up to it's former level, it does bring the module back up (hence the reason I said ECM, not the ship). Basic reading. Maybe you're FC's are still asking pilots to bring ECM ships along. The one's I fly with are saying to fit ECCM and ignore the ECM ships completely. Argue all you wish, the facts speak for themselves.
DuPuy	Posted - 2007.02.26 05:09:00 - [52] I have maximum-to near-maximum ecm skills I fly blackbirds I fly falcons I used to fly rooks I don't fly scorpions. I still fly ecm as I refuse to accept that the time spent training that skill tree was a waste... I'm now training up another race's force recons as a result of my experience since Revelations. Russian Roulette is not a game I'm willing to pay for. Fit an $80mil cloak to a $60 mil Falcon... and your named racials and full-lowslot-range of boosters will still fail to jam one in three cycles on a battlecruiser. It is a "chance based" mod now afterall. As almost all non-ecm ships are nanos... the 200km "buffer" you started the engagement with is meaningless. (ecm can't fit nanos as they must have the boosters to even bother undocking... just as they cant fit armor or anything else in lows... and you can shield tank if you don't carry a full set of ecm... and without ecm, why fly that ship anyway?) The blackbird is at least cheaper and expendible. And it is useful... in that rare situation where a battle-plan goes exactly to plan. So... you're of use maybe once every four times you undock... until the dice determine you miss a jam and go pop or have to warp out. yes: fly them smart and have "lady luck" on your side, you can do reasonably well. But if you can fly so well as to make these ships work... you'd be a true killer in any other ship that doesn't have to sacrifice tank and flexibility to be moderately useful at its core EW job. And you'd probably also do better in any ship that has the dps to at least threaten frigates...
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 05:23:00 - [53] So ECM desont hold up well to nano battleships. And you see the problem is with ECM not being strong enough how? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
DuPuy	Posted - 2007.02.26 05:42:00 - [54] Edited by: DuPuy on 26/02/2007 05:40:26 read it all. not just the bit you're interested in. as for that one little piece... people keep saying the weakness of ecm boats should be overcome by their range... but range isn't the "iwin" button they say it is.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.26 05:45:00 - [55] Originally by: Goumindong So ECM desont hold up well to nano battleships. And you see the problem is with ECM not being strong enough how? The problem is NOT ECM! The problem is ECM specific ships having to sacrifice everything, be flown only 1 way, to have to guess on what the enemy is going to fly, and hoping that the enemy doesn't bother to use ECCM. To have any chance to have an impact on a battle. Now if all the cards line up, I can jam 1 to 3 ships and have an impact on the fight. On the other hand I can use my same skills jump into a rohk and add some serious firepower to any fight, and ignore enemy ECM by fitting one ECCM module. Some people feel this situation is fine and doesn't need to be changed, usually those who don't fly the ships.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 06:00:00 - [56] Originally by: DuPuy Edited by: DuPuy on 26/02/2007 05:40:26 read it all. not just the bit you're interested in. as for that one little piece... people keep saying the weakness of ecm boats should be overcome by their range... but range isn't the "iwin" button they say it is. I did, its tripe. ECM is no longer overpowered. Deal with it, its still very strong and stronger than all the other EWs ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Avalloc GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.26 06:03:00 - [57] Another thing I've noticed effected by the ECM nerf is the leadership gang mod for EW strength. Prior to nerf my Rook had a jam strength of 17 with racials while being buffed by a max Information Warfare pilot (using mindlink too.) Now? Only 13.8 and he unbuffed strength is 12.1 which is pretty sad. And 1.7 point boost? Come on!
DuPuy	Posted - 2007.02.26 06:59:00 - [58] Edited by: DuPuy on 26/02/2007 06:58:40 Edited by: DuPuy on 26/02/2007 06:56:11 Quote: I did, its tripe. ECM is no longer overpowered. Deal with it, its still very strong and stronger than all the other EWs I guess we'll soon be seeing what you have to say when they nerf nos... and force all those (many) pilgrim and curse pilots to fill their lows with mods to make their EW useful as well as make their effectiveness "chance" based...
Pinky Denmark	Posted - 2007.02.26 07:32:00 - [59] EW got nerfed but is still very useful in the right hands - the ships are nber fragile however if the pilot want a good shot at jamming a few people.
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.26 08:42:00 - [60] Originally by: Veryez Oh and Lukec, I don't use the Rook, but at 20% boost per level, so that at level 5, ecm is back to it's former strength. I would tend to agree with you. The fact you don't use Scorps or Falcons actually supports the contention that these ships are underpowered.... You have distortion amps & rigs to make them better. I can't have 4x 1600mm plates on any fleet setup with guns and perform good. It would be funny if you would need 2x cpuII to fit all ecm on scorp like amarr for guns -------- .....
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 11:39:00 - [61] Edited by: Aramendel on 26/02/2007 11:43:28 Originally by: Veryez Arbitrators and Celestis can tank, deal damage at the range their EW is effective, and still assist w/EW. The Blackbird can't. It's ECM or nothing. The "tank" of arbis and celestis lasts about 5 seconds if they are called primary - especially since they operate at ranges where EVERYTHING can attack them, not just longrange ships. Or you could just send 5 heavys on them, then they last about 15 seconds. The BBs range is a far better tank as anything you can fit on them. Quote: As far as basic math goes, I was refering to the difference between a 10% boost per level and a 20% boost per level. While it doesn't bring the ship up to it's former level, it does bring the module back up (hence the reason I said ECM, not the ship). Basic reading. Riiiight. Nice try. Exept you were talking about the balance of the ECM ships towards each other. So, no, you were referring to the ship. And, as said, the strength of the rook compared to the falcon and scorp is now if anything lower than pre-kali. So kali did not nerf them harder than the rook. Quote: Maybe you're FC's are still asking pilots to bring ECM ships along. The one's I fly with are saying to fit ECCM and ignore the ECM ships completely. Argue all you wish, the facts speak for themselves. Indeed they do. Why do you think do they ask specifically to fit ECCM and not countermeasures against SDs or TDs? Because they classify ECM as biggest danger of all EW. When they tell you "Don't waste a slot on ECCM" THEN you could argue that ECM is too weak. Originally by: DuPuy as for that one little piece... people keep saying the weakness of ecm boats should be overcome by their range... but range isn't the "iwin" button they say it is. The same applies for TDs (utterly useless against most nanosetups since they use no turrets) and SDs (they can get into their reduced targeting range easily). ECM can at least still jam them even if they are at 1k distance. Originally by: Avalloc Another thing I've noticed effected by the ECM nerf is the leadership gang mod for EW strength. Prior to nerf my Rook had a jam strength of 17 with racials while being buffed by a max Information Warfare pilot (using mindlink too.) Now? Only 13.8 and he unbuffed strength is 12.1 which is pretty sad. And 1.7 point boost? Come on! The reason for that is because the lowslot ECM mods and the leadership skill bonus share a stacking penalitiy.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.26 13:12:00 - [62] Originally by: Aramendel The "tank" of arbis and celestis lasts about 5 seconds if they are called primary - especially since they operate at ranges where EVERYTHING can attack them, not just longrange ships. Or you could just send 5 heavys on them, then they last about 15 seconds. Still better than the BB and they can deal damage too. Originally by: Aramendel Riiiight. Nice try. Exept you were talking about the balance of the ECM ships towards each other. So, no, you were referring to the ship. And, as said, the strength of the rook compared to the falcon and scorp is now if anything lower than pre-kali. So kali did not nerf them harder than the rook. Please stop trying to read my mind, I know what I said and don't need you to explain it to me. The Rook returns ECM to it's original strength, no other ECM ship can do that unless you fill it with 4 signal amps. Originally by: Aramendel Indeed they do. Why do you think do they ask specifically to fit ECCM and not countermeasures against SDs or TDs? Because they classify ECM as biggest danger of all EW. When they tell you "Don't waste a slot on ECCM" THEN you could argue that ECM is too weak. Or maybe they know we fit sensor boosters and tracking computers when/if out guns need it, besides all they do it reduce ew's effects - not completely nullify it. See two can play this silly game, and you still don't know what you're talking about.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:35:00 - [63] Originally by: Veryez Still better than the BB and they can deal damage too. And by which magical means drones can reach the BB? Or anything but longrange large guns? Range = tank. Quote: Please stop trying to read my mind, I know what I said and don't need you to explain it to me. The Rook returns ECM to it's original strength, no other ECM ship can do that unless you fill it with 4 signal amps. ECM strength on a rook < ECM strength on a scorp wth 2 amps. Same amount of free low slots. And, again, you were speaking of ships. Fact is that the rook got if anything hit harder by the ECM nerf than other ECM ships. Ignore it as long as you want to if you like. Quote: Or maybe they know we fit sensor boosters and tracking computers when/if out guns need it, besides all they do it reduce ew's effects - not completely nullify it. Contrary to popular opinion fitting an ECCM is not = ECM immunity. All it does is reducing the jam chance. As said, as long as they feel the need to protect themselves against ECM they clearly class it as danger.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:39:00 - [64] Aramendel, please, for the love of god, try flying these ships if youre gonna talk that much about them.
ITTigerClawIK Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:50:00 - [65] 4 racials on a BS with no ECCM fitted should jam it.... but last time i did it... nothing happend for 5 cycles streight before i blew up...summit up with that... Sig (partially) nerfed. Only one image allowed, and that one image has to be under 400x120, and below 24,000 bytes. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
ChiShen Aliastra	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:54:00 - [66] As an ECM caldari user. falcon pilot. ECM atm are ok but only if used on one of ships that give a massive strenght bonus and then you really need an ecm strength module to help. Im quite disappointed that CCP completely nerfed ECM so hard and left Sensor Damps as they are. A ship with a 250 target range vs an arazu with good skills and 3-4 damps and the arazu wins; you will never target him because he will orbit outside 8km.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 15:00:00 - [67] Yes, damperners are very strong shortrange. But if you get close enough they don't do much - so they are only effective vs slower ships. This is a significant limitation, especialyl with the current nanofad. You can fit it for speed, too, of cource, but it does not have the cap to sustain a MWD. They might be a bit too strong right now, but it's nowhere near the "everyone is using them" of ECM. And the window in which you can use them effeciently is a lot smaller.
ITTigerClawIK Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.26 15:05:00 - [68] this is the fault of all those people who winged and whined couse they never botherd to fit ECCM or sensor backups and such and woudnering why they keep getting jammed... yea its useing a slot.. but then agian your useing slots for loads of other things aint ya?..... all most people care about is the damage and tank mods... i used to go around with a radar backup array alot of the time before REV and i was fine nad good to go unless i was called primary and ALL of the EW ships went after ya but then there iant nout you can really do..people should learn to live with that fact insted of wanting a nerf all the time.... yes i have been victim of ECM and i DID use ECM in the past but now i dont find them any use at all whatso ever.. same kinda responce is gunna happen if ya take the INSANE speeds away from larger ships... this i cna understand that large ships are not ment to go so fast but smaller ships ARE... TBh i belive the nanoships came in as responce to the ECM nerf in away since the complaints seemed to stack up AFTEER the ECM nerf but this is just me of course.. im done please go right ahead everyone else Sig (partially) nerfed. Only one image allowed, and that one image has to be under 400x120, and below 24,000 bytes. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
kill0rbunny Chimera Intelligence Agency	Posted - 2007.02.26 15:17:00 - [69] Originally by: Aramendel Yes, damperners are very strong shortrange. But if you get close enough they don't do much - so they are only effective vs slower ships. This is a significant limitation, especialyl with the current nanofad. You can fit it for speed, too, of cource, but it does not have the cap to sustain a MWD. They might be a bit too strong right now, but it's nowhere near the "everyone is using them" of ECM. And the window in which you can use them effeciently is a lot smaller. You NEVER EVER got hit by a dampener ship whose pilot knew what to do. In a bs, targeting range doesn't matter, it's the time you take to actually target the ship. With three damps on you, you are out of battle till it's over. There's no better ewar for small roaming gangs than damps. - I got a portrait now, wheeeee! \o/
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:35:00 - [70] Edited by: Aramendel on 27/02/2007 00:31:51 Originally by: kill0rbunny You NEVER EVER got hit by a dampener ship whose pilot knew what to do. In a bs, targeting range doesn't matter, it's the time you take to actually target the ship. With three damps on you, you are out of battle till it's over. There's no better ewar for small roaming gangs than damps. I am using them myself, thank you. One of my last kills was against a curse which had a pretty similar damperner setup. So I know how to fight with and against them. If for a BS the battle is already over by the time it can get a lock you have a gank gang in which case it doesn't really matter what you are using. In another battle the BS target I dampened was still on top or near the top of most of our loss killmails. Why? It had a sensorbooster on and the battle was at closerange around a station, so it could still lock quite a few ships just nicely. With ECM you do not face such limitations. It's just fire & forget. And it's stronger vs non-BS targets. Yes, those matter too. I freely admit, though, that it's chance based nature sucks. Big time. With the other EW ships you usually know for sure if that situation is winable or not. With ECM ships you can only guess. But in order to remove the random factor of ECM it would have to get another effect. The ability to remove a ships ability to have targets from any range is just too powerful for that.
Shamis Orzoz Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:48:00 - [71] A good rook pilot still kicks ass. ECM seems to work fine on the ships that are intended for it, which is ok by me. Shamis
Caletha Reborn	Posted - 2007.02.27 12:41:00 - [72] ECM is not fine, currently you do -not- need to fit ECCM's on BS because you hardly get jammed anyway. You have ECM ships, to be effective they need to sacrifice any sort of tank. They cant tank using mid slots as they are needed for sensor boosting & jamming, they cant use low slots as they are used for ECM-strength increase. But now you say "but ECM is their tank", so you call a module that works on -chance- a tank? My huginn has 2 sensor damps, they -always- work (their counter is sensor boosters, and if they can still target me, I warp out, not like they can get close when dual-webbed). My friend's Pilgrim uses tracking disruptors, they -always- work too (ok, except on missile ships). An arazu can tackle at +50km, if things go wrong he just cloaks + warps off (not like any ship can target them 1 on 1 at that range, no mater how many sensor boosters are fitted). But here's the kicker, none of those ships sacrifice their tank to be effective. But the Falcon and Rook both get -no- tank with a EW weapon thats based completely on chance. If you think thats fine, then I'm Santa Clause. ECM got nerfed too much and you see this in ship setups and current state of PvP. You never see people fit ECCM's anymore, this says something about both the strength of ECM's and the number of pilots willing to fly ECM ships. If ECM was fine, people would have to fit modules to counter its effect. In all fairness, I always felt ECM was fine before, once you fitted an ECCM, scorps had less chance of jamming you then as they do now (and that says a lot). What had to get nerfed was none-dedicated ECM ships (most likely as how Sensor Damps will get 'nerfed' as I'm sure it'll happen), fitting an Multi-spec ECM on a pest/mega/domi/raven was almost an i-win button, that was wrong. Rooks and Scorps and Falcons etc, those where never wrong, they where fine. Anyways, I'll be buying a Rook soon, because if this nerf did one thing 'good', it was dropping prices of these ships dramatically. Last time I saw them go for something like 50m, compared to the what? +200?
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.27 14:01:00 - [73] Edited by: Veryez on 27/02/2007 13:57:30 Rather than sacrificing tank, the signal amp should be a high slot module, additionally it should be boosted to 35% for the t2 version, 30% for t1, if allowed to use more than one, or 50% if limited to one. I for one would give up gank to be effective at ECM again. Additionally t2 ECM modules need a small boost, since they are actually worse than their t1 counterparts. The beauty of this simple solution is that the griffin and the blackbird would become viable jammers again. This simple change, even if they left the strength the same but made signal amps high slot modules, would bring ECM ships back to fleet battles. As it stands now the odds of the ECM ship being a liability in a battle are too great, most take the sure thing and bring another damage dealer along. CCP at least consider this simple solution to allow players to fly all ECM ships again.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:02:00 - [74] Edited by: Aramendel on 27/02/2007 15:03:34 Originally by: Caletha Reborn But now you say "but ECM is their tank", so you call a module that works on -chance- a tank? Yes. No normal tank allows you to remove 100% of the damage you get. ECM does. If it would work all the time reliably it would be ..well.. just a little tiny bit overpowered? And this is even ignoring that it also disables enemy nos and any kind of EW. Quote: My huginn has 2 sensor damps, they -always- work (their counter is sensor boosters, and if they can still target me, I warp out, not like they can get close when dual-webbed). My friend's Pilgrim uses tracking disruptors, they -always- work too (ok, except on missile ships). An arazu can tackle at +50km, if things go wrong he just cloaks + warps off (not like any ship can target them 1 on 1 at that range, no mater how many sensor boosters are fitted). And if you jam someone at 100-200k you cannot warp out if you have bad luck with the jams? Right. Also, you might ask your pilgrim friend how good his TDs works against a ship with med blasters or ACs, especially when they web him. Quote: But here's the kicker, none of those ships sacrifice their tank to be effective. But the Falcon and Rook both get -no- tank with a EW weapon thats based completely on chance. Only if you totally ignore that these ships have to be within 40-50k to use their EW effeciently (or 12k in the case of the pilgrim). Give ECM a max range of 50k and remove the range bonus on the ships (and as result make it just like damps and TDs useless for fleet combat) and you might have a point about the missing "tank". Btw, "tank" is relative. The only recon which can tank well is the pilgrim and I think I mentioned that it has to operate within 12k? The other recons do barely tank better than the rook or falcon - but the one-eyed king of the blind does still not win a sniper contest against people with 2 eyes. Rooks were pre-kali around 70 mil in jita, btw.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.27 17:37:00 - [75] ECM platforms can be totaly ignored. We usualy only shoot them because they explode with a single or two voleys and it is much ISK-damage done to the enemy without much effort. The only reason a Rook might be considered a valid choice is that the price has droped almost to production costs/effort lately. The range is aproximately that at which a FleetBS can shoot anyway. Except for gatecamps there is usualy no opportunity to use it above 100km+ range anyway. And even then you are totaly unflexible, not able to follow through the jumpgate if your friendshave to jump though. Even with the coincidence that you have exactly the racial jammers you need: Your chance is aproximately 44% of successfully jamming two average BS at once. Happy exploding I say, but oh yeah, there is still a VERY high chance of keeping the two enemy BS jammed in order to survive a few cycles...
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 18:37:00 - [76] Edited by: Aramendel on 27/02/2007 18:33:56 Originally by: Skeltek The range is aproximately that at which a FleetBS can shoot anyway. Except for gatecamps there is usualy no opportunity to use it above 100km+ range anyway. And even then you are totaly unflexible, not able to follow through the jumpgate if your friendshave to jump though. If you are at 150k+ from the gate you can warp to it. A warp to 150k and warp to 200k option would be useful, though, since you need otherwise bookmarks to do that. Quote: Even with the coincidence that you have exactly the racial jammers you need: Your chance is aproximately 44% of successfully jamming two average BS at once. Uh...what? With max skills and 1 ECM mod a rook has 10.8 strength per racial. Vs a target with a sensorstrength of 21 it has about a 51% chance to jam it with one racial. Or 76% with 2 racials. And a 58% chance to jam 2 battleships at once this way. Using half of it's low slots. With 3 racials on each BS (using 75% of it's low slots) this becomes a 78% chance to jam 2 at once. Or, if it fits 2 ECM mods and no 1600mm plate this becomes a 71% chance with 2 racials per target and a 88% chance with 3 racials per target.
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.02.27 19:34:00 - [77] Yes. ECM was overnerfed. Why. Simple. ECM specialised ships were and their purpose is: Provide cheapish and effective platforms for EW systems for the purpose of laying EW cover to the fleet, by effectively reducing the effectiveness of 2 or 3 ships of their own class for a short period of time while the rest of the gang takes down enemy ships. Since to be effective as described, you no longer can fill your purpose with a T2 fit, but have to fit damage mods and rigs as well. This multiplies the price of the EW ship compared to what it used to cost, while making it more fragile. Hence no-one flyes them anymore. I have not been jammed once, since the ECM nerf. Wether it is due to less ppl flying the ships or just the ships failing miserably. Either way, it is time to ungimp the ECM systems so that they are at least 75% base str of what they used to be. The situation as it is, is just redicilous. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.27 21:25:00 - [78] Originally by: Aramendel Uh...what? With max skills and 1 ECM mod a rook has 10.8 strength per racial. Vs a target with a sensorstrength of 21 it has about a 51% chance to jam it with one racial. Or 76% with 2 racials. And a 58% chance to jam 2 battleships at once this way. Using half of it's low slots. With 3 racials on each BS (using 75% of it's low slots) this becomes a 78% chance to jam 2 at once. Or, if it fits 2 ECM mods and no 1600mm plate this becomes a 71% chance with 2 racials per target and a 88% chance with 3 racials per target. I do so love when someone uses the most powerful ECM ship in the game to prove a point. So lets use this hypothetical setup to see how other ships work: Scorpion, max skills, best Racial ECM, and Best Signal Distortion Amp vs Megathon (21 sensor strength): 1 Racial: (3.61.51.251.2 = 8.1/21 = 38.57% success rate 1 multispec: (2.01.51.251.2) = 4.5/21 = 21.43% success rate 1 Racial and 1 Multispec: (1-(1-.3857)(1-.2143)) = 51.73% success rate 2 Racials: (1-(1-.3857)(1-.3857)) = 62.26% success rate 2 Racials and 1 multispec is: 70.35% success rate Optimistically this is the best you can hope for. Now lets give the Mega pilot 1 ECCM (sensor strength now 41.16). 1 Racial : 8.1/41.16 = 19.68% success rate 1 Racial and 1 multispec = 28.46% success rate 2 Racial= 35.49% success rate 2 Racials and 1 multispec = 42.54% success rate So A pilot with battleship level 5, Signal dispersion level 5, has these chances against a Megathon pilot with electronics upgrades 1. Now to achieve these lofty numbers the pilot must reduce his tank and fight at a range where he can do no damage what so ever. Even if we accept your contention that these numbers are "fair" how exactly would moving Signal distortion amps to high slots and increasing their strength to 35% @ t2 (30% t1) hurt? for comparision the numbers would be: 1 Racial = 43.39% 1 Racial and 1 multi = 42.96% 2 Racials = 67.95% 2 racials and 1 multi = 75.68% With ECCM 1 Racial = 22.14% 1 Racial and 1 multi = 31.71% 2 Racials = 39.38% 2 racials and 1 multi = 46.83% And we both know the mega does NOT have the best sensor strength. Ultimately we disagree about the numbers, sadly the people I fly with don't share you're optimistic view of ECM.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.28 01:24:00 - [79] Edited by: welsh wizard on 28/02/2007 01:24:41 Originally by: Veryez The fact that there is only one way to fly a ship (jump in last at extreme range) does not mean the ship is fine. We've had this argument before and I'm well aware that you will never listen to any argument that ECM ships have been nerfed into uselessness. So don't waste your time posting here. You think ECM ships are fine. I think amarr ships are fine, but since I don't fly them what does my opinion matter? Only if you fly the ship on a day in/day out basis can you truely be qualified to comment on it. I tried to present an arguement based on flying the ship. No FC I've flown with has wanted to bring a battleship into combat that has a 50/50 chance of doing nothing. But it can perma-jam frigates - so what! Most battleships can kill frigates with secondary weapons. The comparison is not valid. In a 5 on 5 battle, bringing a scorpion is a big risk. It cannot add any damage to the fight at the range it needs to be to survive. So you are starting out down in firepower and tanking. It has the possibility of taking 2 other battleships out of the fight, which would now raise the odds into your favor. However, if the other ships carry one ECCM module, it will fail the jam far more often than it exceeds. If it does not have the correct racials, it's chance of jammimg is well below 50%. Not to mention that since it is fighting deep in falloff, the effective ECM strength is ever lower. Add these odds up and there is a big risk in bringing in the Scorp. On the other hand, the same pilot can fly a rohk with equal effectiveness, who adds firepower and tanking. Most FC's I fly with don't like risks. As I said, you believe they are fine - most others, including those who fly them, don't agree. Oh and Lukec, I don't use the Rook, but at 20% boost per level, so that at level 5, ecm is back to it's former strength. I would tend to agree with you. The fact you don't use Scorps or Falcons actually supports the contention that these ships are underpowered.... What should be done? Leave ECM modules as they are. Make the signal amp a high slot module and boost it's effectiveness to 50% - allow only one to work (like damage controls). Lastly make it's CPU intensive so that only ECM specific ships can fit it (they get a boost to fitting requirements). They would still be weaker than before Kali, but only slightly (for example multispec would be strength 4.5 vs 5). Now if ECM ships want to boost ECM strength higher they can use rigs. Lastly boost T2 ECM modules so they are in ANY way better that their T1 counterparts (Higher fitting, higher cap usage, same range, same strength - but at least they cost less). Veryez blew you away with that post tbh guys. That is the current situation. "UBERWTFOMGTASTIC!!!" on paper but in a day to day Eve situation, less useful than something else. It was almost perfect for a very short time (About 3 weeks?) pre-Kali when ECCM was buffed. Now they've just removed said module from the game again. I mean whats the point in its existence? They went too far with the nerf post-kali.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:49:00 - [80] Originally by: welsh wizard It was almost perfect for a very short time (About 3 weeks?) pre-Kali when ECCM was buffed. Now they've just removed said module from the game again. I mean whats the point in its existence? They went too far with the nerf post-kali. I completely agree, ECCM and ECM were very well balanced then. I even carried projected ECCM sometimes to help my gang mates, since I had enough tank to stay close to them (for some time at least). The Scorpion is my favorite PvP ship by a wide margin, but it just can't help groups like a Raven or Rokh can. All they do is sit in my hanger now
Dire Lauthris Caldari Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.28 09:34:00 - [81] I still fly rooks, and I still jam the crap out of everyone with them. I quite often get jams using racial jammers on targets of a different sensor type, which IMO is just wrong. I especially like how Rooks have fallen so low in price because people think they're useless now. I should say I've not used a Multispec since the nerf though. Scorp doesn't do so well anymore, it really should get a bit of a strength bonus to get it anywhere like it was before. I've put damps on mine instead. -------------- Never Outgunned
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 10:38:00 - [82] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 10:36:58 Originally by: Veryez I do so love when someone uses the most powerful ECM ship in the game to prove a point. I do so love when someone takes things completely out of context. Skeltek was using a Rook himself and giving redicously low numbers for said rook. What should I have used to prove him wrong? A Griffin? Vs his, in case I haven't mentioned it, rook? Quote: Scorpion, max skills, best Racial ECM, and Best Signal Distortion Amp vs Megathon (21 sensor strength) Scorp has 4 low slots in case you forgot, so it is no problem for him to mount 3 ECM mods, giving him 10.6 ECM strength, pretty much the same as the rook has with 1 free low slot. Quote: Now lets give the Mega pilot 1 ECCM (sensor strength now 41.16). ECM is balanced vs a ship without ECCM, not vs a ship with ECCM, even if certain people believe otherwise. Quote: And we both know the mega does NOT have the best sensor strength. See above "taking things out of context" comment. Skeltek was talking abot the strength vs the average battleship so I used a BS with an average sensorstrength (however surprising it may be). Geddon has 17, scorp and rokh have 24, average is 20.5. Of cource are some BSs harder to jam. About as many are easier to jam, though, too. If you only look at the worst case and ignore all easier ones everything is underpowered.
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.28 12:23:00 - [83] Originally by: Veryez Originally by: welsh wizard It was almost perfect for a very short time (About 3 weeks?) pre-Kali when ECCM was buffed. Now they've just removed said module from the game again. I mean whats the point in its existence? They went too far with the nerf post-kali. I completely agree, ECCM and ECM were very well balanced then. I even carried projected ECCM sometimes to help my gang mates, since I had enough tank to stay close to them (for some time at least). The Scorpion is my favorite PvP ship by a wide margin, but it just can't help groups like a Raven or Rokh can. All they do is sit in my hanger now It was ballanced in 1vs1 situation. 10 ships with 1 multispec of doom vs 10 ships with backup ... Best outcome for backupers was not getting jammed. Seriously, ECM is fine. All you need to do is pick ship with ECM bonus and FIT it for jamming and voila, it works. Nobody fits backups anyway as they are worthless(i remember flying domi with 2 medslot ECCM and still getting jammed all the time). 1 backup is waste of slot, because 1 stupid bb with few multis will still nerly permajam 1bs. Sensor booster will perform better, at least it gives you small chance to put drones on jammer or nosfs. -------- .....
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.28 13:44:00 - [84] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 27/02/2007 18:33:56 Originally by: Skeltek The range is aproximately that at which a FleetBS can shoot anyway. Except for gatecamps there is usualy no opportunity to use it above 100km+ range anyway. And even then you are totaly unflexible, not able to follow through the jumpgate if your friendshave to jump though. If you are at 150k+ from the gate you can warp to it. A warp to 150k and warp to 200k option would be useful, though, since you need otherwise bookmarks to do that. Like I wrote, EXCEPT for gatecamps, you usualy almost never happen to get more than 100km fighting range. Originally by: Aramendel Quote: Even with the coincidence that you have exactly the racial jammers you need: Your chance is aproximately 44% of successfully jamming two average BS at once. Uh...what? With max skills and 1 ECM mod a rook has 10.8 strength per racial. Vs a target with a sensorstrength of 21 it has about a 51% chance to jam it with one racial. Or 76% with 2 racials. And a 58% chance to jam 2 battleships at once this way. Using half of it's low slots. With 3 racials on each BS (using 75% of it's low slots) this becomes a 78% chance to jam 2 at once. Or, if it fits 2 ECM mods and no 1600mm plate this becomes a 71% chance with 2 racials per target and a 88% chance with 3 racials per target. When standing against two random enemy BS, the chance of having 4 or more ECMs of the right kind is very improbable. So I lured you into doing the same exact calculation that I did. Quote: And a 58% chance to jam 2 battleships at once this way. So you yourself just admited, that the chance of not surviving the first cycle of your jamming is 42%. Quiet nice for such an expensive ship to loose at below 100-150 km range. But of course a gatecamper surely prepares for 150+km fights properly.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.28 13:56:00 - [85] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Veryez Originally by: welsh wizard It was almost perfect for a very short time (About 3 weeks?) pre-Kali when ECCM was buffed. Now they've just removed said module from the game again. I mean whats the point in its existence? They went too far with the nerf post-kali. I completely agree, ECCM and ECM were very well balanced then. I even carried projected ECCM sometimes to help my gang mates, since I had enough tank to stay close to them (for some time at least). The Scorpion is my favorite PvP ship by a wide margin, but it just can't help groups like a Raven or Rokh can. All they do is sit in my hanger now It was ballanced in 1vs1 situation. 10 ships with 1 multispec of doom vs 10 ships with backup ... Best outcome for backupers was not getting jammed. Seriously, ECM is fine. All you need to do is pick ship with ECM bonus and FIT it for jamming and voila, it works. Nobody fits backups anyway as they are worthless(i remember flying domi with 2 medslot ECCM and still getting jammed all the time). 1 backup is waste of slot, because 1 stupid bb with few multis will still nerly permajam 1bs. Sensor booster will perform better, at least it gives you small chance to put drones on jammer or nosfs. 1. ECM is a medslot module, backup arrays are lowslot mods(except EECM) 2. of course it works, for a high price and poor tank. I agree on ECM ships being efficient, but the shipsjammedatbeginningoffight/effectivenessreductionpertime- quotient is simply too low. You get killed too fast, loose a ship and enemy gets a ship "back". Considering the short longelivity of a Rook, you just waste a potential BS pilot in it... (we speak here about having capable oponents, not jamming some noobs that don¦t know how to fight back and kill the ECM first) 3. getting permajammed in a Dominix while having 2x medslot ECCM... maybe you forgot to put them on? a multispec-BB permajamming a BS? you must be kidding... If it is a 1vs1, the BB will not be able to kill the BS; if it is a 2vs2, the second enemy BS will finish you in seconds and then they will both kill your gangmate. And honestly... a Dominix being jammed has a real serious problem with her drones agressing the ECM ship automaticaly... <.< kind regards, Skel
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.28 14:05:00 - [86] Boost ecm up, nerf ecm range, boost eccm, reprogram drones so that 1) they aren't screwed and 2) they can be told what sort of ship to agress without a target lock. End point - ecm ships work most of the time vs non eccmed up ships, but need to be closer in and therefore vulnerable to drones. Works for me. sgb
Nyack GREY COUNCIL Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2007.02.28 14:15:00 - [87] hi! havtn read the whole thread yet but a thing to take into consideration these days are speed. before patch ew ships was pretty much untouchable. they jamemd at 100km+ and back then inties was the only thing able to cover that distance. now it seems most ships do 3km/s+ atleast!! 10km/s+ on pimped ships. fitting out a EW boat with rigs and low slots mods and t2 jammers isnt really worth it these days cause u will prolly get ganked by nanoships very fast anyway..
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 15:06:00 - [88] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 15:14:01 Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 15:10:38 Originally by: Skeltek When standing against two random enemy BS, the chance of having 4 or more ECMs of the right kind is very improbable. So I lured you into doing the same exact calculation that I did. You lured me into nothing, you gave out incorrect information which I corrected. Were you just unable to do the calculations correctly and were guessing instead or trying to spread falsified information in an attempt to make the ships look weaker than they are in reality? If you wanted to proof anything you could just have done the - correct - calculations yourself. What could I have done? Claiming they were wrong when everyone who completed firstgrade highschool could verify they are right and making myself looking stupid? Quote: So you yourself just admited, that the chance of not surviving the first cycle of your jamming is 42%. Quiet nice for such an expensive ship to loose at below 100-150 km range. But of course a gatecamper surely prepares for 150+km fights properly. WTB weapon which enables a single BS to destroy a rook with an 1600mm plate at 100k instantly without it being able to warp out. Hey, lets be generous, instead instantly lets say within 10 seconds. Originally by: Nyack now it seems most ships do 3km/s+ atleast!! 10km/s+ on pimped ships. fitting out a EW boat with rigs and low slots mods and t2 jammers isnt really worth it these days cause u will prolly get ganked by nanoships very fast anyway.. It's hurting all EW ships, ECM less than most. If you think they travel 100k fast how long do you think they need to cross the 20-40k distance to a dampening boat or how effective tracking disruptors are vs trackinglass weapons? An ECM ship at least still has the chance to jam them when they are 1k away from them.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.28 15:32:00 - [89] Originally by: Aramendel WTB weapon which enables a single BS to destroy a rook with an 1600mm plate at 100k instantly without it being able to warp out. Hey, lets be generous, instead instantly lets say within 10 seconds. ok, then fit a plate if you like. Warp out from the battle shortly after it starts. You assume you are alligned and prepared for warpout/battle when the enemy jumps through the gate instead of you having to jump to them. You also exclude the enemy from warping to anywhere else than you expect, when you want them to engage you coming from within the same system. Sorry, I am no gatecamper, but all the situations you describe to strenghten your arguments are in my experience very rare and usualy not found much in regular PvP in my humble opinion. I don¦t care how high the numbers exactly are, the key argument is that the probability of having too many ships not jammed is simply still pretty high, so your duration of effectiveness during the battle is simply too short to be as effective as a battleship. Even if you could gurantee 2 BS to be permajammed, you will still be forced to warp out pretty soon after the fight has started. So effectively you will have prevented the enemy fleet of inflicting 4-6 volleys or something like that before you get rendered useless.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 15:55:00 - [90] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 15:56:01 Originally by: Skeltek ok, then fit a plate if you like. The number you used was for 1 free low slot. What would you fit there otherwise? A cargo extender? Quote: Warp out from the battle shortly after it starts. Assuming the enemy has a longrange BS able to shoot at you. Better than getting destroyed. Any other EW ship will have to warp out in such a situation as well. Quote: You assume you are alligned and prepared for warpout/battle when the enemy jumps through the gate instead of you having to jump to them. Why would you have to allign for warp out? 10 seconds are plenty for an armoed cruiser to make a warp from standstill. Quote: You also exclude the enemy from warping to anywhere else than you expect, when you want them to engage you coming from within the same system. If they warp at 100k to a spot from different directions they will in 90% of all situations still be within your ECM range if you are at 100k too. If they warp at premade sniper spots 150-200k away in ~50% of all cases you won't reach them if you are a simple warp-to-100 spot. But then they prepared better than you so it's not exactly a surprise that you have a disadvantage. If you yourself are at a premade sniper spot too you can warp to the center and be back in ECM range. And, of cource, SDs and TDs will be useless no matter what they do vs targets at these ranges. Quote: I don¦t care how high the numbers exactly are, the key argument is that the probability of having too many ships not jammed is simply still pretty high, so your duration of effectiveness during the battle is simply too short to be as effective as a battleship. Even if you could gurantee 2 BS to be permajammed, you will still be forced to warp out pretty soon after the fight has started. So effectively you will have prevented the enemy fleet of inflicting 4-6 volleys or something like that before you get rendered useless. That it still more than a normal fleet BS does. It, just like a scorp, has to try to warp as soon as it gets primaried if it wants to survive. You disable 2 fleet BS dpsing until you warp. Your fleet bs does the the dps one 1 fleet BS before it warps. Btw, did I mention already that TDs and damps are completely useless for fleet engagements because they do not have the range? And when they are in range cannot relyably disable more than 2 targets (at best) as well?
Nerogk Shorn Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:40:00 - [91] I was perma jammed by a rook in my nighthawk till my tank eventually died to him and his buddies. In my experience the rook's jamming couldn't have been better. It almost made me go out and buy one. 'Nough Said. D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S
Lucian Corvinus Gallente Expert Systems	Posted - 2007.02.28 19:39:00 - [92] Originally by: Veryez I completely agree, ECCM and ECM were very well balanced then. I even carried projected ECCM sometimes to help my gang mates, since I had enough tank to stay close to them (for some time at least). The Scorpion is my favorite PvP ship by a wide margin, but it just can't help groups like a Raven or Rokh can. All they do is sit in my hanger now Same here, there really isn't any reason for bringing a scorp instead of a rokh or a raven. It's a shame cause they could really have added some flavor but they just do not compare... I hope they buff the dedicated ships so they do not rust up in the hangar...
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.28 20:11:00 - [93] Edited by: welsh wizard on 28/02/2007 20:11:12 Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Veryez Originally by: welsh wizard It was almost perfect for a very short time (About 3 weeks?) pre-Kali when ECCM was buffed. Now they've just removed said module from the game again. I mean whats the point in its existence? They went too far with the nerf post-kali. I completely agree, ECCM and ECM were very well balanced then. I even carried projected ECCM sometimes to help my gang mates, since I had enough tank to stay close to them (for some time at least). The Scorpion is my favorite PvP ship by a wide margin, but it just can't help groups like a Raven or Rokh can. All they do is sit in my hanger now It was ballanced in 1vs1 situation. 10 ships with 1 multispec of doom vs 10 ships with backup ... Best outcome for backupers was not getting jammed. Seriously, ECM is fine. All you need to do is pick ship with ECM bonus and FIT it for jamming and voila, it works. Nobody fits backups anyway as they are worthless(i remember flying domi with 2 medslot ECCM and still getting jammed all the time). 1 backup is waste of slot, because 1 stupid bb with few multis will still nerly permajam 1bs. Sensor booster will perform better, at least it gives you small chance to put drones on jammer or nosfs. Well I guess our experiences have differed then Luke. Fighting Xelas invariably meant being jammed at least once during a fight when ECM was still borked. Then ECCM was buffed... Celes bs started fitting one low-slot and one mid-slot ECCM to counter the almost exclusively caldari/gallente Xelas fleets. Practically overnight jamming was quashed. I can tell you this from personal experience and even quoting a Xelas member who was confused as to why Celes ships were suddenly almost impossible to jam. Why? Because the Celes ships chose to sacrifice 1 or 2 precious low/med slots to fit ECCM, and it worked. Now if thats not a perfect example of a module working as intended I don't know what is? I'm pretty much certain being in BoB you never decided to try ECCM out against an ECM zerg. You probably just carried on fitting for speed and damage. Apologies if this assumption is wrong but I base it on plenty of experience fighting you, minimal ECM and plenty of speed/hurt. When in Celes we actively fit ECCM to counter the zerg and it worked well with the close range philosophy the corp used to employ. Based on my experiences ECM was almost a perfect system at that point. Still massively effective unless the target was fit to counter it.
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.28 21:04:00 - [94] Originally by: welsh wizard ...stuff that I mostly agree... BUT: Backups were dice standard(and ATUK). Let's be honest, fleets of alliances with less sp heavy players are (or at least used to be) jammer heavy. ASCN was fielding fleets with 20-30 scorps (up to 30% of bs sometime) and that was mainly pre-kali ecm nerf. Was it effective? No. But it was annoying enough that people started to fit backups again. But let's be honest, skilled EW pilots are rare as hell. I can usually field rook with maxed skills, but usually i don't unless if it's roaming trip. Reason is too obvious, you don't field jamming ship when you can have insta damage. But my problem with EW never really was fleets. It was... look he's jamming alot, primary.. problem solved. Problem was smaller gangs(up to 15-20), where jaming was mother of god, 3 plates and 5 jammers on raven/domi, combined with few wcs. -------- .....
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.03.01 14:02:00 - [95] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: welsh wizard ...stuff that I mostly agree... BUT: Backups were dice standard(and ATUK). Let's be honest, fleets of alliances with less sp heavy players are (or at least used to be) jammer heavy. ASCN was fielding fleets with 20-30 scorps (up to 30% of bs sometime) and that was mainly pre-kali ecm nerf. Was it effective? No. But it was annoying enough that people started to fit backups again. But let's be honest, skilled EW pilots are rare as hell. I can usually field rook with maxed skills, but usually i don't unless if it's roaming trip. Reason is too obvious, you don't field jamming ship when you can have insta damage. But my problem with EW never really was fleets. It was... look he's jamming alot, primary.. problem solved. Problem was smaller gangs(up to 15-20), where jaming was mother of god, 3 plates and 5 jammers on raven/domi, combined with few wcs. Now that I think of it... I must totaly agree. Back then our low-SP members were advised to fly Scorpions in fleetfights, if they were unable to fly a tech2 BS. Anyone capable to fly a direct damage tech2 BS usualy flew one. So the job was left only for those that relly loved the challenge of coordinating cyclejamming and those that were unable to fly tech2 BSs or Ceptors. Since the patch, I just saw a handfull Scorps in total during fleetfights. Neither our nor the enemy sides seem to have flown them any longer. Regarding small-scale engagements: An ECM platform ROCKS of course. Ganking a much inferior force will leave enough pilots leftover on your side to fly ECM ships and might help reduce your losses completely to zero. The thing is different if meeting an equaly sized force though...
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.01 23:00:00 - [96] I believe the problem is one of balance, and what is fair. I propose the following: any ECM specific ship should have a 50% chance to jam a ship of equivalent class, assuming max skills, using 1 racial ECM and 1 Signal distortion amp (best of each). The average theoretical battleship has a sensor strength of 21.1. The average theoretical cruiser has a sensor strength of 14.2. I wonÆt go into frigates. Here in lies the problem, all 3 ECM specific t1 ships have an ECM strength of 8.1. Thus by this estimation the griffin and the blackbird are slightly overpowered, and the Scorpion slightly underpowered. To further the discussion the t2 ships should have a 50% chance to jam a battleship. By this reasoning the falcon is underpowered and the Rook is fine (ECM Strength of 10.8). The fallacy of range. With maximum skills a Scorpion can jam out to 243k, however optimal is 162k, and falloff 40.5k. Therefore a Scorpion jumping in @ 200k (technically 202.5k) has about a 50% chance of ômissingö with ECM and has an effective strength of around 4. This is why the proposed tactic of using range is not a good solution. To the proposed plan of using more than 1 signal distortion amp. Almost every ship in the game can be setup to gank or tank. Using 3xdamage mods is normally a gank setup, not minimum necessary to perform. If a scorpion pilot decides to forgo tank and go for a pure gank setup, then he/she should have the ability to choose that. This choice does not exist at this time. The ECM ôtankö. Many people have implied that the scorpion has an ôECM tankö. I believe most ECM pilots believe that ECM is a weapon and use it accordingly. This is the real reason Scorpions have become extinct, there is simply no reason to use one over a Blackbird. The problem is not ECM per say, but specific ECM ships that have been affected more than others. Thus I propose that ECM ships be adjusted to provide a 50% chance to jam an equivalent ship. This would result in a slight nerf to the griffin, no change to the blackbird and a boost to the Scorpion (to 20% per level). I also believe that t2 ships should be adjusted to be able to jam any ship, so the falcon should be boosted to 20% per level. Lastly denoting itÆs ôKing of jammingö reputation the Rook should either get a boost to 25% per level strength or 25% per level increase in optimal if the former should prove to be imbalanced.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.02 00:32:00 - [97] Originally by: Elrich Zann The fallacy of range. With maximum skills a Scorpion can jam out to 243k, however optimal is 162k, and falloff 40.5k. Therefore a Scorpion jumping in @ 200k (technically 202.5k) has about a 50% chance of ômissingö with ECM and has an effective strength of around 4. This is why the proposed tactic of using range is not a good solution. You overread or ignored that I specifically mentioned this with rigs. +ECM strength rigs share a stacking penality with ECM lowslot mods, so they not a good idea to use because they have a minimal effect. The only really useful one left are EW range rigs. With 2 of them you have an optimal range of 230k with racial ECM. Which is an higher range than any BS exept the rokh can achieve. And, yes, it increases the cost of a scorp. However not beyond the cost of a fleet fitted BS with t2 guns. Quote: To the proposed plan of using more than 1 signal distortion amp. Almost every ship in the game can be setup to gank or tank. Using 3xdamage mods is normally a gank setup, not minimum necessary to perform. If a scorpion pilot decides to forgo tank and go for a pure gank setup, then he/she should have the ability to choose that. This choice does not exist at this time. The scorp has to choose between maximizing it's physical DPS "gank" or it's EW "gank". This is not limiting the scorp because every single other BS does not even have the option to maximize it's EW "gank". Quote: The ECM ôtankö. Many people have implied that the scorpion has an ôECM tankö. I believe most ECM pilots believe that ECM is a weapon and use it accordingly. Does not change anything that it's effeciently a tank as well. And, if you consider it a weapon it does not make much sense saying that it should be able to use both of its weapons, EW and physical, at the same time with maximum effeciency. See above. It's keeping the cake and eating it. Quote: This is the real reason Scorpions have become extinct, there is simply no reason to use one over a Blackbird. Outside of having 2 more mids and lows (stronger EW) and 5 times the hitpoints (higher survivability). Quote: Thus I propose that ECM ships be adjusted to provide a 50% chance to jam an equivalent ship. The problem here is that you are ignoring the non-equivalent ships. Battleships are not the only ships in the game. And the scorp has this very 50% chance already. If he uses 3 ECM mods it has 10.6 strength on it's ECMs. It has a weak tank then, of courc,e but this is something intended by tux. In his original dev blog about ECM he said that he does not see a problem with dedicated ECM ships since they sacrfice tank for that. If they fill their lows with an armortank they don't do this.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.02 00:36:00 - [98] You know what the real problem is? It the chance based nature of ECM. Nothing in EVE is chance based and neither should ECM be. To support this claim i give the following example: My gang was annoying the hell out of the locals with a Raven, an ECM Scorp and a Stabber. They decided to fight back. The gang they threw at us was: 2 Ravens, 2 ECM Scorps and a Taranis. For some reason we decided not to run and try to fight these guys. The outcome, much to our surprise, was: 0 casualties on our side with them losing 2 Scorps and 1 Raven. How did this happen? Bear in mind all pilots were of similar age. "Easy". Our Scorp (piloted by me) had a very lucky break. I was jamming three battleships at a time (generally i cant even think of doing this, it was a freak accident) while their Scorps failed to jam anything at all. It was a massacre. And there was no way we should have won looking at the odds. Whats the point of this war story? Once you bring ECM on the table the outcome of the battle (small scale battle) becomes entirely chance based. Roll your dice and pray. This is bad. This is something people like myself(dedicated ECM pilots) have always been trying to avoid (by fly ships with ECM bonuses and using racilas, both of these increase our chance of a jam therefore reducing the luck factor). What happened with the patch? People who depended on luck found themselves severely nerfed (Domis,Caracals with ECM and such). However people who were trying to eliminate depending on the luck factor found themseleves severely nerfed too. Why is this? I can still have comparable jamming strength on my ships, right? No... I get slightly below of what i used to have and i can not carry any tank whatsoever. You might say: "this is fair". And it might be.. But i was depending on my tank in an effort to reduce the randomness of my role. It was part of my "anti-luck-dependant" fitting. Why? how? Becouse...Even if i failed to jam anything (which is chance based and DOES happen) i was still primary, always, so failing my role i was still usefull. I would suck up some damage for my gang. Ill put before you antoher war story to support this: Back in the TCF vs MM days... After all the fleet action was done, some of us(MM allied forces) decided to stay and try to control D7-. Most of the guys docked and jumped into small, fast ships. I had none nearby so i stayed in my long rng, tanked, fleet Scorp. We didnt get to fight TCF, but we found out the infamus Burn Eden 3 pilot gang was camping a gate nearby. We decided to engage that. This gang was typical of BE for that time: 2 Dampener Ravens firing at about 100-150km off the gate and a dictor sitting on the gate.We jumped into their dictor and into the firing line of the Ravens. I (flying the long rng fleet scorp, fitted with sensor boosters amongst else) was immidiately dampened and failed to jam anything. However... I was still primary. The ravens started pounding on me. My armor tank held long enough for the reminder of my gang (mostly various t2 frigs) to kill the dictor without taking casualties. I was still usefull to the gang even though my CHANCE based role failed miserably. We won a small victory that day (we didnt kill them all but at least we forced them to stop ganking until they can replace the dictor) thanks to the scorp. And before you say: "You cant jam and have an uber tank". It wasnt that good. I had to jump back before the dictor went down. It was just enough. This is me reducing the randomness factor of my ECM ships. Even if my cycles fail... Ill stil be primary and at least ill buy my gang some time. The ECM nerf took all of this away... It reduced my chances of jamming, increasing the randomness of my primary role. And it took away my ability to tank. And i do tank since im alway primary and this is my secondary role. I, for one, do NOT have a desire to fly a ship whose preformance is, now, completely chance based.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.02 00:38:00 - [99] So... As a passionate ECM pilot... Please take away the luck factor of ECM. Make me capable of perma jamming if i prepare properly. Or make me useless if i didnt... But dont force me to fly a lottery.
Neuromandis EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.03.02 01:20:00 - [100] Edited by: Neuromandis on 02/03/2007 01:19:24 In short, increase chance to jam for "medium-good" jamming strength (right racial vs. common battleship, multifreq vs. cruiser), decrease chance to jam for "bad" jamming comparisons (wrong racial vs. cruiser, multifreq against battleship), keep "medium" comparsisons about the same chance as today (wrong racial vs. frigate, multifreq against battleship), and make jamming time sensor-strength specific instead of standard 20sec timer (it would take a single multifreq jammer to lock down a frig, a racial or two multifreq for a cruiser, 2 racials or 3 multispecs for a battleship's worth of jamming time). These comparisons are of course completely rough approximations as ships have different sensor strengths and jammers different variations, but that is the general idea: To make ECM less chance-based you need to increase probability of jam and decrease duration. And lose the low slot-modules already. There you go, chance factor decreased, preparedness factor increased, balance maintained, no gimped setups. I also liked the idea somebody threw around elsewhere of making jammers something completely different (chance to deactivate random modules for a time), but it sounds so hard to implement and balance that it is just that- an idea...
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.02 02:59:00 - [101] Originally by: Aramendel A whole lot of junk that amounts to nothing more than what you feel is fair. Don't care about your opinions or your "facts" based on numbers. I won't enter into a debate with you, since you have apparently never flown an ECM ship. Your opinion is wrong, but you're too blind to see it. I fly in small gang engagements, Scorps are a no-no, don't fly them anymore - hardly ever see them. Rooks (for strength) and blackbirds (throw away) are the only ships around. You can scream ECM is fine till your blue in the face. The rest of EVE doesn't hear you. Damps are the new kings of the EW block, I'm sure when they get nerfed - you'll scream the loudest.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.02 12:33:00 - [102] Originally by: Trillian Mcmillan As a passionate ECM pilot... Please take away the luck factor of ECM. Now that is something I can utterly, 100% agree with. The random factor of ECM sucks, sucks, sucks. The problem however is that as ECM is currently it's the only thing which can balance it. Compare it to damperners: With a specced ship you can effeciently permajam a ship which is within 10-50k. Below that you will be in danger of getting into it's targetting range, above that damps have also only a chance to work and behave pretty much like ECM. Due to their very long falloff they can still be halfway decent for a good time, but won't reach the ranges ECM is able to. At 50-100k they are basically an high effeciency jammer and at 100-150k a low effeciency jammer. At sniper ranges of 180k they are about as strong as an unbonused multispec. Also, since you need to stack damps for them to be effective a damperner ship cannot really disable more than 2 targets. Basically, compared to ECM damps are considerably stronger at 10-50k, somewhat stronger at 50-100k and about equal at 100-150k. ECM is stronger at 0-10k and 150k+. Right now, with it being chance based. Damps trade a more relyable effect for a range limitation, which ECM does not have. If it would loose it's random factor it would need another limitation to balance this out, like ranges where it simply will not work. Originally by: Elrich Zann Don't care about your opinions or your "facts" based on numbers. I won't enter into a debate with you, since you have apparently never flown an ECM ship. Your opinion is wrong, but you're too blind to see it. I fly in small gang engagements, Scorps are a no-no, don't fly them anymore - hardly ever see them. Rooks (for strength) and blackbirds (throw away) are the only ships around. You can scream ECM is fine till your blue in the face. The rest of EVE doesn't hear you. I see scorps very regulary in gangs of my alliance. Just today I saw a corpmail with one of our members offering to sponsor 2 falcon pilots. And, likewise, you can go into surpression, scream "ECM is underpowered" and try to use incorrect "facts" as long as you want. I'll be there to correct you. Quote: Damps are the new kings of the EW block, I'm sure when they get nerfed - you'll scream the loudest. Oh rly?
RossP Zoyka	Posted - 2007.03.02 15:22:00 - [103] I wonder what a group with a logistic ship and jammer would do? People would have to pick and choose which to go after when they weren't jam cycled and if they went for the jammer with no tank the logistic would heal like hell and if they went for the logistic it'd tank them long enough for the jam cycle to catch up. Throw in a damage dealer or two and this seems like a viable addition to a small gang.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.02 21:00:00 - [104] Originally by: Aramendel And, likewise, you can go into surpression, scream "ECM is underpowered" and try to use incorrect "facts" as long as you want. I'll be there to correct you. Please learn to read. I never said ECM was underpowered. I said the Scorpion and Falcon were underpowered. Where in my post did I ask for a boost to ECM? I stated that those 2 ships need a boost, and if boosting them, the rook should get a small boost so that it is still king.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.02 21:37:00 - [105] Edited by: welsh wizard on 02/03/2007 21:34:08 I've seen no real argument against an ECM buff yet. Pretty much everything you've said Arumandel has what I consider to be a more convincing counter-argument. The Scorpion at this time is a poor ship and there are a multitude of better alternatives in a fleet situation including smaller ship types. Same goes for small gang operations. Survivability has not been an issue for the ECM Scorpion for the last 2 years. It dies if the foe is competent, simple as that. What used to set it apart was its ability to turn the tide in a battle while inevitably sacrificing itself. This is what made it the revered ship of old. Now, you fly something else because it isn't that ship anymore. It just isn't effective at its role currently. End.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.02 23:12:00 - [106] Originally by: Elrich Zann Please learn to read. I never said ECM was underpowered. I said the Scorpion and Falcon were underpowered. Where in my post did I ask for a boost to ECM? I stated that those 2 ships need a boost, and if boosting them, the rook should get a small boost so that it is still king. Decide. Either the rook is ok and does not need a boost or it is underpowered and needs a boost. Arguning that a balanced ships has to be made stronger because it is supposed to be the king is a rather poor argument. Originally by: welsh wizard I've seen no real argument against an ECM buff yet. Pretty much everything you've said Arumandel has what I consider to be a more convincing counter-argument. Every fool can say "this is so". Arguments and proofs make a point, not simply stating it.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.02 23:29:00 - [107] Originally by: Aramendel What do you think is the survivability of **every single other** EW ship in mass combat? The non-ECW EW ships do not fare in any way better than the ECM ships. Please point me to another EWAR battleship and then we can compare the Scorps survivability to its. He was talking about Scorps fyi. Even says so in your quote...
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.02 23:38:00 - [108] I still say that the real issue for ECM ships now is that range has been minimized, or at least marginalized. Pre nanofad for small gangs I would take my scorp in at range. This allowed me to use my jammers but moreso my range as a tank. The only thing that could close the distance were ceptors. Any scorp/falcon/rook that engages at close range knows that they will die. Even if you jam you will be primary and subject to mass droneage. Nanofits (mainly rigs) have taken range away from ECM ships, and thereby thier tanks. After the upcoming reduction in speed I would like to come back and look at ECM ships to see if they are still weak (hopefully they will be able to use distance as tank again). Afterwards if they are still too weak I wouldnt mind beefing up the tank of the scorp, but not ecm. Survivability=yes, more jamming power=no Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.02 23:39:00 - [109] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/03/2007 23:37:41 Originally by: Trillian Mcmillan Please point me to another EWAR battleship and then we can compare the Scorps survivability to its. He was talking about Scorps fyi. Even says so in your quote... This is only something which boosts ECM and not nerfs it. Unless you can explain to me how a cruiser can survive longer then a BS if the enemy is focussing fire on it? Originally by: Nyxus I still say that the real issue for ECM ships now is that range has been minimized, or at least marginalized. This is very true - however it is no ECM issue but a general EW issue. TD and damp ships also have to rely on range. Not to use it as tank, but to make their EW work. They are effected by it just as heavily.
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.02 23:51:00 - [110] Originally by: Aramendel This is only something which boosts ECM and not nerfs it. Unless you can explain to me how a cruiser can survive longer then a BS if the enemy is focussing fire on it? Ok then.. since i have to spell it out... The Scorp is unique. It doesnt compare to anything. You have to judge it by itself. Persoanlly... i feel its a useless peise of crap atm, barring one single setup: High: 4 cruise launchers 1 350mm rail 1 recon probe launcher Med: 5 warp core disruptors 3 sensor boosters Low: 1 lar 1 dcu 2 1600mm plate This is a great setup for solo ganking industrials at lowsec gates. Scrambles everything and tanks for long enough. also you can squish the pod of loggers thanks to the recon probe launcher. Now theres an electronic warfare battleship! Utter bull****. If you want to compare smaller ships i can only point you to: Ship setups index If you take a look there you will find a whole mess of Curses and Pilgrims with plates, MAR 2s (sometimes even dual), a whole mess of nossage, great drone dmg and plenty of slots for various ewar and Arazus and Lachesis's with 1600mm plates and what not. The only recons which dont get tanked are the caldari and the minmatar ones. Minmatars make great use of their speed tanks combined with uber webbage. Cladari are sitting ducks praying to god something happens once they push their buttons. Thanks for reading.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.03 00:10:00 - [111] The scorp is unique, but that doesnt mean we cant compare it to other ships. Or should we say that the curse is unique and so we cant compare it to other ships? When the armageddon was the gankageddon it was also "unique" That doesnt stop us from comparing them quite well to other ships. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Trillian Mcmillan Cry Me A River Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.03 00:16:00 - [112] Originally by: Goumindong The scorp is unique, but that doesnt mean we cant compare it to other ships. Or should we say that the curse is unique and so we cant compare it to other ships? When the armageddon was the gankageddon it was also "unique" That doesnt stop us from comparing them quite well to other ships. There is no ship in its class which has an even remotely similar role. The curse can easily be compared to other recons. They each have their unique abilites but they are also all very similar due to them all being in the same class and sharign some similarities. Such as the ability to mount a covops claock for the force variety and some tankability/damage dealing potential on the combat variety. An armageddon can easily be compared to any other battleship whose primary role is damage dealing. There are NO ewar battleships expect the scorp.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.03 01:29:00 - [113] Originally by: Aramendel Decide. Either the rook is ok and does not need a boost or it is underpowered and needs a boost. Arguning that a balanced ships has to be made stronger because it is supposed to be the king is a rather poor argument. And that is your problem in a nutshell. I stated that I have no experience with the Rook and that it would need to be tested to see if it is overpowered with a slight boost in ECM strength. Since I don't fly it, I won't comment of whether it needs to be boosted or left alone. I do fly the Scorpion (or did) and it needs a boost to it's bonus. Period. It should jam better than the blackbird, and it can't. Since I have experience w/a 10% per level ECM boost, I can tell you this is fine for jamming cruisers, too strong for frigates, and too weak for battleships. So to spell this out for you (take your time and read this carefully): ECM is fine, the blackbird is fine, the griffin is slightly overpowered, the Falcon and the Scorpion need a slight boost, the Rook MAY need a boost if it is to remain the "ECM king" - however this needs testing to prove.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.03 02:02:00 - [114] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/03/2007 01:59:15 Originally by: Trillian Mcmillan If you take a look there you will find a whole mess of Curses and Pilgrims with plates, MAR 2s (sometimes even dual), a whole mess of nossage, great drone dmg and plenty of slots for various ewar and Arazus and Lachesis's with 1600mm plates and what not. The only recons which dont get tanked are the caldari and the minmatar ones. Minmatars make great use of their speed tanks combined with uber webbage. Cladari are sitting ducks praying to god something happens once they push their buttons. Nothing stops the caldari ships from using an 1600mm plate as well. Many examples I posted deliberatly left one low slot free. And, to repeat myself, how exactly does this enable non-caldari EW ships to have a snowflakes chance in hell when they get primaried? Their "great tank" has problems keeping up with a single dps fitted cruiser, let alone bigger ships. The get primaried their either manage to warp out in time or are a wreck. ALL EW ships have a **ty tank. If anything the high range of caldari ships is still the best tank because it pulls them out of heavy drone range, which are the highest danger to recons. Originally by:** Elrich Zann And that is your problem in a nutshell. I stated that I have no experience with the Rook and that it would need to be tested to see if it is overpowered with a slight boost in ECM strength. Since I don't fly it, I won't comment of whether it needs to be boosted or left alone. Too late. ...if boosting them, the rook should get a small boost so that it is still king. Quote: I do fly the Scorpion (or did) and it needs a boost to it's bonus. Period. It should jam better than the blackbird, and it can't. It can. 2 reasons: - 8 vs 6 medslots -> it can fit 33% more ECM modules than the blackbird. Now you could argue that it needs these 2 slots for sensorboosters to lock as fast as the BB. True. But then it also has a way way higher lock range than it. It would be still in an advantage. - 4 vs 2 low slots -> it can fit 3 ECM mods and a 1600mm plate, giving it's ECM modules an 11% higher strength than the BB with 2 ECM mods. And in addition it has 6 times the hitpoints.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.03 02:58:00 - [115] Aramendel - do you seriously think that you know enough about a ship that you don't even fly to say that it is "fine". That's what it comes down to. I have stated my premise: An ECM ship should have a 50% chance to jam an equivalent sized ship assuming 1 Racial ECM and 1 Signal Distortion Amp. Best modules, max skills. A T2 ECM ship should have a 50% chance of jamming a Battleship using the same assumptions. I know how to fit a Scorpion, I know how to Calculate ECM, and I am fairly certain I have spent far more time flying a Scorpion than you. I don't believe that a 50/50 chance is unfair. If the pilot wants to avoid being jammed, fit ECCM which will reduce the odds, if the Scorpion pilot wants to increase the odds of jamming, add more Signal dispersion amps (sacrificing his/her tank). Don't put words in my mouth. To reach my premise, the Scorpion and the Falcon need a boost the ECM strength for that ship ONLY. Now the part you seem to misread - IF the Rook is the remain the king of ECM it MAY need a boost, BUT THIS WILL HAVE TO BE TESTED TO ENSURE IT IS NOT OVERPOWERED.
nico wurz250 The X-Trading Company Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.03.03 11:06:00 - [116] I am totaly argee with Pistonbroke As an ecm pilot (before the nerv) i am totaly miss-skilled now. My Online Time has been reducted to 50% because my charakter was specialized and is now useless. It exists EECM Modules to counter ECM perfectly, if noone fit thease EECM Modules, ECM should effectfully. -
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.03 12:07:00 - [117] Originally by: Elrich Zann An ECM ship should have a 50% chance to jam an equivalent sized ship assuming 1 Racial ECM and 1 Signal Distortion Amp. Which is a fallacious assumption because it ignores that the scorp has 4 low slots and has unlike the BB no problem to use 3 Signal Distortion Amps. The only reasoning you brought for that is that the scorp should have free slots for damage mods for it's weapons of all things so it can fit a gang setup. Which is ignoring that ECM IS it's weapon (which you yourself admitted). It's a straw man argument.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.03 12:36:00 - [118] Originally by: Aramendel The only reasoning you brought for that is that the scorp should have free slots for damage mods for it's weapons of all things so it can fit a gang setup. Which is ignoring that ECM IS it's weapon (which you yourself admitted). It's a straw man argument. Again proving my point that since you don't fly the ship, you don't know what you are talking about. I don't believe I've ever even heard of a Scorp setup with 3 damage mods. Amazing. The reason I chose 50% was because most rational people consider a 50/50 chance fair. It has nothing to do with carrying 3 damage mods...
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.03 14:59:00 - [119] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/03/2007 15:00:25 Originally by: Elrich Zann Again proving my point that since you don't fly the ship, you don't know what you are talking about. I don't believe I've ever even heard of a Scorp setup with 3 damage mods. Amazing. Me neither. It would be rather braindead. You were the person metioning it. Originally by: Elrich Zann To the proposed plan of using more than 1 signal distortion amp. Almost every ship in the game can be setup to gank or tank. Using 3xdamage mods is normally a gank setup, not minimum necessary to perform. If a scorpion pilot decides to forgo tank and go for a pure gank setup, then he/she should have the ability to choose that. This choice does not exist at this time. /edit: Ah, wait, now I get what you are saying. You are referring for the 50% chance as a minimum performance setup. I consider it the gank setup. No other BS can disable averagely 2 targets from sniper ranges, een with a gank setup. Also, Tux himself said the high effeciency of ECM on specced comes with the price of a weak tank. An 3 slot tank is a rather strong tank compared to other sniper fitted BS. Quote: The reason I chose 50% was because most rational people consider a 50/50 chance fair. It has nothing to do with carrying 3 damage mods... The scorp has a 50% chance to jam the average BS with 3 ECM mods... BTW, as a sidenote, just now an enemy scorp totally wrecked our first attempt to break up a gatecamp. He was hovering at 150k away from the gate and jamming multiple of our ships and we could do nothing to take him out. We could kill it after their dictor logged and I could get us a warpin for the scorp with a cov ops, their remaining ships warped out that.
Shaala Caldari Singularity Services	Posted - 2007.03.03 15:37:00 - [120] Aramendel perhaps you would understand one day, but I guess we don¦t have that much time here <.< If you want to compare an ew ship to other ships, give the ecm-ships a heavy tank, effective weaponry(ecm in this case) and make it as cheap as other ships of it¦s class. No point comparing a commandship to an interceptor. If I look at the development of this discussion here, the ship you claim to be not underpowered has the tank of a scorp, the ew strenght of a rook and the benefit/cost-relation of a blackbird. And talking about fleetbattles. I guess you missed the whole concept. Of course you will die almost instantly when getting called primary; anyway here are a few facts that indeed to matter in a fleetfight: -wether you will get called primary in minute #10 or minute #16 -wether you have 3 or 6 seconds time to push the warpout button -will the enemy fleet have 80 or 20 Turretmodules left unactivated after killing you and switch them to the next poor idiot. So the argument of getting insta-pwnd when primaried anyway is not that well-thought-through imho. weaponturrets kill enemy ships ecm disables an enemy for a short duration(until you got to warp out or get destroyed) ecm like turrets are an offensive weapon, even though the effect is of a much shorter duration. making the ecm effectiveness&duration AND the tank inferior to a regular turret BS at a much higher price is questionable.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.03 16:19:00 - [121] Originally by: Shaala So the argument of getting insta-pwnd when primaried anyway is not that well-thought-through imho. The argument is about all EW ships getting insta-pwnd when primaried. EW ships have a bad tank and if multiple ships target them they are dead if they cannot warp out. It is not an ECM specific weakness. And, yes, I am aware that the scorp is a BS. The priciple is still the same - an arbi or celestis will die just as fast as a blackbird when multiple cruisers fire on them. A scorp will die fast when multiple BSs fire on it. Quote: ecm like turrets are an offensive weapon, even though the effect is of a much shorter duration. making the ecm effectiveness&duration AND the tank inferior to a regular turret BS at a much higher price is questionable. The difference here is that your regular turret BSs performance is extremly dependant on it's fitting. A sniper fited BS will do next to no damage against targets close to it. ECM works fine at 1k and at 150k. Also, any turret BSs (not only snipers) will have a reduced effeciency vs smaller targets. ECM gets increased effeciency vs smaller targets. So, yes, of cource ECM is less effective than regular turret BSs in fleet battles. Because it is useable in a far greater area. If you want to boosts ECMs effeciency in fleet battles you would have to limit it's area where it is effecient. Like giving it some kind of negative falloff, making it less effecient the closer it's target is and making it - like turrets - less effective vs smaller targets instead more effective. And higher prices...which higher prices? And EW scorp is cheaper than any sniper fitted turret BS with t2 guns.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.03.03 18:21:00 - [122] Imo ECM should work whole different way. My idea is following: Lets say that multispactral mounted on blackbird has strengh 40, jammed ship has senzor strengt 15. At first cycle BB will jam target becose his jaminmg strengh is bigger then senzor strenght of target(40>15). In second cycle jamming strenght is reduced by strenght of target(computers on target ship is starting to filter the noise made by jammer), however it wont be enough to overcome the jammer, so target will be jammed again (25>15). In third round jammer is again weaked by strenght of target sensors, and now wont be jammed becose its sensors has greater power then jammer. (10<15) To regain it full strenght jammer needs to recalibrate (reload), witch coud take some time and maybe cap. Now jammers can effectivly disable part of enemy fleet, and reduce damage dealed by focus fire, but not forever due jamming strenght reduction. Yes with this mechanism could one ECm specialized ship perma disable 2-3 ships, but its imo ok for ship with no ofence an defence. Also jamming streng should be modified by signature or sensor strengt of smaller ships changed. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Yuleth Gix	Posted - 2007.03.03 20:24:00 - [123] correct me if i'm wrong but the rook can get over 15 sensor strength with racials and 10 with multispecs... what's to complain about?
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.03 21:28:00 - [124] Aramendel - I should have been clearer when I refered to a Scorpion "gank setup", I was refering to a 3xSignal distortion amp setup. I see now where the confusion lay. In this setup a racial would have a strength of 14.1246, so it would have a: 14.1246/20.5 = 68.9% chance to jam our theoretical average battleship. or 14.1246/(20.5*1.96) = 35.1% chance to jam our theoretical battleship if it fits ECCM. Neither of which is overpowering or grossly unfair considering the above Scorpion pilot has to tank at all. It's a significant tradeoff, and one that does not exist today. Today it's (Scorp with 3 signal amps) 10.5934/20.5 = 51.7% chance to jam. compared to 46.4% chance for the Blackbird (About 1/20 the cost), as both are throw away ships.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.03 21:37:00 - [125] 70% for one module to disable an enemy ship (or better: an enemy battleship. It will be 100% for anything smaller) be it at 1k or 170k? Yes,I consider that highly "unfair". Maybe you should take a look at the effeciency and limitations of the other EW systems. ECM is balanced vs ships which have no ECCM fitted, not vs ships with it. And you are still ignoring that the scorp has 2 more med slots than the blackbird - and if the BB uses 2 disortion amps it has only 1/6th or 16% of the total hitpoints of a scorp with 3 amps and an 1600mm plate. This is a rather mahor difference.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.03 21:38:00 - [126] Originally by: Elrich Zann Aramendel - I should have been clearer when I refered to a Scorpion "gank setup", I was refering to a 3xSignal distortion amp setup. I see now where the confusion lay. In this setup a racial would have a strength of 14.1246, so it would have a: 14.1246/20.5 = 68.9% chance to jam our theoretical average battleship. or 14.1246/(20.5*1.96) = 35.1% chance to jam our theoretical battleship if it fits ECCM. Neither of which is overpowering or grossly unfair considering the above Scorpion pilot has to tank at all. It's a significant tradeoff, and one that does not exist today. Today it's (Scorp with 3 signal amps) 10.5934/20.5 = 51.7% chance to jam. compared to 46.4% chance for the Blackbird (About 1/20 the cost), as both are throw away ships. 69% chance to completly remove a battleship from the battle for twenty seconds, more if it doesnt have a sensor booster and depending on the type of ship its locking with one module! A single scorpion could have a reasonable change to take out two or three battleships. [b]This is something that no other ship in the game has the possibility of doing. No other ships can instantly shut down multipule ships offense. It takes a full gank armageddon with maxed skills at otpimal range against an unmoving rokh about 3 minutes to kill it[drones advance into range delaying damage for 30 seconds or so, shield lasts 55 seconds after that, armor goes down slightly faster at about 40 seconds, and another 50 seconds for the structure]. It takes a scorpion 5 seconds or less to take that same rokh out of the battle for long enough to matter. Or similarly, to take the geddon out of the battle of killing the rokh. Yea, it doesnt have a great tank, but could you imagine if it did? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.03.03 22:38:00 - [127] Scorp maybe have 2 more mids and more low but its also much bigger, slower, with lower sensors resolution ... BTW you are comparing fully fited and skilled EW ship aganits ship with NO ECCM, in this case 70% not enough for ship with no decent efence and defence capability, unable to jam multiple ships from same race, witch 20s cycles witch prevent from fast target switching.. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Shaala Caldari Singularity Services	Posted - 2007.03.03 23:00:00 - [128] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Shaala So the argument of getting insta-pwnd when primaried anyway is not that well-thought-through imho. The argument is about all EW ships getting insta-pwnd when primaried. EW ships have a bad tank and if multiple ships target them they are dead if they cannot warp out. It is not an ECM specific weakness. And, yes, I am aware that the scorp is a BS. The priciple is still the same - an arbi or celestis will die just as fast as a blackbird when multiple cruisers fire on them. A scorp will die fast when multiple BSs fire on it. Quote: ecm like turrets are an offensive weapon, even though the effect is of a much shorter duration. making the ecm effectiveness&duration AND the tank inferior to a regular turret BS at a much higher price is questionable. The difference here is that your regular turret BSs performance is extremly dependant on it's fitting. A sniper fited BS will do next to no damage against targets close to it. ECM works fine at 1k and at 150k. Also, any turret BSs (not only snipers) will have a reduced effeciency vs smaller targets. ECM gets increased effeciency vs smaller targets. So, yes, of cource ECM is less effective than regular turret BSs in fleet battles. Because it is useable in a far greater area. If you want to boosts ECMs effeciency in fleet battles you would have to limit it's area where it is effecient. Like giving it some kind of negative falloff, making it less effecient the closer it's target is and making it - like turrets - less effective vs smaller targets instead more effective. And higher prices...which higher prices? And EW scorp is cheaper than any sniper fitted turret BS with t2 guns. I get the feeling no matter how someone argues, you take his words and turn them around so they have right the opposite meaning. Of course all ships will almost instantly die when primaried; the fact is simple: an ew ship disables 2 or so ships for a very short duration a damagedealing BS disables multiple enemies for a "much longer" duration cough balancing the effectiveness of these two most simple aspects is not as easy to argue and twist around like you describe. of course a ship capable to "disable" several enemy ships sounds a good argument, but you simply refuse to mention in your argumentation, that it does that only for a very short amount of time. oh, and excuse my sarcasm, but a fully fitted rook costs more than a fully insured BS.(but yeah, argue back with the ship I didn¦t mean and leave out the insurance thing, it might stand in your argumentation¦s way)
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.03 23:26:00 - [129] Tbh it's not 1 module w/a 68.9% chance - it's 4, and that chance is drastically reduced by 1 module - ECCM. Surprisingly the rest of Eve does not share your optimistic appraisal of the situation.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.04 00:40:00 - [130] A damage dealing BS does not incapacitate a ship nearly as fast as an ECM ship does. Claiming that a damage dealing BS does is utterly riduculous. Put it this way. 10 ships go up against each other, one is 9 damage dealers and an ECM and the other is 10 damage dealers. After initial engagement the side with 10 damage dealers only has 8 until they kill the ECM ship and will only have 8 until the jam runs out. The side with 9 will easily even the odds in that time. Now if that ECM ship is out of attack range since it has the ability to do so then what happens? saying "LOL damage ships permanently disable ships!" is just ignorant of the realities of combat, where it matters when you are disabled. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.04 00:42:00 - [131] I keep hearing the "oh noes ECCM" meme, but i frankly find it unconvincing. How many ship setups regularly fly with ECCM? How many modules that have no value aside from defending against a specific form of ewar are normally fitted? Tracking computers and sensor boosters have secondary uses aside from defending against EW and are more common fits for every type of ship than ECCM. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
starship enginer	Posted - 2007.03.04 00:45:00 - [132] ecm nerf is one of the reasons i have returned to eve, i had played 2 years straight. stopped because of ecm about 9months ago. now im back because ecm was one of the biggest crappers on pvp in the game.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.04 01:19:00 - [133] Originally by: Goumindong Put it this way. 10 ships go up against each other, one is 9 damage dealers and an ECM and the other is 10 damage dealers. After initial engagement the side with 10 damage dealers only has 8 until they kill the ECM ship and will only have 8 until the jam runs out. The side with 9 will easily even the odds in that time. The 8 unjammed Battleships will target the ECM ship and eliminate it in one salvo (dead or warp off) so at best it got one cycle in since it has no staying power. Tactical choices are now removed and a simple slugfest results. Since the result is the same, wouldn't you rather start the ECM pilot in a Rokh since you would be sure he'll stay around and contribute for the entire fight (or get primaried and last far longer than the Scorp)? The latter seems the more popular choice. Oh and the "I don't want to carry an ECCM" is not a real answer. Don't carry one and accept a 50% chance that an ECM specific ship can jam you - sounds fair to me.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.04 01:25:00 - [134] Originally by: starship enginer ecm nerf is one of the reasons i have returned to eve, i had played 2 years straight. stopped because of ecm about 9months ago. now im back because ecm was one of the biggest crappers on pvp in the game. It was poor because of those Dominixes with 3 multispecs and stilletos with 2. Not because of a Scorpion doing what it was designed to do. Goumindong, seriously, you think what you've highlighted above is good!? You think no-one using ECCM is a good thing? It's quite bloody simple, if you don't fit ECCM and a jamming ship targets you, then you should get jammed for the majority of the fight because you didn't fit to counter. Last time I checked this is what Eve was all about, second guessing your opponents. Currently it doesn't matter if you fit ECCM or not because the likelyhood of getting jammed is stupidly low, why? Because the people who used to fly these ships aren't flying them anymore, why? Because they're flying other ships or failing to jam anything in any useful capacity. Incredibly this isn't because they're brain dead as you'd have us believe, its because they've had enough experience in these platforms to know that they're better off in something else. They had it perfect for a very short time pre ECM nerf and post ECCM buff. Then they nerfed ECM, bravo! Except they thought it'd be a good idea to nerf ECM ships too. Now they're expensive, skill intensive and offer an average end result. Fly ECM ships for a month, then sell them and buy a Dominix. N1.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.04 01:35:00 - [135] Edited by: Aramendel on 04/03/2007 01:40:33 Originally by: Shaala Of course all ships will almost instantly die when primaried; the fact is simple: an ew ship disables 2 or so ships for a very short duration a damagedealing BS disables multiple enemies for a "much longer" duration cough "A damagedealing BS" does not do this. Many damagedealing BSs do this. Basically, in order to disable enemies with similar speed than ECM for your "much longer" duration you do not need 1 damagedealing BS, but a whole swarm of them. A single damagedealing BS has only a relatively small effect - the effect of an ECM ship is bigger. 1 damagedealing BS deals the dps of 1 damagedealing BS until it is destroyed/warps out. 1 ECM BS prevents the dps of averagely 2 damagedealing BSs until it is destroyed/warps out. When your ECM BS gets destroyed right at the start and a turret BS does not get called primary for the whole battle the turret BS has of cource the bigger effect. However, if you compare the effect an ECM BS and a turret BS have which are both called primary the effect of the ECM BS is higher. It prevented the dps from 2 BS while it lived while your turret BS did the dps of 1 turret BS while it lived. And that is assuming it takes 20 seconds to kill them. If you kill the ship within 5 seconds the turret BS will have done it's ROF time the dps of 1 turret BS (varies between 5 and 13 secs depending on weapon). The ECM ship will have prevented 20 sec + lock time times the dps of 2 turret BS. Meaning during the time it was alive it was worth 3-8 times what a turret BS would have been worth. In short: The effect/time of the ECM BS is higher. While it is alive it prevents far more damage to your fleet than one of your turret BS could deal to the enemy fleet. Thats the very reason they are primary - because they have the biggest effect. If a turret BS would have a bigger effect they would be primary and not the ECM ship, at least if your enemy FC wants to win. Originally by: welsh wizard It's quite bloody simple, if you don't fit ECCM and a jamming ship targets you, then you should get jammed for the majority of the fight because you didn't fit to counter. Again you fail to see the big picture. ECM is balanced because you cannot just permajam everything without ECCM. Why? Take damps. Pretty much same same effect as ECM has. However they only work in considerably more limited range area - get too close and you can be targeted just fine, get too far away and your damps have only a very low chance to work. Basically, damps permajam only within a limited range area and do nothing or have only a good to very low chance to work outside it. ECM do not permajam, but have a good chance to work over pretty much the whole combat relevant ranges.
starship enginer	Posted - 2007.03.04 01:39:00 - [136] Originally by: welsh wizard Originally by: starship enginer ecm nerf is one of the reasons i have returned to eve, i had played 2 years straight. stopped because of ecm about 9months ago. now im back because ecm was one of the biggest crappers on pvp in the game. It was poor because of those Dominixes with 3 multispecs and stilletos with 2. Not because of a Scorpion doing what it was designed to do. first point is true, domis where stupidly powerful with a few ecm. same with dam rifters wrong about the scorp or blackbird being ok back then i remember a specific fight we had in an empire system with a war corp. they bought heavy amounts of BS and vagabonds (at lest 5 BS and 5 vagas) plus support. within a few min we setup had only 3 BS on the gate and about 5 blackbirds sitting 100km away. we where able to TOTALLY POON them, they where all jamed 90% of the time. and by characters sub skilled (i remember i used my low sp alt to jam because my main pvp char was 20j away). you think it was fair for 5 low sp people in cheap t1 ships with t1 gear to jam t2 ships piloted by t2 skilled pilots kitted with t2? i remember scorps could jam 8 geddons with over 80% success. what makes you think that one ship jamming 8 is fair all the while shooting back and have some sort of tank low down. ecm was powerful on non ecm ships, it was powerful on ecm ships.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.04 02:03:00 - [137] Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 02:01:06 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: welsh wizard It's quite bloody simple, if you don't fit ECCM and a jamming ship targets you, then you should get jammed for the majority of the fight because you didn't fit to counter. Again you fail to see the big picture. ECM is balanced because you cannot just permajam everything without ECCM. Why? Take damps. Pretty much same same effect as ECM has. However they only work in considerably more limited range area - get too close and you can be targeted just fine, get too far away and your damps have only a very low chance to work. Basically, damps permajam only within a limited range area and do nothing or have only a good to very low chance to work outside it. ECM do not permajam, but have a good chance to work over pretty much the whole combat relevant ranges. 5 ships based around this principle, incapable of anything else. "You're failing to see the bigger picture". You're failing to comprehend the current situation wrt to ECM in Eve. News for you buddy, people aren't flying ECM ships and their targets aren't getting jammed regardless of the amount of ECCM they've fitted. Damps schmamps, again, "you're failing to see the bigger picture". Ewar is very much secondary in Gallente warfare, In Caldari warfare it is/was the very backbone of the fleet. As for a Scorpion jamming 8 Armageddons 80% of the time in a combat situation. Play the game starship engineer, not the imaginary scenario in your head.
starship enginer	Posted - 2007.03.04 02:35:00 - [138] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 02:13:44 You know what? Forget it. Your flawless argument flies in the face of current popular opinion demonstrated in game, but regardless you must be right. You are after all an authority on ECM ships and their pilots opinions right? No more ECM posts for me. No more ECM posts for me. as stated i was talking about pre nerf. then ecm MODUELS where extremely overpowered which you agree. so and EXTREAMLY overpowered module on a ship that gets a bonus for its use made the module balanced? you contradict yourself! back then, pre nerf. it took less than 3months to be a IMPORTANT member of a gang if you where in a scorp or blackbird because you could EASILLY jam at LEST one 40mil SP pilot in a BS and probably more!! i cant comment on the current situation as i have been away a while, but pre nerf, ecm on any ship was overpowered including jamming specific ships from your post I read ôwaaaa waaaa baby want 3mil sp char to pawn jam multiple t2 ships againö which is semi confirmed by your ôYou know what? Forget itö. If you think you have a valid argument post it, if not stop whining.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.04 03:26:00 - [139] Edited by: Elrich Zann on 04/03/2007 03:23:52 Originally by: Aramendel Again you fail to see the big picture. ECM is balanced because you cannot just permajam everything without ECCM. Why? Take damps. Pretty much same same effect as ECM has. However they only work in considerably more limited range area - get too close and you can be targeted just fine, get too far away and your damps have only a very low chance to work. Basically, damps permajam only within a limited range area and do nothing or have only a good to very low chance to work outside it. ECM do not permajam, but have a good chance to work over pretty much the whole combat relevant ranges. And so do you, Damps work against every ship, there are no racial damps. No need to guess at what you'll be facing. The people who keep complaining about being permajammed, even with the modest increase I suggested a Scorpion cannot permajam another battleship. At best right now, a Scorpion will get 2 Racials on one ship. Assuming max skills and 1 Signal Dis Amp, the odds are: 63.4% 1 cycle 40.2% 2 cycles 25.5% 3 cycles 16.2% 4 cycles More likely you'll get 1 racial: 39.5% 1 cycle 15.6% 2 cycles 6.1% 3 cycles And he didn't have to bother w/ECCM. The blackbird has exactly the same odds. That's why Scorps need a small boost. Granted the above Scorp won't die as fast as a blackbird, but given enough enemies - it will die. On the other hand, by your logic the Rook must be overpowered. With approximately a 50% chance to jam a battleship, it clearly needs a severe nerf. After all using 2xSig Dis Amps, it can achieve a jam strentgh even higher than a Scorp w/4.
Shaala Caldari Singularity Services	Posted - 2007.03.04 11:10:00 - [140] Originally by: Elrich Zann Originally by: Goumindong Put it this way. 10 ships go up against each other, one is 9 damage dealers and an ECM and the other is 10 damage dealers. After initial engagement the side with 10 damage dealers only has 8 until they kill the ECM ship and will only have 8 until the jam runs out. The side with 9 will easily even the odds in that time. The 8 unjammed Battleships will target the ECM ship and eliminate it in one salvo (dead or warp off) so at best it got one cycle in since it has no staying power. Tactical choices are now removed and a simple slugfest results. Since the result is the same, wouldn't you rather start the ECM pilot in a Rokh since you would be sure he'll stay around and contribute for the entire fight (or get primaried and last far longer than the Scorp)? The latter seems the more popular choice. Oh and the "I don't want to carry an ECCM" is not a real answer. Don't carry one and accept a 50% chance that an ECM specific ship can jam you - sounds fair to me. You immediately got the point with your first post that Aramendel is still unable to see. After just a few seconds of fighting: 10BS(one half damaged) vs 9BS(The Scorp is down) That speaks for itself: the Scorp/Rook being down within a very short amount of time will not be able to "harvest" enough benefit in the timespan before it¦s death to compensate for the kills/losses-ratio malus that it initialy caused by not being a battleship.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.04 13:15:00 - [141] Edited by: Aramendel on 04/03/2007 13:19:36 Originally by: Elrich Zann And so do you, Damps work against every ship, there are no racial damps. No need to guess at what you'll be facing. And are very vulnerable vs small fast ships and drones. ECM can operate outside drone range and permajam frigs easily. There is more to damps vs ECM than just range limitations, yes. Both this goes for both sides. Although personally I do consider damps a bit overpowered right now - splitting them up into a module which reduces lock time and one which reduces range might be nice, as dalman suggested a few times. This doesn't change anything that permajam for ECM would be far too strong, having no range limitations at all is a far too huge advantage for that. Quote: At best right now, a Scorpion will get 2 Racials on one ship.At best right now, a Scorpion will get 2 Racials on one ship. Assuming max skills and 1 Signal Dis Amp, the odds are:.. Contrary to popular opinion racials of the wrong type still have an effect. And there is the the old issue about 1 dis amp, but see below for that. With 2 correct racials and 2 incorrect ones and 3 dis amps you get: 84% 1 cycle 70% 2 cycles 60% 3 cycles 49% 4 cycles Quote: The blackbird has exactly the same odds. Don't know why I bother since you ignored it already multiple times, but: Scorp has 2 more med slots, aka can use more ecm and 2 more low slots, aka can use more dis amps. It has a higher ECM power. Have fun ignoring that again. Quote: Granted the above Scorp won't die as fast as a blackbird, but given enough enemies - it will die. So does every single ship in eve. Also, since you apparently see the hitpoint increase from the BB to the scorp as nonissue, could you please explain to me why you keep insisting on using only 1 dis amp on it? Since survivability does not seem to matter to you since it will die to enough enemies anyway there is no reason to limit the scorp to 1 amp - or do you need the additional lows for WCS and cargo expanders? Quote: On the other hand, by your logic the Rook must be overpowered. With approximately a 50% chance to jam a battleship, it clearly needs a severe nerf. After all using 2xSig Dis Amps, it can achieve a jam strentgh even higher than a Scorp w/4. It's a t2 ship, so it's not terribly surprising that it is more effective. And it will also have a good deal less hitpoints than the scorp, even with the t2 resists. And after insurance also a good deal more expensive than the scorp. Originally by: Shaala You immediately got the point with your first post that Aramendel is still unable to see. After just a few seconds of fighting: 10BS(one half damaged) vs 9BS(The Scorp is down) Actually, just after a few seconds of fighting it's: 10BS(one 90% damaged) vs 9BS(The Scorp is down) A geddon with an 1600mm plate (cannot fit anything else as tank in a sniper setup) has a whooping 3% more total hitpoints than a scorp with an 1600mm plate. The scorp has not really fewer hitpoints than other compareable BSs of the same tier. Also, this is assuming that the non-ECM side fires before the scorp can react. Meaning that have the initiative because they surprise the other side. If it's the other way around (scorp will jam 2 BS before they fire) only 8 BS will fire from the non-ECM side and you will get: 10BS(one 90% damaged + 2 still jammed for about 20 seconds) vs 10BS(Scorp 80% damaged) A primaried scorp has still a higher effect than a primaried sniper BS. Explained it in a previous post. Feel free to ignore it.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.04 13:39:00 - [142] Originally by: Shaala Aramendel is still unable to see More correct is Aramendel refuses to see. Aramendel and the rest of the pilots like him/her believe ECM should be balanced vs ships, not ECCM. They should not have to fit ECCM to prevent being jammed. They also believe that 40% is a fair chance to be jammed. The rest of Eve does not see it this way, Scorpions are becomming more and more rare. Most ECM players don't feel an 11.4% increase in jam strength and a 1600 plate is worth 20 times more isk. Aramendel and others can keep spouting numbers and how great scorpions are (especially if you don't fly them), ECM pilots aren't buying it.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.04 13:43:00 - [143] Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 13:42:31 Originally by: starship enginer ... Play the game dude, don't jump on argument you don't really know much about without witnessing the evidence first hand. I haven't been jammed in pvp for about 2 months and my corporation isn't exactly known for avoiding action. More skill points required to use jamming? Fantastic, I really mean that, I'm all up for specilisation in order to achieve proficiency. Problem is the time spent training isn't worth it. ECM strength was fine as it was on ECM ships. They buffed ECCM (something which I assume you missed based on your argument) and by fitting these modules you could reduce the likelyhood of getting jammed to about 10-20% without nerfing your setup too drastically. If you took a risk and decided not to take ECCM then chances are you'd get jammed, at this point by anything with a jammer. This wasn't good so...... CCP decided to nerf ECM across the board in order to stop these modules being used on Dominixes etc, perfect, "Finally ECM will be effective only in the hands of a skilled pilot dedicated to his art!" I thought.. Unfortunately they went too far wrt Caldari ECM ships. These ships are now approximately 90% as effective as they were before the nerf but only with 3 ECM damage mods fitted and approximately 4 months of solid training in Electronic warfare. If you're prepared to spend at least 200million isk (rigs, ship, insurance, modules) on your ship you can make it slightly more effective than it used to be pre nerf. But you have zero tank, against a good opponent thats almost certainly 200mil+ lost. All that time to specialise in a system which often fails and almost always results in losing your ship is not a fair trade. Right now, to use a Scorpion effectively it is the most expensive tier 1 batlleship in the game. You need to fork out for rigs and sacrifice your low slots and therefore tank to exist. Then you die horribly to a competent foe sometimes without even jamming a single ship (especially if you listen to Arumandel and don't fit sensor boosters on your Scorpion, bwaf!). As I've said about 20 times before, you undock, have a fight and you rarely if ever get jammed, right? Now, take this statement and apply it to the Caldari race and its five ships based entirely on this random, ineffective and expensive principle. Seriously, you're more use to yourself and your friends in a different ship. Whenever I'm leading I'll call the recons primary then the ineffective Scorpions, and guess what? We almost always win. Like I said, play the game a bit.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.04 14:01:00 - [144] Originally by: Elrich Zann More correct is Aramendel refuses to see. I am not the person who ignores arguments. Kettle, Meet Pot. Notice how black it is?
starship enginer	Posted - 2007.03.04 14:23:00 - [145] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 13:43:55 Unfortunately they went too far wrt Caldari ECM ships. These ships are now approximately 90% as effective as they were before the nerf but only with 3 ECM damage mods fitted 90% as effective, what is the problem then. before they where EXTREAMLY overpowered. the difference now is you have lost 2-3 low slots which is fair imo since no other class of ship can shut down so many others. tell me that right now in a medium or small fight, switching one of your ships to a scorp or rook or falcon will not dramatically change the outcome of a battle Originally by: welsh wizard All that time to specialise in a system which often fails and almost always results in losing your ship is not a fair trade. Right now, to use a Scorpion effectively it is the most expensive tier 1 batlleship in the game. You need to fork out for rigs and sacrifice your low slots and therefore tank to exist. Then you die horribly to a competent foe sometimes without even jamming a single ship (especially if you listen to Arumandel and don't fit sensor boosters on your Scorpion, bwaf!). why not use a rook for comparison. they are relatively cheap now. after insurance you loose about 40mil isk on the ship which isnt too far from the scorp. your tank is your distance for most cases. but you can dump a large ext in a rook if you like. on top of that, at over 210km distance only sniper ships can hit you and with extreme range t2 ammo. megathron & tempest will miss about 70% of the time. Tacks will miss 95% of the time. also if you sit your rooks 200km away and stick one tracking desrupter per turret sniper BS then you are very safe. but i guess this game isnt meant to have any teamwork right? Originally by: welsh wizard Whenever I'm leading I'll call the recons primary then the ineffective Scorpions, and guess what? We almost always win. well if you where fighting me, id make sure our cheap t1 crusiers/frigs (stuff like caracals, griffins, anything) each put a tracking disrupter on your sniper BS. then the jammers are free to jam you while you hold your **** wondering why your missing. or a single damp on your snipers each. or sit the jammers 210-220km away where you will miss. (with an AB and transverse everything apart from a rokh will miss 90% of the time.) you say yourself that you can get 90% the jamming strength, or more if you spend some isk. so why is different now compared to before eh? the only thing you have said so far that makes any argument is that you can not tank so much because you need to spend 2-3 lows on ecm upgrades. yet you are arguing that the ecm needs a buff on caldari. you should be arguing that ECM ships should get more HP or better resistance or ecm upgrades should have a passive effect on hp or resistance.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.04 20:51:00 - [146] Originally by: Aramendel I am not the only person who ignores arguments. Kettle, Meet Pot. Notice how black it is? There, fixed.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.04 22:07:00 - [147] Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 22:04:45 Originally by: starship enginer you should be arguing that ECM ships should get more HP or better resistance or ecm upgrades should have a passive effect on hp or resistance. I'd be perfectly happy with any of that as I've said many times before, not just in this thread. If you'd think about it for a while though, a boost to ECM strength is essentially the same thing because now you can fit a tank but you've lost the damage mods. MAGIC! Get rid of ECM damage mods for all I care, do it the old way. Make ECCM useful! Not just another module that no-one fits because there is no point. Is this difficult to comprehend? Right now an ECM ship which has to sacrifice all or all but one of it lows is not adequate when compared to the other races ships in its class. "ECM is your tank!" ? *****s, makes no difference what so ever, if a fleet or a small gang decides to shoot your jamming ship with absolutely zero tank its dead. Dead before its been of any use. Oh, and this whole "Range is your tank" thing, also an essentially useless practice. At the extreme ranges you used in your example you're well into ECM fall off. This reduces your jamming strength as a percentage. An already feeble sensor strength is now alot worse, wonderful. Of course we haven't even started on the rarity of situations in which you can actually utilise range in your ecm ship especially** post nano/i-stab buff. Defending at gates, is about the only time this is a useful practice, aren't these five ships supposed to make up the offensive backbone of a Caldari fleet? Face it, ECM ships/ECM modules are currently underpowered, one or the other needs changing because people are not flying them anymore and thats all the evidence any of us should ever need.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.04 22:07:00 - [148] Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 22:04:45 Originally by: starship enginer you should be arguing that ECM ships should get more HP or better resistance or ecm upgrades should have a passive effect on hp or resistance. I'd be perfectly happy with any of that as I've said many times before, not just in this thread. If you'd think about it for a while though, a boost to ECM strength is essentially the same thing because now you can fit a tank but you've lost the damage mods. MAGIC! Get rid of ECM damage mods for all I care, do it the old way. Make ECCM useful! Not just another module that no-one fits because there is no point. Is this difficult to comprehend? Right now an ECM ship which has to sacrifice all or all but one of it lows is not adequate when compared to the other races ships in its class. "ECM is your tank!" ? *****s, makes no difference what so ever, if a fleet or a small gang decides to shoot your jamming ship with absolutely zero tank its dead. Dead before its been of any use. Oh, and this whole "Range is your tank" thing, also an essentially useless practice. At the extreme ranges you used in your example you're well into ECM fall off. This reduces your jamming strength as a percentage. An already feeble sensor strength is now alot worse, wonderful. Of course we haven't even started on the rarity of situations in which you can actually utilise range in your ecm ship especially** post nano/i-stab buff. Defending at gates, is about the only time this is a useful practice, aren't these five ships supposed to make up the offensive backbone of a Caldari fleet? Face it, ECM ships/ECM modules are currently underpowered, one or the other needs changing because people are not flying them anymore and thats all the evidence any of us should ever need.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.04 23:13:00 - [149] Originally by: Elrich Zann Originally by: Aramendel I am not the only person who ignores arguments. Kettle, Meet Pot. Notice how black it is? There, fixed. So you admit that you ignore arguments which you do not like? Or have you trained your "I am out of arguments so I try childish flaming instead" skill only to lvl 1 and as result couldn't remove the "not" from my post? PS: If you are the opinion I ignored a point of yours feel free to point me to it.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.04 23:52:00 - [150] No the "not" was left in for a reason. You refuse to believe people when they tell you that the ship is hardly used anymore. You can quote numbers all you want. The facts on TQ do not support you. Damage Dealer>>>ECM ship. If you truely believe it is a well balanced ship, then fly it and prove the rest of Eve wrong.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.05 00:24:00 - [151] Edited by: Aramendel on 05/03/2007 00:22:37 Originally by: Elrich Zann You refuse to believe people when they tell you that the ship is hardly used anymore. Yes, maybe because I still see the ships used myself to good effect. Last time yesterday, where an enemy scorp prevented our dps-wise superior gang to break up a gatecamp. Quote: The facts on TQ do not support you. Damage Dealer>>>ECM ship. Which "facts"? The subjective reports of a few people? And, besides, what about the ECM users in this thread who said that ECM is fine? Their reports obviously do not count? Maybe you should drop your blinkers and stop seeing only what fits in your version of the world. Quote: If you truely believe it is a well balanced ship, then fly it and prove the rest of Eve wrong. I do not need to prove "the rest of eve" wrong. Only a few people who resent being mortal again and want their I-win buttom back. And that is already done for me by the numerous amount of people who still use ECM very effeciently.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.05 01:03:00 - [152] Originally by: Elrich Zann No the "not" was left in for a reason. You refuse to believe people when they tell you that the ship is hardly used anymore. You can quote numbers all you want. The facts on TQ do not support you. Damage Dealer>>>ECM ship. If you truely believe it is a well balanced ship, then fly it and prove the rest of Eve wrong. Then why are ECM ships always primary? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.05 01:39:00 - [153] Originally by: Welsh Wizard Face it, ECM ships/ECM modules are currently underpowered, one or the other needs changing because people are not flying them anymore and thats all the evidence any of us should ever need. Originally by: Elrich Zann Damage Dealer>>>ECM ship. It's not that ECM ships aren't good. It's just that Nanoships are omfg better and deny anyone range, which ECM ships need. When the nanofad is nerfed back into it's box you will still see more jamming ships. You don't need jamming when nothing can hit you due to speed and you still do bs damage have 4+nos and get away from anything that doesn't move at 4km/s. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.05 02:19:00 - [154] Edited by: welsh wizard on 05/03/2007 02:17:39 Nyxus, You make a good point. I fear it goes a bit deeper than that however. People aren't flying ECM ships because they're ineffective at jamming unless they go without any tank what so ever. They're also silly expensive (w/rigs) for what you get. You're of just as much use in a battleship, hac, bc, recon, inty or dictor these days. Not to mention that flying any of the latter is generally a much better experience for the pilot. Goumingdong, they're not always primary. Damage dealers take as much precedence these days, at least as far as I'm concerned. I will call them if I see them but I won't go out of my way. The other races recons are arguably bigger danger ships now. Minmatar, Amarr, Gallente recons generally in that order. That's if you like your support to live of course. Calling them primary these days is as much habit as anything. Of course others will disagree. Arumandel, precisely what has Gallente Ewar got to do with this? We're talking about 5 ships which use ECM as their primary function. We're not talking about the Arazu or Lachesis, both of which use what is currently the most useful form of Ewar in the majority of situations. People aren't using all those Scorpion mids for damps because they're confused you know?
Rinaldo Titano Caldari Domus Fatalis X-PACT	Posted - 2007.03.05 11:27:00 - [155] First, sorry for my english :) Im not a very well skilled ecm pilot, but i fly an ecm fitted scorp in small gang pvp. And it works very very good, after kali too. i can almost premjam a BS without ani rigs and without all lows used for mods, so it works fine. So the problem is not the ecm nerf after kali, but that ecm works now well just against ships without eccm. Not the ships or the ecm's should be boosted, they are fine, but is not good, that for example 1 multispec. eccm modul can incrase the strenght of the ship sensor with +84%. i think eccm's are good idee, just we should not let that 1 mid slot eccm modul make 5-6 ecm moduls worthless. i think the eccm moduls should have the same strenght as ecm's the multispec for example should give +2.4 to the strenght, maybe a bit more. pls comment. tnx
kill0rbunny Chimera Intelligence Agency	Posted - 2007.03.05 11:48:00 - [156] Edited by: kill0rbunny on 05/03/2007 11:46:54 Edited by: kill0rbunny on 05/03/2007 11:45:16 Originally by: Goumindong Then why are ECM ships always primary? Because it takes 3 seconds to get a bs killmail, that's why. Doing 40 jumps from north to south nowadays and then staying in a fight 5 seconds must be great fun. I'd rather be a slightly tanked damagedealer dealing damage for half a minute than going pop after having 50% chance of jamming a frigate. Scorps nowadays die without beeing primary by well skilled ceptors. Nope, not what I'm training for. Don't get me wrong, as said on other threads there are many good caldari ships, but the five ecm ships are not worth the spent time. Killboard
R3dSh1ft Caldari FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.03.05 12:06:00 - [157] make ECM/sensor dampers to high slot modules and boost them this way a dedicated ship can be very effective in fleet, still fit a tank, but solo cannot perma jam/damp an opponent without sacrificing slots that would otherwise be weapons/nos. ______________________________________
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.05 13:54:00 - [158] Edited by: Aramendel on 05/03/2007 13:54:39 Originally by: welsh wizard Arumandel, precisely what has Gallente Ewar got to do with this? We're talking about 5 ships which use ECM as their primary function. We're not talking about the Arazu or Lachesis, both of which use what is currently the most useful form of Ewar in the majority of situations. People aren't using all those Scorpion mids for damps because they're confused you know? Wulsh, would you would try to balance lasers without taking a single look at hybrids, projectiles, missiles and drones? No? Because in order to balance something you need to compare it vs something you balance it against. Without this balancing isn't possible in the first place. So the other races EW has a big censored lot to do with ECM. You are right, though, we are not speaking about the Arazu or Lachesis, we are speaking about the maulus, celestis, arazu and lachsesis. And about the crucifier, arbitrator, curse and pilgrim. And about the virgil, bellicose, huggin and rapier. Caldari only have 1 more EW ships than the other races, not 3. About "damps are the most useful form of EW in the majority of situations"... They are the most useful form of EW for the "higher" shortrange and the medium range. They are pretty useless vs the "low" shortrange and sniper ranges. And, to repeat myself, are getting hurt by nanoships just as ECM does. In the range they are good they are currently definately better than ECM. But, seriously, what do you expect? That an EW system which can work fine from 0k to 250k* works better than an EW system which is limited to half that range area? with rigs - and, as a sidenote, those do not make them "silly expensive", one EW range rig is nowadays about 20 mil in jita. An mega/rokh with 7-8 t2 425mms is "silly expensive" (about 300 mil for a fleet fitted rokh), you can have a fully equipped scorp with 2 EW range rigs (230k optimal) for about 120 mil. Originally by:* kill0rbunny Because it takes 3 seconds to get a bs killmail, that's why. A scorp with 3 ECM lowslot mods has about the same amount of hitpoints as a sniper fitted geddon.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.03.05 15:35:00 - [159] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Elrich Zann No the "not" was left in for a reason. You refuse to believe people when they tell you that the ship is hardly used anymore. You can quote numbers all you want. The facts on TQ do not support you. Damage Dealer>>>ECM ship. If you truely believe it is a well balanced ship, then fly it and prove the rest of Eve wrong. Then why are ECM ships always primary? A ship doesn¦t need to be good, neither in efficiency nor in benefit/cost-ratio in order to become a primary. If there was a ship with 50% more damage than an average BS but without ANY tank(just an exagerated example), it would be called primary, even though it is most apparently not a good ship. You are assuming implications in a loose summ of facts. I can assure you, if you ever fly a Mothership, please put no tank at all on it. I promise to call you primary, since your ship is the most efficiently fitted/efficient out of the enemy fleet. And by the way, which idiot assumes he will always fight with an ECM ship @ 200+km range? Only gatecampers get in situations where they can play out such advantages. That is not the PvP most players are looking for. And I¦d like to aim one word at our dedicated powerposter in this threa: You claim that only a small minority of the community shares the opposite opinion you have. Do you think that a single person like you spamming the thread with thousand posts will look more representating for the whole of us because you hold half the threads here? And probably you are right: Since more that half the posts here are pro-ECM nerf(your posts) the occasional reader will of course most probably assume that the majority of the forum shares that opinion <.<
Neuromandis EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.03.05 15:37:00 - [160] Edited by: Neuromandis on 05/03/2007 15:34:26 At the moment, an 8 dampener scorp and a 4 slot armortank (or 7 dampener + cap booster) is better/just as good as an 8 slot ecm 1 plate. That is the problem with ECM. There should be a clear advantage to ECM use on specialized ships, just as you will NEVER see an ECM lachesis it should be equally improbable to see Damp-scorps. Hell, with the 4 lowslots free you could even make a few "funny" nonstandard setups, and generally have some versatility/unpredictability. Its jamming strength is pretty much as it should be. It is the necessity of the low slot modules that make other setups just as useful/more useful even in such a specialized ship, which is the reason I believe they should be removed from the game (the low slots damage mods) while their strength should be added to the base of the ECM modules.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.05 15:50:00 - [161] Edited by: Aramendel on 05/03/2007 15:52:10 Originally by: Skeltek Since more that half the posts here are pro-ECM nerf(your posts) the occasional reader will of course most probably assume that the majority of the forum shares that opinion <.< Oh really ? Somehow I do not think so. (Ok, 3 of those are "my corpmate" stuff, but the rest are "real" users. I wanted to complete the sentence ). Originally by: Skeltek A ship doesn¦t need to be good, neither in efficiency nor in benefit/cost-ratio in order to become a primary. If there was a ship with 50% more damage than an average BS but without ANY tank(just an exagerated example), it would be called primary, even though it is most apparently not a good ship.... A sniper fitted geddon has now pretty much the same "tank" as an scorp with 3 ECM mods. Is it called primary now? Pre-kali a scorp had a considarably better "tank" and was still called primary. By your own logic it must have been overpowered then. Why would your fleet shoot at a scorp with 3 1600mm plates when they could shoot at the geddon with 66% of it's HP?
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.05 16:21:00 - [162] Hey we never bothered to make scorps primary in fleets. Reasons are obvious: 1. cheap 2. lots of hp 3. they don't kill you 4. they don't force you to warp out 5. pilots are nubs & suck 6. do you really have time to check who's flying scorp or something silly along these lines? -------- .....
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:03:00 - [163] Well I don't think ECM itself needs a boost. Mainly because you can still achieve almost prenerf jamming levels, and jamming is one of the only things in Eve where your chances of a jam actually go up the more jammers you throw on something. I do, however, think that the BB, Rook, Scorp and (maybe Falcon) need a LOT more survivability. I wouldn't want to see more slottage but a huge increase to base shields and armor wouldn't be out of line if you ask me. Just be sure to drop the shield recharge rate accordingly. They already move like a ton of bricks, and set to tank they don't do damage or jam appreciably. So double shields and give the equivalent armor. I don't think 10k base shields and 10k base armor for the scorp would be overpowering considering it's dps and when set to jam the tank is beyond weak even if you plate it up. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:23:00 - [164] Originally by: Nyxus Well I don't think ECM itself needs a boost. Mainly because you can still achieve almost prenerf jamming levels, and jamming is one of the only things in Eve where your chances of a jam actually go up the more jammers you throw on something. I do, however, think that the BB, Rook, Scorp and (maybe Falcon) need a LOT more survivability. I wouldn't want to see more slottage but a huge increase to base shields and armor wouldn't be out of line if you ask me. Just be sure to drop the shield recharge rate accordingly. They already move like a ton of bricks, and set to tank they don't do damage or jam appreciably. So double shields and give the equivalent armor. I don't think 10k base shields and 10k base armor for the scorp would be overpowering considering it's dps and when set to jam the tank is beyond weak even if you plate it up. Nyxus And since they are disposable ships they should be cheap... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
starship enginer	Posted - 2007.03.05 18:58:00 - [165] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 04/03/2007 22:04:45 Originally by: starship enginer you should be arguing that ECM ships should get more HP or better resistance or ecm upgrades should have a passive effect on hp or resistance. I'd be perfectly happy with any of that as I've said many times before, not just in this thread. If you'd think about it for a while though, a boost to ECM strength is essentially the same thing because now you can fit a tank but you've lost the damage mods. MAGIC! that is like saying, ahh my geddon cant tank so well because i have to fit damage mods. ccp please boost geddon damage bonus so i can take off the damage mods and fit armor mods yeh who you kidding, you know you would still stick the damage mods, ecm mods down there
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.03.05 19:30:00 - [166] Originally by: LUKEC Hey we never bothered to make scorps primary in fleets. Reasons are obvious: 1. cheap 2. lots of hp 3. they don't kill you 4. they don't force you to warp out 5. pilots are nubs & suck 6. do you really have time to check who's flying scorp or something silly along these lines? agree to all points, except since the nerf, they don¦t really have much HP. Except we took our time to make them primarys before the patch(when we still encountered any in fleetfights). Even if they had tripple the amount of HP of a normal BS, it would have payed off back then. The biggest slowdown of killing enemy ships in fleetbattles is the targeting duration, and how many pilots will have guns still unused after killing the previous target. So since the time to take down an enemy ship is lag+targeting+shooting(assuming you have sufficient guns left after killing the prior target), the actual tank of the target doesn¦t matter that big. A bigger tank will increase the chance of warping out before structure though. So you choose the target that will bring you the most benefit: kill enemy and free two ships of your own at the same time(even though you free much less ships of your own, since without a huge amount of coordination work, most of your Scorps jamm the same target, making most of the jammers useless). Considering the huge lag in fleetbattles, target cycling and efficiency goes to hell. The key in fleetbattles is focused on maximizing kills/time ratio or better ISKdamagedone/time. Since the survivability of a target in fleetbattles is based mainly on lag and the seconds you have to hit the warpbutton after receiving the first damage results in: halving the armor of a ship decreases the survivability by MUCH more than 50%. I am able to move my mouse to the warpout button within two seconds, but not within one second. Smaller fights have other points that should be considered though. @Lukec: to point6 of your list about having time to find an EW scorp... Rook/Falcon-size=262m; BB-size=350m Easiest to find in overview imho, within the first seconds of the fight you get all EW-Recons locked. Making them useless pretty fast(they cannot afford to fit much ECCM and stuff, one ECM ship can usualy easily neutralize a big amount of Rooks; or they get killed pretty fast with a BS)
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.06 03:07:00 - [167] Originally by: starship enginer that is like saying, ahh my geddon cant tank so well because i have to fit damage mods. ccp please boost geddon damage bonus so i can take off the damage mods and fit armor mods yeh who you kidding, you know you would still stick the damage mods, ecm mods down there Perhaps I would, and perhaps I wouldn't. Sometimes I fly a tempest w/3 Gyro's and sometimes I tank it to the max. However I don't need to put 3 Gyro's on a tempest to reach minimum effectiveness with my guns. With 3xSig Dis Amps, I achieve about a 50% chance to jam a single battleship using one racial ECM, assuming he didn't bother to fit ECCM. Bottom line is that a pilot has no choice when flying a Scorpion - he/she has to fit 3 Sig Dis amps and has to warp in at max range. Maybe that's why the price has dropped like 10 to 12 mil since kali. (and no I don't build them).
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.06 14:29:00 - [168] Originally by: Elrich Zann Perhaps I would, and perhaps I wouldn't. Sometimes I fly a tempest w/3 Gyro's and sometimes I tank it to the max. However I don't need to put 3 Gyro's on a tempest to reach minimum effectiveness with my guns. That totally depends what your subjective definition of "minimum effectiveness" is. Module vs module 3 damagemods give a bigger boost than 3 ECM mods, btw. Essentially all you are saying is "ECM is too weak because I think so".
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.06 21:21:00 - [169] Originally by: Aramendel That totally depends what your subjective definition of "minimum effectiveness" is. Module vs module 3 damagemods give a bigger boost than 3 ECM mods, btw. Essentially all you are saying is "ECM is too weak because I think so". I've already defined what I think is minimum effectiveness - 50% chance to jam an equivalent sized ship - you must have forgotten that. And if your going to quote me do it correctly - "ECM is fine, the Scorpion and the Falcon are underpowered." At least the falcon has other uses, but there simply is no good reason to spend to spend 60+mil when a Blackbird costs 3+mil and jams nearly as well. A ship that can only be flown one way is not balanced. A ship that can only be setup one way is not balanced. A ship that can is only 11% better than it's cruiser counterpart at it's primary mission and costs 20 times as much isn't worth it. You keep saying it's fine - but you don't fly it so how would you know? You say people fly it, I say less and less people are flying it The prices have dropped, I rarely see them in my areas. I have stated my premises, I have stated my assumptions and I have provided calcs to back them up. I fly the ship, and it is only marginely better than the blackbird.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.06 21:41:00 - [170] Originally by: Elrich Zann I've already defined what I think is minimum effectiveness - 50% chance to jam an equivalent sized ship - you must have forgotten that. Which, to repeat myself again, is a subjective definition of it. It has no real reasoning behind it. It is just one value you state "which has to be so" and then base your whole argumentation chain on it. Which makes all which you base on it essentially only a subjective "I think so" statement.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.07 13:33:00 - [171] I base my argument on it since the Rook seems to be well balanced in ECM, so a 20% boost seems about right for a good ECM ship. If we go off that assumption then the rook has a 50% chance (approximately) to jam a battleship, and most of the people who have said ECM is fine use the Rook to back up their arguement. Therefore t1 ECM specific ships, being slightly weaker must in general be somewhat underpowered. However they all have the same ECM strength. I then looked at their most likely targets. Clearly it isn't unreasonable to pit them against ships their own size. I gave each ship the same probability to jam as the rook, except only against ships of their own size. While you feel this is subjective, I feel it is a logical analysis. And a good point for comparision. It is foolish of us to expect that such a major change in ECM would be perfect on the first attempt. Additionally is seems rather shortsighted to assign a frigate, a cruiser and a battleship the same bonus. But you scream, "Every ship is like that." Well yes and no, while each ship has the same bonus, it is on different sized guns. Battleship sized guns do more damage than frigate sized guns, therefore while the percentages are the same, the effect is greater w/larger ships. I have said before that ECM is a Scorpions primary offensive weapon. Not the modules in it's high slots (those are it's secondary weapons). Therefore I believe a battleship should do more damage than a frigate. Since both ships use the same module, the correct difference should be the modifier. The difference between a blackbird and a scorpion is too small to justify the cost. This is based on both analysis and flying them. More correctly, the griffin should have been left @ 5% per level. The blackbird should have been 10% per level (as it is) and the Scorpion should have been at least 15% per level to justify it's higher cost (although I believe 20% would be more exact - at least 15% could be justified). Whatever the Scorpion ends up at, the falcon should also be at, to justify it's t2 status. Lastly, most of the replies you list are not talking about Scorpions. I do not dispute those who say the Rook is fine - since I have no experience flying it. Additionally you have never stated why you feel a 10% per level is fine for a Scorpion? The setup you expouse has no tank and can only be flown one way. Are other ships that only have one setup and can only be flown one way considered balanced?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.07 16:22:00 - [172] Originally by: Elrich Zann I base my argument on it since the Rook seems to be well balanced in ECM, so a 20% boost seems about right for a good ECM ship. If we go off that assumption then the rook has a 50% chance (approximately) to jam a battleship, and most of the people who have said ECM is fine use the Rook to back up their arguement. The rook trades it's higher ECM power vs the inability to cloak compared to the falcon vs being more vulnerable (smaller hitpoint buffer) and the usual t2 ship disadvantages (higher training time, harder to replace) compared to the scorp Considering the scorp has these 2 advantages vs it it's no big surprise it has a slightly weaker ECM. And it is only slightly weaker. If both ships leave one lowslot free (1 ECM mod rook, 3 ECM mods scorp) the scorp has 98% of the rooks jamming power! When both fill all their lows the scorp has still 88% of it's ECM power. Considering the higher survivability, easier replacement and lower trainingtime thats a pretty good trade. So, no, compared to the rook the scorp does not need a boost. Even a small ECM strength boost would make it stronger than the rook. Quote: Clearly it isn't unreasonable to pit them against ships their own size. With ships which have "normal" weapons, no. A ship with large turrets is best compared vs another BS. However, this is not only because they are the same size, but also because it's weapons are most effective against that target. Vs cruisers and frigates their weapons have lower effeciency. ECM does not have this problem, it's completely the other way around. The smaller the target, the better. It is pretty unique even compared to other EW. TDs and RSDs have percentual the identical effect vs smaller targets, so in theory they have neither a advantage nor disadvantage there. However, their range reduction can be easier negated by the higher speed of smaller targets and the tracking/lock time reductions are compensated by the naturally higher lock & trackingspeed of small ships. So in a sense they have a similar effeciency reduction as large physical weapons have. This makes the "a battleship should do more damage than a frigate" point somewhat moot. Not that this shouldn't be the case, that is. However this must always be with an added "vs other battleships". A battleship whose "main weapons" get more effecient instead less effecient the smaller it's target cannot be balanced just vs other battleships.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.07 22:19:00 - [173] Originally by: Aramendel The rook trades it's higher ECM power vs the inability to cloak compared to the falcon vs being more vulnerable (smaller hitpoint buffer) and the usual t2 ship disadvantages (higher training time, harder to replace) compared to the scorp Considering the scorp has these 2 advantages vs it it's no big surprise it has a slightly weaker ECM. And it is only slightly weaker. If both ships leave one lowslot free (1 ECM mod rook, 3 ECM mods scorp) the scorp has 98% of the rooks jamming power! When both fill all their lows the scorp has still 88% of it's ECM power. Considering the higher survivability, easier replacement and lower trainingtime thats a pretty good trade. So, no, compared to the rook the scorp does not need a boost. Even a small ECM strength boost would make it stronger than the rook. One would argue that the higher resists of the t2 ship make the tanking difference between the Scorpion and the Rook less than you make it out to be. Besides you keep harping on the 3 Sig Dis Amp setup as the cureall to Scorpion, completely ignoring that this setup completely limits the Scorpion to only being flown one way. No options and no choices hardly makes for a good ship. Additionally flying it this way it is only marginally better than a Blackbird. Originally by: Aramendel With ships which have "normal" weapons, no. A ship with large turrets is best compared vs another BS. However, this is not only because they are the same size, but also because it's weapons are most effective against that target. Vs cruisers and frigates their weapons have lower effeciency. ECM does not have this problem, it's completely the other way around. The smaller the target, the better. It is pretty unique even compared to other EW. TDs and RSDs have percentual the identical effect vs smaller targets, so in theory they have neither a advantage nor disadvantage there. However, their range reduction can be easier negated by the higher speed of smaller targets and the tracking/lock time reductions are compensated by the naturally higher lock & trackingspeed of small ships. So in a sense they have a similar effeciency reduction as large physical weapons have. Comparing ECM to other forms or EW is pointless. I'm comparing ECM ships to each other. Your arguement is weak. By your logic Target Painters (which are only effective vs small ships) are completely overpowered. You won't find many who support that view. ECM is unique. The way it is setup now there is no reason to train up from a cruiser to a battleship if you are an ECM pilot. The only logical choice is to train from cruiser to recon ship and skip battleships all together.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.03.07 22:35:00 - [174] I've been of the opinion that ECMs, Damps and tracking disruptors were fairly well balanced before the ECM nerf. Damps and tracking disruptors were more effective, but in less situations, where ECM was chance based. It was easier to use effectively, which is why it caught on. I've seen really very few 'ewar' ships that are not running damps in the last couple of months. I do think that ECMs were becoming ludicrously common. However I do not think the problem was the ECM ships.It was 'everything else'. So yes, I think that the Rook, might be 'ok' like a lot of people seem to claim. I'm less sure, but I don't fly it much, so.. fine. BB and griffin, fulfill a useful niche, Griffin's still not used much, but lets face it, it never was, especially when the merlin got an extra mid. BB in general was OK - ECM acceptable, and easy to be able to fly. Scorpion and Falcon are a big problem IMO. Scorps need to be worth using, and at the moment, they combine bad damage, bad tank, bad maneuverabilty and a marginally acceptable ECM strength. Falcon is the same, only it can cloak and has an even worse tank.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.08 01:07:00 - [175] Edited by: Aramendel on 08/03/2007 01:12:17 Edited by: Aramendel on 08/03/2007 01:04:59 Originally by: Elrich Zann One would argue that the higher resists of the t2 ship make the tanking difference between the Scorpion and the Rook less than you make it out to be. Besides you keep harping on the 3 Sig Dis Amp setup as the cureall to Scorpion, completely ignoring that this setup completely limits the Scorpion to only being flown one way. No options and no choices hardly makes for a good ship. Additionally flying it this way it is only marginally better than a Blackbird. Normalized vs 0% resistance (and without skills) the rook has 7413 hp and the scorp 25369 HP. The rook has 30% of the scorps effective HP. Secondly, how does it limit the scorps fitting? If it wants maximum ECM "damage" it needs to fit ecm damage mods. If a turret/missle ship wants maximum dps it needs to fit damage mods. If they want to tank (well, at least if they use armortanks) they have every option to do that, but need to sacrifice gank to do that. It's called a tradeoff. With a full "gank" fitting on all ships if you take the rook strength for 100% the scorp is at 88% and the BB at 75%, so the scorp is almost perfectly between both ships which seems pretty reasonable to me. If you call the scorp only marginally better than the BB then the rook is also only marginally better than the scorp. Quote: Comparing ECM to other forms or EW is pointless. I'm comparing ECM ships to each other. Your arguement is weak. By your logic Target Painters (which are only effective vs small ships) are completely overpowered. You won't find many who support that view. ECM is unique. The way it is setup now there is no reason to train up from a cruiser to a battleship if you are an ECM pilot. The only logical choice is to train from cruiser to recon ship and skip battleships all together. Thats like saying missile ships should never be compared to turret ships but only be compared vs each other. Of cource ships of the same "type" also have to be balanced vs each other, but balancing them vs other ship types is also essential. I could just as well say that ECM strength should be reduced by the factor of 10. It would have no effect since ECM ships cannot be compared vs other ships anyways. Right? By the very fact of looking at their effeciency vs other ships you compared them vs something non-ECM. And no, how would by my logic be TPs overpowered? You either completely miss or try to twist my point there. Perhaps this is clearer: Large guns: BS - 100% efficiency. Cruiser - 50% efficiency. Frigate: - 25% efficiency. Target painters: BS - 25% effeciency. Cruiser - 50% efficiency. Frigate: - 100% efficiency. ECM (if it is balanced only vs BSs): BS - 100% effeciency. Cruiser - 150% efficiency. Frigate: - 200% efficiency. Target painters would be that logic only overpowered if they would be balanced vs battleships - and would as result boost the sig of frigs to kingdom come. And then they would be indeed be overpowered. As for training progression, see above, the scorp lies in strength perfectly between the BB and rook. Originally by: James Lyrus I've been of the opinion that ECMs, Damps and tracking disruptors were fairly well balanced before the ECM nerf. If that was the case why was ECM then the standard equipment on non-caldri EW ships? If they were balanced vs each other it wouldn't have been a better option for ships with TD or RSD boni use instead ECM without boni.
Elrich Zann Minmatar Hidden Agenda	Posted - 2007.03.08 07:39:00 - [176] Originally by: Aramendel Thats like saying missile ships should never be compared to turret ships but only be compared vs each other. Of cource ships of the same "type" also have to be balanced vs each other, but balancing them vs other ship types is also essential. I could just as well say that ECM strength should be reduced by the factor of 10. It would have no effect since ECM ships cannot be compared vs other ships anyways. Right? By the very fact of looking at their effeciency vs other ships you compared them vs something non-ECM. So therefore you believe that the Scorpion is balanced vs other battleships? That is, as FC, you would be equally fine with a pilot with Calderi Battleship 5, flying a Scorpion, Raven or Rokh? Assuming his/her other skills were equivalent.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.08 10:54:00 - [177] Depends really how the fleet/gang composition is already. If there are already 5 EW ships and only 2 damagedealers I would prefer the rokh or raven depending on the engagement range. If there are 10 damagedealers and 1 EW ship I would prefer the scorp. If the gang is already balanced I would tell the pilot to bring whatever he likes. Assuming he can jam more than 1 ship at a time (and assuming that he keeps at range for shortrange engagements) the scorp is still more effective than a DPS BS for the gang. See the reasoning here. Now, compared to most other ships a scorp has a noticeable lower hitpoint buffer in largescale engagements. But the thing is - this isn't because it is an ECM ship. It is because it is a tier 1 battleship which simply have fewer hitpoints than tier 2s and tier 3s. Of the tier 1 battleships only the scorp and the geddon are useful for sniper combat, so they form a bit of a minority. And in terms of survivability there is really no difference between both ships. Their base HPs are virtually identical. After damage, fitting and range mods I doubt that the geddon can mount more than one plate. Likewise, the scorp has after 3 ECM mods also only room for 1 plate. The geddon is a bit lighter, though, but it's only a minal difference (4.3% lighter to be exact, less with a plate on both ships). And if I had to pick between a geddon and a scorp for fleet combat I would pick the scorp every single frigging time (well, unless you have already so many ECM ships in your gang that it becomes too likely that they jam the same target). It's really quite simple: - both ships survive the same time when called primary - while alive the geddon can do the dps of one geddon - while alive the scorp can prevent the DPS of averagely 2 geddons
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.08 13:37:00 - [178] Originally by: Elrich Zann Originally by: Aramendel Thats like saying missile ships should never be compared to turret ships but only be compared vs each other. Of cource ships of the same "type" also have to be balanced vs each other, but balancing them vs other ship types is also essential. I could just as well say that ECM strength should be reduced by the factor of 10. It would have no effect since ECM ships cannot be compared vs other ships anyways. Right? By the very fact of looking at their effeciency vs other ships you compared them vs something non-ECM. So therefore you believe that the Scorpion is balanced vs other battleships? That is, as FC, you would be equally fine with a pilot with Calderi Battleship 5, flying a Scorpion, Raven or Rokh? Assuming his/her other skills were equivalent. You are generalizing too much. Skilled scorp can be extremely useful in smaller skirmishes, in fleets rooks are 4tw. -------- .....
Kloro Draz Gallente Ex Coelis	Posted - 2007.03.09 01:32:00 - [179] I had a pirate jam my hyperion. He had ECM on his dominix, not even a scorpion or other ECM-boosted ship. It worked fine against me, I don't see how it's supposed to be so weak.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

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