| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
15
   |
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
Just make it so that ECM mods break the target lock. Bam. Done. The hassle of re-targeting is enough. |
YoFault
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
I completely agree!!! |
Zindale
M S Not at WAR
The BORG Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Do not see the point of this post cause that is what ECM does for the cycle of the module. If the cycle is successful for the second cycle then it prevents the re target.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
129
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
ECM is fine. |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Zindale wrote:Do not see the point of this post cause that is what ECM does for the cycle of the module. If the cycle is successful for the second cycle then it prevents the re target.
It prevents you relocking for 20 seconds. I propose that be removed, and possibly reduce the cycle time for ecms.
Robert Caldera wrote:ECM is fine.
Wrong, they need fixing. It's okay to be be wrong, I won't hold it against you. |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy
Cascade Imminent
117
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 14:09:00 -
[6] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Wrong, they need fixing. It's okay to be be wrong, I won't hold it against you.
I think your problem is that you are trying to 1v1 a falcon. |
Caliph Muhammed
Caldari Investment and Security Industries
Innovia Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 14:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Galphii wrote:Wrong, they need fixing. It's okay to be be wrong, I won't hold it against you. I think your problem is that you are trying to 1v1 a falcon.
And with zero ECCM. |
Duchess Starbuckington
Starbuckington Manor
127
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 17:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
So how do you propose to buff ECM ships to make up for the fact the one thing they're good at is now borderline useless? |
Simi Kusoni
The Synergy
Cascade Imminent
117
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 19:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:So how do you propose to buff ECM ships to make up for the fact the one thing they're good at is now borderline useless?
I propose that in order to balance this change all ECM ships are now capable of fitting doomsday weapons, and utilizing them on sub-capital ships. |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 00:15:00 -
[10] - Quote
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:So how do you propose to buff ECM ships to make up for the fact the one thing they're good at is now borderline useless?
Easy: reducing the cycle time on the ecm mods (I've adjusted the OP). So, you've got 7 ECM's on your scorp, each one of them has a chance to break the lock. If you activate them 1 second apart, then every second you have a chance at breaking the lock on your target. The target can re-lock immediately, but they still have the locking time to deal with, and if they get hit again, they have to start from scratch. So instead of sitting there for 20 seconds at least, scratching your arse, you're still in the fight, spamming the lock function hoping to get a lock again. It's not that different from the current system, except the individual isn't shut down for so long, and if jams are failing, there's less time to wait to get another shot. It's elegant and there is precedent within the game (burst ecm).
I've fought with and against ecm ships with allies; this isn't about trying to solo a falcon 
This change might mean you need to put a bit of a tank on a ecm ship instead of relying on the ecm itself, which sounds fine to me. I'd fly one. |
|
|
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 00:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Duchess Starbuckington wrote:So how do you propose to buff ECM ships to make up for the fact the one thing they're good at is now borderline useless? I propose that in order to balance this change all ECM ships are now capable of fitting doomsday weapons, and utilizing them on sub-capital ships.
You're an f-ing tosser mate. |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
500
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 00:29:00 -
[12] - Quote
Well, one side effect I could see happening if this was implemented would be that sensor damps would be more useful (break someone's lock and then have a friend damp him so he has issues re-locking). I don't know that it's the right solution to ECM (or even if ECM needs changing at all), but I think that that'd be a side effect. |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 00:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
mxzf wrote:Well, one side effect I could see happening if this was implemented would be that sensor damps would be more useful (break someone's lock and then have a friend damp him so he has issues re-locking). I don't know that it's the right solution to ECM (or even if ECM needs changing at all), but I think that that'd be a side effect.
I just came on to post that exact point 
Bring a friend along with sensor damps (which are getting buffed soon anyway) and he'll futz the locking time of your enemies, and bam, you've got your permajam back again, just that now you have to like, co-ordinate with you fleet buddies to make it happen. And yeah I'm not 100% sure this is the solution either, but I wanted to put it on the table for CCP. |
Caldari Citizen20090217
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 00:54:00 -
[14] - Quote
The other thing they could do with ECM is make ECCM less useless.
ECCM currently doesn't give enough protection and has no other benefit to the ship ie. if you face a non-ECM boat the slot is wasted. This is unique to ECCM - sensor boosters and tracking comps (counters to other ewar) give bonuses that help even if not tracking disrupted/damped.
Suggestion: make ECCM give your ship another sensor type as well as the strength boost. Now the jamming ship needs to score two simultaneous successful jams with two different races of jammer to actually jam you. Only downside I can see is multispecs may become FOTM. Or allow each active ECCM mod to ignore one successful jam and forget the racial stuff. |
Soldarius
United Highsec Front
The 99 Percent
144
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 03:59:00 -
[15] - Quote
Reducing ECM cycle time would only make them better. In the same 20 seconds with current cycle time, you get one chance per jammer. With a 10 second cycle time you would get 2 chances, that is twice as many opportunities. Now say I'm in my Falcon with a 14 jam strength trying to jam a Drake (18 sensor strength). Currently I have a 26% chance to miss. With your solution, the chance of missing a jam within the same 20 seconds with that same jammer would be 7%.
I wold gladly give up my 20sec jam cycles for this, and then go fit a single remote sensor damp w/scan res script. Or, God forbid, fly with a bro in an Arazu that has lots of damps fit. Even when you finally lock, you can't keep it or more than a few seconds. Hell, this would even make multispecs useful.
For fun, lets try the mathz. 4x multispecs jam str ~9.3, cycle time of 10 seconds. Chance to miss vs Drake per cycle is 1-(9.3/19)=51%. Stagger the jammers so one fires every 2.5 seconds over the course of the previous time of 20 seconds means 8 attempts every 20 seconds (love the new cycle time). 51%^8=.46% chance to miss. Over the course of the 10 seconds required to fire all jammers once the chance to miss would be 6.8%.
OP is now my favorite person in the whole Eve Online universe.
"How do you kill that which has no life?" |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
504
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 04:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Caldari Citizen20090217 wrote:The other thing they could do with ECM is make ECCM less useless.
ECCM currently doesn't give enough protection and has no other benefit to the ship ie. if you face a non-ECM boat the slot is wasted. This is unique to ECCM - sensor boosters and tracking comps (counters to other ewar) give bonuses that help even if not tracking disrupted/damped.
Doesn't being more difficult to probe down count as a side effect? (Just because you can't be unprobable anymore, it doesn't mean you can't be all-but-unprobable)
Caldari Citizen20090217 wrote:Suggestion: make ECCM give your ship another sensor type as well as the strength boost. Now the jamming ship needs to score two simultaneous successful jams with two different races of jammer to actually jam you. Only downside I can see is multispecs may become FOTM. Or allow each active ECCM mod to ignore one successful jam and forget the racial stuff.
And this sounds exploitable. |
Caliph Muhammed
Caldari Investment and Security Industries
Innovia Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 05:05:00 -
[17] - Quote
Caldari Citizen20090217 wrote:The other thing they could do with ECM is make ECCM less useless.
ECCM currently doesn't give enough protection and has no other benefit to the ship ie. if you face a non-ECM boat the slot is wasted. This is unique to ECCM - sensor boosters and tracking comps (counters to other ewar) give bonuses that help even if not tracking disrupted/damped.
Suggestion: make ECCM give your ship another sensor type as well as the strength boost. Now the jamming ship needs to score two simultaneous successful jams with two different races of jammer to actually jam you. Only downside I can see is multispecs may become FOTM. Or allow each active ECCM mod to ignore one successful jam and forget the racial stuff.
That's the nature of the game. Weapon Disruptors don't help towards missiles. Defender Missiles don't help against guns. ECCM covers jamming. Just because you don't want to give up a mod for Anti ECM doesn't mean it needs to be changed.
ECM has a right to exist within game. I specialized in it because I like the nature of it. The Science & Electronic warfare aspect. Its a flavor. And I don't want it changed. The counter is in game for it and if you opt to neglect it you suffer when faced against it.
People don't like equipping warp core stabilizers to deal with scrambling but if they don't they pay the price. |
Limerance Zet-Giry
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 06:00:00 -
[18] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Just make it so that ECM mods break the target lock, in the way that burst ecm works. Bam. Done. The hassle of re-targeting is enough, especially since you could be interrupted by another ecm cycle. Reduce the cycle on ecm modules as well; perhaps a10 second baseline, with a skill to reduce that by 5% each time.
ECM is fine.
If you re-target 10 seconds - it's your problem. Don't fight on a BS against Falcon. There is Rapier for example, which locks on Falcon in a moment.
If you fly BS, fit ECCM, or have a friend with a hac/assault in a fleet. |
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 06:14:00 -
[19] - Quote
I have no issues with ECM in it's current form, but I can see why people would like to change it.
Someone over on the-site-that-shall-not-be-named.com suggested that the sensor strength reduces the time that you are locked out. Something to the effect of Jam Time=20(Jam Strength/Sensor Strength) with a hard limit of 20 seconds.
I think that this is an acceptable comprimise with the stipulation that all jams are autohit just like every other ****ing EWAR.
BTW if this change goes through it'll break ECM so badly that you'll wish for the old system. Just saying. |
Duchess Starbuckington
Starbuckington Manor
127
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 08:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
Quote:Bring a friend along with sensor damps (which are getting buffed soon anyway) and he'll futz the locking time of your enemies, and bam, you've got your permajam back again, just that now you have to like, co-ordinate with you fleet buddies to make it happen. And yeah I'm not 100% sure this is the solution either, but I wanted to put it on the table for CCP.
(And some other drivel)
Ok, worth using - maybe.
Worth dedicating two ships to, for a chance at mildly inconveniencing 1-2 at best?
Not in the slightest.
Quote:BTW if this change goes through it'll break ECM so badly that you'll wish for the old system. Just saying.
This.
ECM ships are the only EWAR ships in the game that have no secondary functions, besides the Rook which has some token DPS. This isn't like tracking disruptors, where nerfing those would still keep the ships bonused towards them useful for other things. You break ECM, you break 6 ships to the point where they're not worth flying.
That's why it needs much more careful consideration.
One of the best suggestions I've seen actually was changing ECM so while it always hits, it doesn't break locks: what it does is slash the range/(?)effectiveness of modules like RR and EWAR. |
|
|
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
17
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 09:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Reducing ECM cycle time would only make them better. In the same 20 seconds with current cycle time, you get one chance per jammer. With a 10 second cycle time you would get 2 chances, that is twice as many opportunities. Now say I'm in my Falcon with a 14 jam strength trying to jam a Drake (19 sensor strength). Currently I have a 26% chance to miss. With your solution, the chance of missing a jam within the same 20 seconds with that same jammer would be 7%.
I wold gladly give up my 20sec jam cycles for this, and then go fit a single remote sensor damp w/scan res script. Or, God forbid, fly with a bro in an Arazu that has lots of damps fit. Even when you finally lock, you can't keep it or more than a few seconds. Hell, this would even make multispecs useful.
For fun, lets try the mathz. 4x multispecs jam str ~9.3, cycle time of 10 seconds. Chance to miss vs Drake per cycle is 1-(9.3/19)=51%. Stagger the jammers so one fires every 2.5 seconds over the course of the previous time of 20 seconds means 8 attempts every 20 seconds (love the new cycle time). 51%^8=.46% chance to miss. Over the course of the 10 seconds required to fire all jammers once the chance to miss would be 6.8%.
OP is now my favorite person in the whole Eve Online universe.
Except that you missed the bit where you don't get the 20 second jam time anymore; they'll work more like ecm bursts, so you'll be breaking locks but 'ceptors with sensor boosters will still be hassling you. I love how almost no-one on these forums actually reads posts. Comedy gold! |
Soldarius
United Highsec Front
The 99 Percent
144
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 10:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Soldarius wrote:Reducing ECM cycle time would only make them better. In the same 20 seconds with current cycle time, you get one chance per jammer. With a 10 second cycle time you would get 2 chances, that is twice as many opportunities. Now say I'm in my Falcon with a 14 jam strength trying to jam a Drake (19 sensor strength). Currently I have a 26% chance to miss. With your solution, the chance of missing a jam within the same 20 seconds with that same jammer would be 7%.
I wold gladly give up my 20sec jam cycles for this, and then go fit a single remote sensor damp w/scan res script. Or, God forbid, fly with a bro in an Arazu that has lots of damps fit. Even when you finally lock, you can't keep it or more than a few seconds. Hell, this would even make multispecs useful.
For fun, lets try the mathz. 4x multispecs jam str ~9.3, cycle time of 10 seconds. Chance to miss vs Drake per cycle is 1-(9.3/19)=51%. Stagger the jammers so one fires every 2.5 seconds over the course of the previous time of 20 seconds means 8 attempts every 20 seconds (love the new cycle time). 51%^8=.46% chance to miss. Over the course of the 10 seconds required to fire all jammers once the chance to miss would be 6.8%.
OP is now my favorite person in the whole Eve Online universe. Except that you missed the bit where you don't get the 20 second jam time anymore; they'll work more like ecm bursts, so you'll be breaking locks but 'ceptors with sensor boosters will still be hassling you. I love how almost no-one on these forums actually reads posts. Comedy gold!
wtf with forums eating my posts not once but twice in 10 minutes.
Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong point. So let me explain it so you can understand. If you decrease the cycle time on a jammer, even if it only breaks locks, a Falcon with 4 multispecs would have a 99.54% chance of breaking your locks at least once every 20 seconds; 93.21% chance every 10 seconds vs a Drake. This is why the ECM Burst module can only fire every 30 seconds, and you can only fit one of them at a time.
Say the Falcon is rainbow racial fit, which is the fleet support standard. That one 14 strength jammer would still have a 74% chance of breaking your Drake's locks on the first try. The cumulative chance on the second try would be 94%.
"How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 11:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
Math isn't my strong point so I'm not going to get into a nerd pissing-match; I'll take your word on the numbers. My numbers aren't set in stone; they're an example of how the system could work. I've modified my OP to reflect a better way of doing this change. Breaking a lock once every 20 seconds is hardly arguing my point, and as many have pointed out in this thread it's underpowered. In a 20 second time frame, the drake will lose its lock once and then can easily reacquire and fire off more missiles etc.
And yeah the forums eat posts for breakfast  |
Valei Khurelem
277
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 11:11:00 -
[24] - Quote
You are so going to get trolled for daring to suggest ECM doesn't work properly and I won't be able to do anything to help, sorry :( ECM needs fixing, but it's the counters that fight against gankers that need fixing the most because things like warp bubbles are just so OP.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 11:30:00 -
[25] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:You are so going to get trolled for daring to suggest ECM doesn't work properly and I won't be able to do anything to help, sorry :( ECM needs fixing, but it's the counters that fight against gankers that need fixing the most because things like warp bubbles are just so OP.
I was expecting it hehe. I knew CCP were talking about the pros and cons of ecm so I thought I'd put this idea into the mix (it was actually a mate of mine who suggested it, cheers 2myst!) |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex
Cosmic Consortium
943
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 11:32:00 -
[26] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:This is why the ECM Burst module can only fire every 30 seconds, and you can only fit one of them at a time.
There's also that minor issue that ECM burst affects everyone in your radius of effect, regardless of whether you can target them or not.
ECM cycling every 10 seconds and simply breaking one/all locks would be fine: at the very worst it would be no worse than current ECM mechanics. 10 seconds is long enough for HACs to target a Rook or Falcon and fire a salvo. If ECM only broke one lock at a time it would be nice to reduce the cycle time to a few seconds.
|
Miss Whippy
Bloody Limeys
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 00:10:00 -
[27] - Quote
No other E-War is as crippling as ECM. Other E-War mods all debilitate ships, but non of them make ships completely useless. There is nothing more boring then being in a fight and not even getting a single shot off.
At the VERY ABSOLUTE LEAST ECCM should be far more effective. I quite like the OP idea, but I prefer the idea of ECM only jamming SOME of your weapons, not all of them. This would be more inline with how the effectiveness of other E-War is graduated. This way it would take several ECMs to jam a ship completely.
ECM is too powerful and it makes gameplay very boring, and many ships lose significant strength having to compensate with ECCM which barely has an effect. |
Caliph Muhammed
Caldari Investment and Security Industries
Innovia Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 00:18:00 -
[28] - Quote
Equip ECCM or suffer. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
EVE Corporation 123566322353
170
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 17:23:00 -
[29] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Equip ECCM or suffer.
ADAPT! use ECM + Sensor damp...
I like the idea of reducing duration of a jam cycle... I would even agree a compromise would be fine too, 5-10 sec cycle could be okay too
But for people fearing a loss in regards to their beloved OP ecm... bring some remote sensor dampening and you would suddenly get same result or even better
a sensor damp ship can make 1000 scan res become 180-200ish scan res... to lock a frig from 2 to 11-12 sec
(or on a hurricane trying to lock a hurricane from 3.8 sec to 21.7 sec (without microwarp on, and down to 13 sec with microwarp on)
Why should one kind of ewar be so strong by itself? I think they should be used in synergy to be "powerful"
should mention the sensor damp should be scripted for scan res dampening |
Abeer
Space-Brewery-Association
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 17:51:00 -
[30] - Quote
i disagree that ecm would be stronger if you reduce the cycle lets say from 20sec to 15sec but you just break the lock and dont jam for 20sec.
atm you can do the same with sensor damp anyway.. if a target is jammed for 20sec tell your dampener to damp him and you make 40sec out of it. but if you take away the 20sec jam also the dampener would have harder times to get his damps on the
broken lock.
and also the jam drones ( i think all e-war drones should be removed because they are to cheap and can be brought always on the field ) would been much less effective... and tbh everyone fits ec-300.. they are so cheap and still so effective in low sec where you cannot smartbomb them. 10-15 of them really jams carriers out for a certain time of a fight.
i saw boosted guardians not getting 1 lock in a 10min fight with a strenght over 60 just by having 30 ecm drones around it.
and now you wanna tell me thats balanced. how you want to break that in low sec ?? shooting every drone, one after one ??
and how do you feel if you jammed out the whole fight ?? are you happy and still telling it was a good fight after you lost your ship while never got a lock on any target ? i doubt that hardly.. and i doubt that when you get ganked by 3 cheap ishkur in an expensive ship and they only spam ecm drones at you.. i truly would rage if that would happen to me. because without the ecm drones you would win and it would match.. if they want fit a slot with td or damps or even an ecm you would give them the win because they had a good ship setup .. but not by just stupid drones.
Cheers |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |