Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:06:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:08:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Herz Ing
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu "I've had quite a few fights recently where there was a lot of ECM. In one fight, an enemy Falcon effectively shut down my gang of four BS/CS and we lost every ship, even though we had ECCM fit."
That's a lie tbh. Do the math and realize how little of a chance he had to jam all four of you when you ALL had eccm fit.
You dont need to perma jam battleships to render them basically useless. You just need to jam a battleship 1-2 times and make him relock 1-2 and the fight is already tilting towards your favor. I think you lie very much in this thread to make ecm look worse then it is.
Yeah - about that.
First off I'm an ECM noob. If that offends you then just skip this post or flame it w/e you want, I don't mind.
Now, why is it that BS with higher sensor strength get hit harder by ECM than say an interceptor? I mean when you jam any ship the effective jamming time is that jam duration + relock time. Is this working as intended or is this just an overlooked side-effect?
If it was intended for ecm to disable a ship for a specific amount of time regardless of ship class - then give the victim back their target locks after a jammer effect expires.
P.S. I can already predict the Caldari Recon pilots will hate this because it would be a nerf and everyone else would hate this because it wouldn't fix being perma-jammed. Lol
BS have a harder time with ECM due to the longer lock times. BS still get jammed very easily by ECM, as sensor strength really doesn't play a part vs. well skilled ECM pilots until it's really *really* high (like upper 70s).
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:11:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
Ah, ok. I totally misunderstood. I thought you were trying to add something to the thread.
If all you're doing is just trolling then, excellent job. 10/10.
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:14:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
Ah, ok. I totally misunderstood. I thought you were trying to add something to the thread.
If all you're doing is just trolling then, excellent job. 10/10.
To be honest, you arn't going to keep "3 recons and 2 BS" out of a fight if they are all using ECCM. Unless of course, you have an all officer fitting. Then maybe, you'll have a small chance. You might jam a few of them each cycle, but not often enough to "totally remove them", and certainly not a 80-90% chance to jam each of them.
If I'm wrong, I'd love to see some math to prove it though. Lock times included.
|
Corstaad
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:15:00 -
[65]
On a side note I found a lone one month old BS running in low sec with my Rifter :). Took me two ECM Bursts to figure out what he had, anyone else found ships running those :).
|
Herz Ing
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:29:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Herz Ing on 12/01/2008 05:30:15
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Herz Ing
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu "I've had quite a few fights recently where there was a lot of ECM. In one fight, an enemy Falcon effectively shut down my gang of four BS/CS and we lost every ship, even though we had ECCM fit."
That's a lie tbh. Do the math and realize how little of a chance he had to jam all four of you when you ALL had eccm fit.
You dont need to perma jam battleships to render them basically useless. You just need to jam a battleship 1-2 times and make him relock 1-2 and the fight is already tilting towards your favor. I think you lie very much in this thread to make ecm look worse then it is.
Yeah - about that.
First off I'm an ECM noob. If that offends you then just skip this post or flame it w/e you want, I don't mind.
Now, why is it that BS with higher sensor strength get hit harder by ECM than say an interceptor? I mean when you jam any ship the effective jamming time is that jam duration + relock time. Is this working as intended or is this just an overlooked side-effect?
If it was intended for ecm to disable a ship for a specific amount of time regardless of ship class - then give the victim back their target locks after a jammer effect expires.
P.S. I can already predict the Caldari Recon pilots will hate this because it would be a nerf and everyone else would hate this because it wouldn't fix being perma-jammed. Lol
BS have a harder time with ECM due to the longer lock times. BS still get jammed very easily by ECM, as sensor strength really doesn't play a part vs. well skilled ECM pilots until it's really *really* high (like upper 70s).
Yes. I think I said that in my original post but I will admit that it was probably unclear because it wasn't very well worded. I meant 'Why did the developers make it so BS are hit harder by ECM than frigs?' rather than 'I don't understand why this happens;.
My point was that this isn't discussed very much and doesn't seem to fit. It would seem like a ship with higher sensor strength should be stronger against ECM. However, this is not the case when a BS with high sensor strength and low scanning resolution gets jammed. In order to effectively overcome ECM while piloting a BS you not only have to fit an ECCM module but a sensor booster with a scanning resolution script.
Doesn't seem very well thought out, yes? Or if there is a valid reason for this? Maybe you could enlighten me?
Anywhoo, once again - what I was suggesting was giving ships back their target locks after an ECM ends.
|
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:31:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Herz Ing Edited by: Herz Ing on 12/01/2008 05:30:15
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Herz Ing
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu "I've had quite a few fights recently where there was a lot of ECM. In one fight, an enemy Falcon effectively shut down my gang of four BS/CS and we lost every ship, even though we had ECCM fit."
That's a lie tbh. Do the math and realize how little of a chance he had to jam all four of you when you ALL had eccm fit.
You dont need to perma jam battleships to render them basically useless. You just need to jam a battleship 1-2 times and make him relock 1-2 and the fight is already tilting towards your favor. I think you lie very much in this thread to make ecm look worse then it is.
Yeah - about that.
First off I'm an ECM noob. If that offends you then just skip this post or flame it w/e you want, I don't mind.
Now, why is it that BS with higher sensor strength get hit harder by ECM than say an interceptor? I mean when you jam any ship the effective jamming time is that jam duration + relock time. Is this working as intended or is this just an overlooked side-effect?
If it was intended for ecm to disable a ship for a specific amount of time regardless of ship class - then give the victim back their target locks after a jammer effect expires.
P.S. I can already predict the Caldari Recon pilots will hate this because it would be a nerf and everyone else would hate this because it wouldn't fix being perma-jammed. Lol
BS have a harder time with ECM due to the longer lock times. BS still get jammed very easily by ECM, as sensor strength really doesn't play a part vs. well skilled ECM pilots until it's really *really* high (like upper 70s).
Yes. I think I said that in my original post but I will admit that it was probably unclear because it wasn't very well worded. I meant 'Why did the developers make it so BS are hit harder by ECM than frigs?' rather than 'I don't understand why this happens;.
My point was that this isn't discussed very much and doesn't seem to fit. It would seem like a ship with higher sensor strength should be stronger against ECM. However, this is not the case when a BS with high sensor strength and low scanning resolution gets jammed. In order to effectively overcome ECM while piloting a BS you not only have to fit an ECCM module but a sensor booster with a scanning resolution script.
Doesn't seem very well thought out, yes? Or if there is a valid reason for this? Maybe you could enlighten me?
Anywhoo, once again - what I was suggesting was giving ships back their target locks after an ECM ends.
But you need to realize that a frigate is jammed nearly 100% of the time by a single ECM.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:44:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
Ah, ok. I totally misunderstood. I thought you were trying to add something to the thread.
If all you're doing is just trolling then, excellent job. 10/10.
To be honest, you arn't going to keep "3 recons and 2 BS" out of a fight if they are all using ECCM. Unless of course, you have an all officer fitting. Then maybe, you'll have a small chance. You might jam a few of them each cycle, but not often enough to "totally remove them", and certainly not a 80-90% chance to jam each of them.
If I'm wrong, I'd love to see some math to prove it though. Lock times included.
Who said anything about using ECCM? I said I kept 3x recons and 2x BS out of the fight, but never said they used ECCM. You're getting your posts mixed up.
And any single ship that can remove an entire well equipped gang from a fight *all by itself* is overpowered. Even before the damp nerf, no damp ship in the game could do that. One ship for sure, maybe two, but certainly not three or more.
I can't stand ECM. The fights consist of everyone sitting around jammed. On both sides. It's boring and stupid when ECM is the primary battle and DPS and tanks are the secondary battle.
But until ECM are balanced I'll be making sure I have at least twice as much as my enemy. Trinity is the age of ECM ships after all the ECM buffs.
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Herz Ing
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:46:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Herz Ing on 12/01/2008 05:49:22
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
But you need to realize that a frigate is jammed nearly 100% of the time by a single ECM.
That's true. But that doesn't really counter what I was saying which was ECM jams are affected by sensor strength and scanning resolution. Regardless of how many ECCM modules I stack there is still a chance of me getting jammed. When that happens the effective duration that I will go without a lock will depend upon my scanning resolution.
This seems broken to me. Wouldn't you agree?
Edit: If sensor strength is the counter to ECM then why isn't recovery from being jammed tied to it but to a completely different stat?
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:51:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Herz Ing
Yes. I think I said that in my original post but I will admit that it was probably unclear because it wasn't very well worded. I meant 'Why did the developers make it so BS are hit harder by ECM than frigs?' rather than 'I don't understand why this happens;.
My point was that this isn't discussed very much and doesn't seem to fit. It would seem like a ship with higher sensor strength should be stronger against ECM. However, this is not the case when a BS with high sensor strength and low scanning resolution gets jammed. In order to effectively overcome ECM while piloting a BS you not only have to fit an ECCM module but a sensor booster with a scanning resolution script.
Doesn't seem very well thought out, yes? Or if there is a valid reason for this? Maybe you could enlighten me?
Anywhoo, once again - what I was suggesting was giving ships back their target locks after an ECM ends.
The real issue is that a BS can be jammed far too easily by an EW ship, even with ECCM fit. And even if ships got their locks back, BS initial lock time is so slow, you'll rarely ever get to have a lock before you're jammed out of the fight anyway.
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 05:52:00 -
[71]
the op doesnt undestand, its another WoW, 1v1, counters need to be buffed, nerf damage, speed, ecm everything
|
Ashley Snow
Save our Souls
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 06:00:00 -
[72]
Quote: Maybe 4 frigates. Not 2 battleships and 2 command ships. Sorry, ECM isn't the god module you pretend it is
You obviosly havnt flown a falcon with good skills. I could lock them up and go get something to eat if I wanted. I dont think ecm needs to be nerfed. I think the eccm definatly needs work. I think it would take work to figure out setups were you could fit a eccm and not sacrifice too much. And if you dont you succumb to ecm. I think it would make it more interesting. Stacking is the worse idea possible for ecm. Just a bad idea all around.
And I think its hilarious all the crying people do on these forums. If its not nos its nano fittings. Not nano its dampners. Not dampners its ecm. Lets just kill it all and just mine.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 06:05:00 -
[73]
\o Ashley ^-^
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Corstaad
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 06:12:00 -
[74]
This is nothing to do with WoW, you fail to realize that good pvp games are more then just people standing toe to toe pew pewing each other. Sorry but theres alot of people that have played pvp games online for last decade that enjoy "combine arms" approach not BS vs BS gatecamps. Your same basis's would be to have nano ships nerfed.
|
Corstaad
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 06:16:00 -
[75]
I was caught half reading something, so take with a grain of salt.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 08:45:00 -
[76]
Why isn't there a booster to increase sensor strength by say, 500%? For a standard quality booster that is?
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
MalVortex
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 09:07:00 -
[77]
The amount of lose in this thread is nauseating.
A max skilled, *ALL LEVEL V* Falcon Pilot can get a Tech II (there are no faction racial jammers) Racial Jammer to 14.12.
The worst battleship in the game sensor strength wise is an Apocalypse, with 14 sensor strength.
The worst Recon in the Game SS wise is The rapier and pilgrim, with 24 sensor strength.
For A Falcon with 7 racial appropriate jammers versus an all Ammar gang of 2x Battleships and 3x Recons to *permajam* them, well, lets take a look:
First off, you'll perma jam the two battleships if they're not packing ECCM. Thats -2 jammers. We now have 5 jammers to jam three targets.
I can post the Excel results if you like, but you only have a per-jammer chance of 59% per target. Even given the two spares, your chance of perma-jamming three recons is only 33.94% per cycle. Your odds start to exponentially drop for a perma jam past the first cycle.
This is, mind you, the absolute perfect storm example. A max skilled pilot, running nothing but 7x Ammar Racial jammers, versus an all ammar gang fielding no ECCM. This simply does not happen in reality. Ever. The math blatantly proves it, now stop posting your impossible situations. ECM is fine, ECCM is fine.
Oh, and ECCM *does* work.
14.21 Max Skilled racial Falcon vs. 24 strength Recon = 0.5920833.. Chance to jam.
14.21 Max Skilled racail falcon vs 47.04 (24*1.96) = 0.3020833... Chance to Jam.
0.5920833 / 0.3020833 = 1.96 better odds. OMFG! No Wai! It effectively halved my chance to be jammed!
14.21 Falcon vs. Apocalypse (14) = 100%
14.21 Falcon vs Apocalypse w/ ECCM (27.44)
14.21 / 27.44 = 51.78 to be jammed. OMFG! No Wai! It just took my permajammed apocalypse and made it nearly an even 50/50 split per jammer! Clearly, this module sucks so much!
And for the "zomg, thats still 50% per module, nerf!" Crowd. This is on an absolutely max skilled falcon running 3x SDA IIs. Its targeting the weakest sensor strength battleship in the game. It has no tank, no dps, no drone bay. 6.8k EHP and an 8DPS Shield Regen tank. Its sole purpose in life is to jam things. If you don't like being jammed, each ECCM halves your chance to be jammed. Alternatively, have your gang shoot at it. This isn't a solo game. You bring friends for a reason. If your gang can't force a falcon to buzz off, your screwed already.
That falcon pilot could also have been a good skilled maga or raven pilot and dumped 1k dps into your hulls. That hurts. A lot. There is a huge opportunity cost to being a dedicated ECM pilot, and its both skill required (you ARE the primary target. always.) and luck based (there is a ~25% chance that 2x racials fail to jam that ECCMed apocalypse).
ECM is fine. Stop complaining.
|
Pan Zhu'Liang
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 11:11:00 -
[78]
funny, when i played 2 years ago ECM was packed into every spare midslot on every pvp ship (remember armor tanked ravens with ECM?); or so the forums had it. then it got nerfed so that only dedicated ships could use it effectively.
ECCM is still problematic though. there's a very high opportunity cost to fitting it and it doesn't change the luck dynamic.
ECCM needs to reduce the time of the jam so that the whole affair is less luck based. and the idea of giving it a secondary benefit is a good one, it wouldn't have to be anything major, but making you harder to probe doesn't really address the opportunity cost problem.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 11:21:00 -
[79]
Originally by: MalVortex
ECM is fine. Stop complaining.
No its not. How come caldari EAF can totally shut down 2 battleships at the same time with ew while the amarr one can barely disrupt one? Oh and compare the range they got to do this at. Ecm has huge range advantage and ontop of it its the most powerful one and ontop of that there is no good counter. gg ccp, caldari online ftl. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Pan Zhu'Liang
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 11:31:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: MalVortex
ECM is fine. Stop complaining.
No its not. How come caldari EAF can totally shut down 2 battleships at the same time with ew while the amarr one can barely disrupt one? Oh and compare the range they got to do this at. Ecm has huge range advantage and ontop of it its the most powerful one and ontop of that there is no good counter. gg ccp, caldari online ftl.
i confess to lacking personal experience in this matter, but that really sounds more like a tracking disruptor problem than an ECM problem. dedicated TD ships should be boosted after the TD nerf just like dedicated ECM ships were after theirs imo.
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 11:33:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Pan Zhu'Liang
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: MalVortex
ECM is fine. Stop complaining.
No its not. How come caldari EAF can totally shut down 2 battleships at the same time with ew while the amarr one can barely disrupt one? Oh and compare the range they got to do this at. Ecm has huge range advantage and ontop of it its the most powerful one and ontop of that there is no good counter. gg ccp, caldari online ftl.
i confess to lacking personal experience in this matter, but that really sounds more like a tracking disruptor problem than an ECM problem. dedicated TD ships should be boosted after the TD nerf just like dedicated ECM ships were after theirs imo.
And how effective is the gallente and minmatar EAF at totally disabling 2 battleships. Also compare range...
No the truth is ccp screwed over everyone except caldari when it comes to EW and amarr got screwed the most tbfh. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Spartan dax
5 finger discounteers
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 12:01:00 -
[82]
Compare range eh? Kitsune has a locking range of 52 km, Keres 48. Their Ewar works for all intents and purposes within their optimal at these ranges. You could argue the effect of the Keres dampeners is subpar but there's nothing wrong with the range.
And a Kitsune holding down two BS's permanently? Why don't you do some math first and come back with the probability of not missing a jam in say 5 cycles?
Use the following ships
2x Megas 2x Megas with eccm
1x Mega 1x Raven 1x Mega 1x Raven both with ECCM
What are the chances of keeping these ships jammed for 5 cycles straight? Use any 4 slot jamming combo you like.
|
zorgluba
Doom Guard
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 12:13:00 -
[83]
Only reasoning here so no need to flame me to hell and back :)
I find that the biggest power of the jam is that not only does it prevents you to target and thus activate any targetted module on someone it makes you loose all locks. Meaning you have to relock and you loose some time here : locking time, finding your former targets on the overview ...
How about the jam only would prevent you to activate a targetted module (and send drones) but NOT drop the locks so if a jam cycle fails you are 100% effective right away ?
I pod ... nano |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 12:41:00 -
[84]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 12/01/2008 12:44:22
Originally by: Spartan dax Compare range eh? Kitsune has a locking range of 52 km, Keres 48. Their Ewar works for all intents and purposes within their optimal at these ranges. You could argue the effect of the Keres dampeners is subpar but there's nothing wrong with the range.
And a Kitsune holding down two BS's permanently? Why don't you do some math first and come back with the probability of not missing a jam in say 5 cycles?
Use the following ships
2x Megas 2x Megas with eccm
1x Mega 1x Raven 1x Mega 1x Raven both with ECCM
What are the chances of keeping these ships jammed for 5 cycles straight? Use any 4 slot jamming combo you like.
Uhm its not like you need to perma jam a BS to make it useless during the time your team is decimating the other...Yeah the caldari EAF has a huge impact alone even on BS sized enemies.
If each side of a 10vs10 engagement would be allowed to bring 1 EAF as support what moron wouldnt pick the caldari one? The minmatar one doesnt suck, sure. Its good at holding people down for gank before they reach gates etc, killing nanos...Gallente one is so-so because of damps and amarr one doesnt even completely shut down ONE battleship at a reasonable range in comparison.
Nerf ecm or boost eccm by large amounts. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
MalVortex
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 12:51:00 -
[85]
For a game based on Internet spaceships, you'd think there would be more rational posters.
They're not overpowered. The math proves their not overpowered. If you fail to understand some basic statistics, thats your problem, and I refuse to make it my own.
/thread.
|
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 13:09:00 -
[86]
it's not ECM, it's ECCM that needs to be changed. ECM as it is is ok.
damps are not that good anymore, specially on a keres with it's pityfull lock range.
hyena is good for anti-nano work, that is true.
and the TD problem is two-fold actually: was hit very hard by the Ewar nerf, and the range it has is totally useless vs snipers, wich is where it should shine.
ARM scripts, while there is potential on them, have nerfed lots of things, and even ships. ---
planetary interaction idea! |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 13:25:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Grimpak it's not ECM, it's ECCM that needs to be changed. ECM as it is is ok.
damps are not that good anymore, specially on a keres with it's pityfull lock range.
hyena is good for anti-nano work, that is true.
and the TD problem is two-fold actually: was hit very hard by the Ewar nerf, and the range it has is totally useless vs snipers, wich is where it should shine.
ARM scripts, while there is potential on them, have nerfed lots of things, and even ships.
This sums it up imo. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 15:20:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
Ah, ok. I totally misunderstood. I thought you were trying to add something to the thread.
If all you're doing is just trolling then, excellent job. 10/10.
To be honest, you arn't going to keep "3 recons and 2 BS" out of a fight if they are all using ECCM. Unless of course, you have an all officer fitting. Then maybe, you'll have a small chance. You might jam a few of them each cycle, but not often enough to "totally remove them", and certainly not a 80-90% chance to jam each of them.
If I'm wrong, I'd love to see some math to prove it though. Lock times included.
Who said anything about using ECCM? I said I kept 3x recons and 2x BS out of the fight, but never said they used ECCM. You're getting your posts mixed up.
And any single ship that can remove an entire well equipped gang from a fight *all by itself* is overpowered. Even before the damp nerf, no damp ship in the game could do that. One ship for sure, maybe two, but certainly not three or more.
I can't stand ECM. The fights consist of everyone sitting around jammed. On both sides. It's boring and stupid when ECM is the primary battle and DPS and tanks are the secondary battle.
But until ECM are balanced I'll be making sure I have at least twice as much as my enemy. Trinity is the age of ECM ships after all the ECM buffs.
Case and point. This thread is about the effectiveness of the ECCM module, but you are using examples where the targets are not using the module. Stick to the op.
If they had been, you would barely keep 2 of them out of the fight with luck.
|
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 15:57:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 12/01/2008 05:06:03
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
And when you add the counter to each recon and BS, you have a better chance at winning 5 lotterys in a row then jamming all 5 of them "permanetly".
All you need to do to "shut down" a ship and render them 100% combat ineffective is keep them jammed long enough that they can't relock you and engage you.
You don't need to literally have them jammed forever, consecutively. 80-90% of the time is perfectly acceptable. I'm sure you know this of course, but you're just being a pedant just to be a jerk.
It's why I post
Ah, ok. I totally misunderstood. I thought you were trying to add something to the thread.
If all you're doing is just trolling then, excellent job. 10/10.
To be honest, you arn't going to keep "3 recons and 2 BS" out of a fight if they are all using ECCM. Unless of course, you have an all officer fitting. Then maybe, you'll have a small chance. You might jam a few of them each cycle, but not often enough to "totally remove them", and certainly not a 80-90% chance to jam each of them.
If I'm wrong, I'd love to see some math to prove it though. Lock times included.
Who said anything about using ECCM? I said I kept 3x recons and 2x BS out of the fight, but never said they used ECCM. You're getting your posts mixed up.
And any single ship that can remove an entire well equipped gang from a fight *all by itself* is overpowered. Even before the damp nerf, no damp ship in the game could do that. One ship for sure, maybe two, but certainly not three or more.
I can't stand ECM. The fights consist of everyone sitting around jammed. On both sides. It's boring and stupid when ECM is the primary battle and DPS and tanks are the secondary battle.
But until ECM are balanced I'll be making sure I have at least twice as much as my enemy. Trinity is the age of ECM ships after all the ECM buffs.
Case and point. This thread is about the effectiveness of the ECCM module, but you are using examples where the targets are not using the module. Stick to the op.
If they had been, you would barely keep 2 of them out of the fight with luck.
ECCM will drop the ammount of ships you can jam, with a specialized ship, from 2-4 to 2-3.
ECCM works, but not as well as you may think, unless you're trying to jam a carrier with 2 ECCM's.
the problem however is that setups that allow ECCM are rare. Shield tankers need the medslots. fitting a ECCM gives no advantage bar the increase of the sides of the dice vs, let's say a sensor booster (even in it's nerfed state), or even a shield extender or another hardener, and the low-slot ECCM is not worth it.
armor tankers rarely have anything above 4 medslots, and you will need all thos slots to fit a mwd, scram, web and injector.
exception here is probably the hyperion, but even with an overloaded ECCM, giving a total of 51pts str to the ship's sensors, you are still very vulnerable to ECM. ---
planetary interaction idea! |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2008.01.12 17:13:00 -
[90]
The level of ignorance of ECM and ECCM in this thread is staggering.
It's obvious most here don't understand the basic mathematics behind probability, and most don't use ECM (or ECCM) on a regular basis. Probability is NOT an additive function. If you don't understand why, STOP making idiotic guesses about the capabilities of ECM....because you're probably wrong.
For the rest of you, pick a *realistic* setup, put that setup in a typical encounter, and crunch the numbers.
In the most simplistic terms:
A single ECCM mod will essentially double your sensor strength. This effectively cuts the chance of being jammed by 50%. You have doubled the chance of the ECM pilot missing a jam.
The significance of this should be obvious. However, if you still feel ECCM is worthless, that's fine by me....I'll just keep jamming the crap out of your ships.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |