EVE Search - ECCM

All Channels

Ships and Modules

ECCM

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ambrosious Martin Son of Man	Posted - 2008.05.10 03:17:00 - [1] Does it even work anymore... just lost a ruppy to a 1v1 with another ruppy and both of us were using ecm drones... his were getting great jams... but heres the thing I had a ladar sensor backup II on mine and his ecms were still getting lots of jams.. what should I do... not equip eccm anymore? or only the midslot eccm or are they junk too? hit this back! flames welcome
AKULA UrQuan Caldari Druuge Crimson Corporation	Posted - 2008.05.10 03:26:00 - [2] Backup array does jackall for a mimatar/amarr cruisers most of the time.
GateScout	Posted - 2008.05.10 03:38:00 - [3] An active ECCM will almost double your sensor strength. It will make you twice as hard to jam...or, looking at it another way, you will be jammed 50% less. Yes. They work. It's all about the maths!
Lobster Man Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.05.10 03:51:00 - [4] Edited by: Lobster Man on 10/05/2008 03:51:05 Meh...I am inclined to disagree... I've been permajammed by a falcon in my thanatos when I was packing a t2 magnetometric ECCM.
Triksterism Gallente Image Not Found	Posted - 2008.05.10 04:10:00 - [5] Pack a t2 ECCM and overload that *****. It can take a lot of overheat punishment and woo does it work.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.05.10 04:21:00 - [6] Originally by: Lobster Man Edited by: Lobster Man on 10/05/2008 03:51:05 Meh...I am inclined to disagree... I've been permajammed by a falcon in my thanatos when I was packing a t2 magnetometric ECCM. A chance based module got lucky! Nerf nerf nerf!
The Tzar Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2008.05.12 13:13:00 - [7] Originally by: Lobster Man Edited by: Lobster Man on 10/05/2008 03:51:05 Meh...I am inclined to disagree... I've been permajammed by a falcon in my thanatos when I was packing a t2 magnetometric ECCM. This of course is possible. Maybe the falcon pilot was fully fit with gallente jammers and overloaded? Over 15 jam strength x 7 jammers, yes thats carrier country baby! With the extra 20% strength this gives to jammers even an ECCM'd carrier could be permajammed with decent probability. __________________________________________ 'Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear intelligent until they speak' __________________________________________
Rethor Badus Gallente Eye Of Horus	Posted - 2008.05.12 13:18:00 - [8] Actually, a short question, Whats the chance of a shipw with 170 strengh gettting jammed by a falcon with max skills using a racial? (i have an anti-falcon setup that needs tweaking)
Jin Entres Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:08:00 - [9] Originally by: Rethor Badus Actually, a short question, Whats the chance of a shipw with 170 strengh gettting jammed by a falcon with max skills using a racial? (i have an anti-falcon setup that needs tweaking) 14.67758 / 170 * 100% = 8.63% chance For an average BS with one active ECCM and say 49 sensor strength as a result, the chance would be 29.95%. ----------------------
Rethor Badus Gallente Eye Of Horus	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:15:00 - [10] Originally by: Jin Entres Originally by: Rethor Badus Actually, a short question, Whats the chance of a shipw with 170 strengh gettting jammed by a falcon with max skills using a racial? (i have an anti-falcon setup that needs tweaking) 14.67758 / 170 * 100% = 8.63% chance For an average BS with one active ECCM and say 49 sensor strength as a result, the chance would be 29.95%. Cheers bud, I have a nice Rokh fitting with max damage 170 sensor strengh & multiple warp in points to really ruin any falcons day (250km fighting range 4tw) Most falcon ppl operate @ around 150 (high STR) or 200 (range rigs)
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:16:00 - [11] Originally by: Lobster Man Edited by: Lobster Man on 10/05/2008 03:51:05 Meh...I am inclined to disagree... I've been permajammed by a falcon in my thanatos when I was packing a t2 magnetometric ECCM. I hate the word permajammed because it's a word that conveys lies and falsehoods. While a Falcon is indeed the most fearsome ECM opponent thanks to it's ability to move cloaked and it's incredibly high jam strength, even a very skilled falcon pilot will only sc*****out about 14 - 16 jam strength out of a jammer. The word permajammed implies that your ship is forever and irrevocably jammed - such a feat is impossible to achieve against a cruiser in a falcon. You can achieve a high enough jam strength and slap on enough jammers that the target's odds of NOT being jammed are less than 1% but this still indicates the ship was not permenantly jammed. More importantly the Thanatos achieves a sensor strenght of WELL above 140 when using ECCM. The falcon, even when using all skills at level 5, 3 signal distortion amps and a rig for ECM strength (which is a lol fitting that would not often be encountered thanks to stacking issues) achieves a jam strength of 14.7. This gives the falcon pilot roughly a 10% chance per jammer to achieve a jam (versus 20% chance per jammer). At the end of the day, a falcon who has dedicated EVERY jammer on his ship specifically towards jamming your carrier (and had the foresight to fit a full rack of gallenete jammers) will have a 47% cumulative chance of achieving a jam. Without the ECCM the same falcon pilot will have roughly an 80% chance of achieving a jam. But even more importantly, a falcon that is carrying a full rack of 7 gallente racial jammers probably did so with the specific intention of countering your carrier. In any sort of fight a carrier shows up for it seems fairly reasonable that you would have friends to swat away the completely untanked cruiser but at this point I'm just nit-picking.
Rethor Badus Gallente Eye Of Horus	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:17:00 - [12] Ohh and my own falcon to operate 100km behind my sniper (ergo out of range of there falcons & in range to jamm any tacklers) Takes some planning, but it isnt that diffiucult to be falcon immune.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:24:00 - [13] Originally by: Rethor Badus Ohh and my own falcon to operate 100km behind my sniper (ergo out of range of there falcons & in range to jamm any tacklers) Takes some planning, but it isnt that diffiucult to be falcon immune. People often assume that every ECM pilot in the game will always take a falcon into battle. If there's a reasonable chance of their being more targets than I can jam I don't bring a falcon, I'll bring a scorpion (if I think that there's much chance of survival) or a blackbird (if I think it's a deathtrap). My falcon is more than 100 million uninsured isk - I didn't train Eve Grinding skills to V like everyone else AND I detest doing it so I prefer to keep my isk sink as safe as it can be. While the falcon is slightly more immune to hate and discontent that my trusty blackbird, a volley or two from even the Rokh (which has laughable alpha) is all the motivation I need to run away from a fight. Hell I think that an Apoc using tachys could almost instantly WTFBBQ my falcon. Falcon's are dangerous in small gang situations. As battles get larger it becomes increasingly less useful, much the same as other ships (Nano HACS as an example)
Rethor Badus Gallente Eye Of Horus	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:32:00 - [14] Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: Rethor Badus Ohh and my own falcon to operate 100km behind my sniper (ergo out of range of there falcons & in range to jamm any tacklers) Takes some planning, but it isnt that diffiucult to be falcon immune. People often assume that every ECM pilot in the game will always take a falcon into battle. If there's a reasonable chance of their being more targets than I can jam I don't bring a falcon, I'll bring a scorpion (if I think that there's much chance of survival) or a blackbird (if I think it's a deathtrap). My falcon is more than 100 million uninsured isk - I didn't train Eve Grinding skills to V like everyone else AND I detest doing it so I prefer to keep my isk sink as safe as it can be. While the falcon is slightly more immune to hate and discontent that my trusty blackbird, a volley or two from even the Rokh (which has laughable alpha) is all the motivation I need to run away from a fight. Hell I think that an Apoc using tachys could almost instantly WTFBBQ my falcon. Falcon's are dangerous in small gang situations. As battles get larger it becomes increasingly less useful, much the same as other ships (Nano HACS as an example) Very true, but the main use of the falcon is its range i find, not to mention the ability to cloak then warp back to another postion cloaked. But i agree in large fleet sniper fights its like paper and dies horribly, but most happen between 150-180km due to the ranges & the tracking computer nerf. In mid scale fights the scorpian is just one big fat primary that will be in the range of any sniper ship, but the falcon wil only be in the range of the heavy duty long range snipers (ergo easy jamming targets). In smaller gangs or lowsec everybody and there dog is shortranged, making falcons insanly powerfull and something i have to fight/counter every single damm day in 3/4 at a time lol. My main purpose is to be in the falcons falloff, and be able to get off a couple of vollys and cause them to constantly warp out.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 14:52:00 - [15] Originally by: Rethor Badus Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: Rethor Badus Ohh and my own falcon to operate 100km behind my sniper (ergo out of range of there falcons & in range to jamm any tacklers) Takes some planning, but it isnt that diffiucult to be falcon immune. People often assume that every ECM pilot in the game will always take a falcon into battle. If there's a reasonable chance of their being more targets than I can jam I don't bring a falcon, I'll bring a scorpion (if I think that there's much chance of survival) or a blackbird (if I think it's a deathtrap). My falcon is more than 100 million uninsured isk - I didn't train Eve Grinding skills to V like everyone else AND I detest doing it so I prefer to keep my isk sink as safe as it can be. While the falcon is slightly more immune to hate and discontent that my trusty blackbird, a volley or two from even the Rokh (which has laughable alpha) is all the motivation I need to run away from a fight. Hell I think that an Apoc using tachys could almost instantly WTFBBQ my falcon. Falcon's are dangerous in small gang situations. As battles get larger it becomes increasingly less useful, much the same as other ships (Nano HACS as an example) Very true, but the main use of the falcon is its range i find, not to mention the ability to cloak then warp back to another postion cloaked. But i agree in large fleet sniper fights its like paper and dies horribly, but most happen between 150-180km due to the ranges & the tracking computer nerf. In mid scale fights the scorpian is just one big fat primary that will be in the range of any sniper ship, but the falcon wil only be in the range of the heavy duty long range snipers (ergo easy jamming targets). In smaller gangs or lowsec everybody and there dog is shortranged, making falcons insanly powerfull and something i have to fight/counter every single damm day in 3/4 at a time lol. My main purpose is to be in the falcons falloff, and be able to get off a couple of vollys and cause them to constantly warp out. You ARE aware that the Scorp has just as long of a reach as the Falcon correct? The key difference between the two is that the Falcon has a much higer scan resolution (making it easier to get early locks) and a better jam strength bonus (20% versus 15%). The scorp on the other hand gets a fairly reasonable HP buffer, an extra jammer and at least enough firepower and utility high slots to disuade tackling.
Hobo silent	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:09:00 - [16] Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:53 Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:25 It hardly conveys lies, people know that you cant completely jam someone every cycle 100% of the time, its a given. Its hardly misleading or full of lies, for all intensive purposes it does perma jam someone, preying on semantics doesnt make you smart. Edit: Sweet double post. Arent I cool.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:17:00 - [17] Originally by: Hobo silent Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:53 Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:25 It hardly conveys lies, people know that you cant completely jam someone every cycle 100% of the time, its a given. Its hardly misleading or full of lies, for all intensive purposes it does perma jam someone, preying on semantics doesnt make you smart. Edit: Sweet double post. Arent I cool. Hardly conveys lies? Permajam - short I ASSUME for permanently jammed. Permanently - adj 1. existing perpetually; everlasting, esp. without significant change. Now, in a completely literal interpretation of this word it means you ship will NEVER miss a jam cycle - a feat that's impossible to achieve unless you're jamming frigates. Unless you can exceed a target's sensor strength with your jammer strength your chance to jam only approaches 100% it will never achieve it. But in a more game friendly definition, a permajam means that the jam lasted the entire length of the battle. Against a battleship being ganked such a situation is not hard to fathom. Against a CARRIER with a sensor strength of 149 I find it INCREDIBLY difficult to believe that it was jammed for an ENTIRE battle by a single falcon. You are however right - in this scenario the Thanatos may have indeed been jammed for an entire battle, but with only 50% cumulative chance to jam the battle would have been awfully short indeed which means the level of firepower being directed at the carrier was so incredibly overpowering that the presence of a falcon was akin to kicking the guy in the shins before pulling the lever on the electric chair.
Hobo silent	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:23:00 - [18] Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: Hobo silent Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:53 Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:25 It hardly conveys lies, people know that you cant completely jam someone every cycle 100% of the time, its a given. Its hardly misleading or full of lies, for all intensive purposes it does perma jam someone, preying on semantics doesnt make you smart. Edit: Sweet double post. Arent I cool. Hardly conveys lies? Permajam - short I ASSUME for permanently jammed. Permanently - adj 1. existing perpetually; everlasting, esp. without significant change. Now, in a completely literal interpretation of this word it means you ship will NEVER miss a jam cycle - a feat that's impossible to achieve unless you're jamming frigates. Unless you can exceed a target's sensor strength with your jammer strength your chance to jam only approaches 100% it will never achieve it. But in a more game friendly definition, a permajam means that the jam lasted the entire length of the battle. Against a battleship being ganked such a situation is not hard to fathom. Against a CARRIER with a sensor strength of 149 I find it INCREDIBLY difficult to believe that it was jammed for an ENTIRE battle by a single falcon. You are however right - in this scenario the Thanatos may have indeed been jammed for an entire battle, but with only 50% cumulative chance to jam the battle would have been awfully short indeed which means the level of firepower being directed at the carrier was so incredibly overpowering that the presence of a falcon was akin to kicking the guy in the shins before pulling the lever on the electric chair. It seems pretty clear to mean to not litterally interprute every piece slang and lingo when the community as a whole knows what they are exactly saying. Perhaps we should make people say they can Almost but not quite perma jam so no one jumps on their back and accuses them of being misleading =p
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:41:00 - [19] Edited by: Derek Sigres on 12/05/2008 15:44:36 Originally by: Hobo silent Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: Hobo silent Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:53 Edited by: Hobo silent on 12/05/2008 15:09:25 It hardly conveys lies, people know that you cant completely jam someone every cycle 100% of the time, its a given. Its hardly misleading or full of lies, for all intensive purposes it does perma jam someone, preying on semantics doesnt make you smart. Edit: Sweet double post. Arent I cool. Hardly conveys lies? Permajam - short I ASSUME for permanently jammed. Permanently - adj 1. existing perpetually; everlasting, esp. without significant change. Now, in a completely literal interpretation of this word it means you ship will NEVER miss a jam cycle - a feat that's impossible to achieve unless you're jamming frigates. Unless you can exceed a target's sensor strength with your jammer strength your chance to jam only approaches 100% it will never achieve it. But in a more game friendly definition, a permajam means that the jam lasted the entire length of the battle. Against a battleship being ganked such a situation is not hard to fathom. Against a CARRIER with a sensor strength of 149 I find it INCREDIBLY difficult to believe that it was jammed for an ENTIRE battle by a single falcon. You are however right - in this scenario the Thanatos may have indeed been jammed for an entire battle, but with only 50% cumulative chance to jam the battle would have been awfully short indeed which means the level of firepower being directed at the carrier was so incredibly overpowering that the presence of a falcon was akin to kicking the guy in the shins before pulling the lever on the electric chair. It seems pretty clear to mean to not litterally interprute every piece slang and lingo when the community as a whole knows what they are exactly saying. Perhaps we should make people say they can Almost but not quite perma jam so no one jumps on their back and accuses them of being misleading =p 50% chance to jam on an unrealistic setup is not even approaching permenant. To state that a capital ship fitted with ECCM is permenantly jammed by a single ship is a blatant falsehood that only approaches truth. My point here is simple: the scenario I responded to (ECCM'd Thanatos being permenantly jammed) is unreasonable. Even if the falcon pilot had level 5 skills, even if he fit a full rack of gallente spec jammers, even if he filled every other slot with signal distortion amps and whatnot the falcon pilot achieves a 47% chance to jam. That means the carrier is going to spend MORE than half it's time in the fight not being jammed against even the most unreasonable ECM scenario you can think of - i.e. a falcon purpose built to jam your carrier. To carry this point on even further, the carrier also had the option of carrying a Triage Module - which makes it EWAR immune and thus still able to help gangmates with remote reps. In short, if this thanatos actually spent the duration of a fight jammed then the fight was clearly so incredibly one sided that the presence of a falcon was meaningless.
Anubis Xian Reavers	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:44:00 - [20] If there was no lock times, jamming wouldn't be so overpowered compared to other EW. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal. I'm the Juggernaut, *****!
Loki Farseer	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:45:00 - [21] PermaJam (Eve Definition) 1. To be completely ****ed and not fire another shot after you are jammed the 1st time by a (insert your fav,or least fav, ecm ship). Example: Pew, pew, pew.. Jammed....Jammed...Jammed....Ship is Out of Contol...Pop... sigh - This is pretty easy to achieve on any BS size ship and down for any competent (insert ecm ship) pilot... not terribly tough to do to 2 targets of BS size or smaller for that matter. Math is cute and all but in almost any small/med (6-12 sips)sized fight if you are jammed for more then 4-6 cycles you are PERMAjammed for this example and useless/popped. Hide behind semantics all you want. Doesn't need a nerf or any crap like that, you just have to be smart about fighting against them.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:48:00 - [22] Originally by: Anubis Xian If there was no lock times, jamming wouldn't be so overpowered compared to other EW. I would agree with this. Just as importnat is the fact that other forms of EWAR are incredibly short ranged in comparison. If a damp reached as far as ECM for example, it would be the ultimate ECM countermeasure. I personally think a lot of the EWAR should be retooled however. ECCM is statistically fantastically useful yet most ships leave the module behind because it's only useful against one type of ship. Liang pointed out that if the ECCM was rolled into a sensor booster script all would be well - I'm inclined to agree.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.