EVE Search - ECCM Change

All Channels

Ships and Modules

ECCM Change

» 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)
Scathain Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.22 19:19:00 - [1] Edited by: Scathain on 22/08/2008 19:20:39 ECCM in its current form is broken, and with 15seconds of jam time people are getting annoyed at the strength of ECM. I have a proposed change that i think would make both sides happy. ECCM instead of a boost to sensor strength, while activated before a jam occurs takes away 3seconds of jam time. So if you had 3 ECCM modules on in fleet and you were ECMd instead of the 15second time before you can lock, it takes 6 seconds + your regular lock time. If you fit 5 ECCMs you just loose your lock. This still allows ECM to be a force multiplier, with out changing the way ECM currently works but boosts ECCM. Activation Cost 100 energy Cycle time 20.00 seconds Overload -4 second jam time These mods would have to be activated before you were jammed. =============================================== Oh Noes!!1!oNe
Tamoko Damage Unlimited Inc INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.08.22 19:21:00 - [2] 5 ECCMs? ROFL 7/10 Originally by: "Bellum Eternus" Is 'speed tank' code for 'completely invulnerable'?
Ralara Caldari Vivicide	Posted - 2008.08.22 19:21:00 - [3] Edited by: Ralara on 22/08/2008 19:23:26 ECM is 20 seconds... You do realise that for the Caldari ECM boats, the ECM IS their tank as well as offensive "weapon", right? Amarr, Gallente and Minmitar can both tank and use their EW at the same time (although sure, as recons and EAFs, the tank is minimal) - Caldari can't really do that. On top of that, each EW boat the Caldari have, has almost next to no DPS. You think the others have crappy damage? Caldari ones are worse. At least you can solo in all the others - Curse, Rapier, Arazu (just). Falcon? Unless you're fighting industrials, you just cannot effectively solo. And who'd want to ECM an industrial? --
Christina Bamar Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2008.08.22 19:23:00 - [4] I'd much much rather have ECCM in its current form compared to that idea.
Kulmid The Elear FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:26:00 - [5] ECCM is no where near broken in its current state, just for some reason no one uses it.
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:50:00 - [6] Edited by: Ignatious Mei on 22/08/2008 20:52:36 Edited by: Ignatious Mei on 22/08/2008 20:51:20 Originally by: Ralara Edited by: Ralara on 22/08/2008 19:23:26 ECM is 20 seconds... You do realise that for the Caldari ECM boats, the ECM IS their tank as well as offensive "weapon", right? Amarr, Gallente and Minmitar can both tank and use their EW at the same time (although sure, as recons and EAFs, the tank is minimal) - Caldari can't really do that. On top of that, each EW boat the Caldari have, has almost next to no DPS. You think the others have crappy damage? Caldari ones are worse. At least you can solo in all the others - Curse, Rapier, Arazu (just). Falcon? Unless you're fighting industrials, you just cannot effectively solo. And who'd want to ECM an industrial? ECM isn't the falcons tank, the fact that it can jam from 200k out is it's tank. And jam multiple ships from that distance as well. Using your argument that ECM is the falcons tank then that means the falcon (a cruiser class ship) can tank 4 BS's at one time. Sounds a bit overpowered. ECCM in it's current form sucks because it has no other uses. Sensor booster counters damps, faster lock time/longer targeting range is useful even if your not being damped. Tracking computer counters tracking disrupters, better tracking is useful even if your not being tracking disrupted. No one cares about countering target painting. ECCM is useful ONLY for countering ECM's. ECCM modules need to be removed and a script added for sensor booster's that takes the place of it.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:51:00 - [7] TBH, ECCM works just fine. The only change that I'd make is to move them (as is, no strength increase) into a script for the sensor booster. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:52:00 - [8] Originally by: Liang Nuren TBH, ECCM works just fine. The only change that I'd make is to move them (as is, no strength increase) into a script for the sensor booster. -Liang lol, I think you were writing this as I was editing my post.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:52:00 - [9] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 22/08/2008 20:53:19 Originally by: Ignatious Mei Using your argument that ECM is the falcons tank then that means a recon cruiser can tank 4 BS's at one time. Sounds a bit overpowered. Did you know that a Curse can easily tank 6 turret battleships? Sounds a bit overpowered to me. -Liang Ed: And tracking computers do not counter TD's. Well, for those unfortunate enough to be falloff bound, anyway. :) -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:53:00 - [10] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Ignatious Mei Using your argument that ECM is the falcons tank then that means a recon cruiser can tank 4 BS's at one time. Sounds a bit overpowered. Did you know that a Curse can easily tank 6 turret battleships? Sounds a bit overpowered to me. -Liang How can a curse tank 6 turreted BS's?
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:54:00 - [11] Originally by: Ignatious Mei How can a curse tank 6 turreted BS's? By fitting TD's like it's supposed to? Even one will completely shut down any turret BS. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.08.22 20:55:00 - [12] Just remove ECCM from the game nobody use those anyway.
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:00:00 - [13] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Ignatious Mei How can a curse tank 6 turreted BS's? By fitting TD's like it's supposed to? Even one will completely shut down any turret BS. -Liang A curse fitting 6 tracking disrupters would not be able to speed tank. That means it would get eaten alive by drones set to aggressive. A falcon on the other hand can sit at 200k tanking those BS's until they can close the distance. A 200k trip even with a MWD is going to take awhile. In addition, how often do you find 6 BS's without ANY missles. Warrior II's will also catch the majority of curses.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:02:00 - [14] Originally by: Ignatious Mei A curse fitting 6 tracking disrupters would not be able to speed tank. That means it would get eaten alive by drones set to aggressive. A falcon on the other hand can sit at 200k tanking those BS's until they can close the distance. A 200k trip even with a MWD is going to take awhile. In addition, how often do you find 6 BS's without ANY missles. Warrior II's will also catch the majority of curses. A curse shortly won't be able to speed tank anyway. Also, please bear in mind that the Falcon can't speed tank when fitting all of those ECM's either. It's also fairly trivial to have the curse sit further than 60km out. And as far as a BS with no missiles... well gee, a Falcon can be hit by FOF's... -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Malcanis We are Legend eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:22:00 - [15] For the 10th time: make ECCM a sensor booster script. When a T2 Sensor Booster can give +60% lock speed OR lock range OR sensor strength, there is not problem, right? If you want to specifically fit your ship vs ECM ships, fit a second SB rather than an ECCM; 1.6 x 1.5 = 2.4x normal sensor strength - very hard indeed to jam on a BC/BS or even a HAC, and you can have extra lock sped/range when ECMers aren't around. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:28:00 - [16] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Ignatious Mei A curse fitting 6 tracking disrupters would not be able to speed tank. That means it would get eaten alive by drones set to aggressive. A falcon on the other hand can sit at 200k tanking those BS's until they can close the distance. A 200k trip even with a MWD is going to take awhile. In addition, how often do you find 6 BS's without ANY missles. Warrior II's will also catch the majority of curses. A curse shortly won't be able to speed tank anyway. Also, please bear in mind that the Falcon can't speed tank when fitting all of those ECM's either. It's also fairly trivial to have the curse sit further than 60km out. And as far as a BS with no missiles... well gee, a Falcon can be hit by FOF's... -Liang Using FoF missiles requires that you are first within range of the falcon and that the FoF missiles actually go after the falcon as opposed to any other ship in the battle. You are correct that the falcon cant speed tank but it doesnt NEED to. As ECM proponents are so fond of saying the ECM is it's tank. My point is that if ECM is it's tank then being able to tank (jam) 4 BS's is overpowered. In addition, ECM is not its ONLY tank, range is it's tank as well. Range as the the tank on a sniper fit BS is fine because range is it's ONLY tank. Range as the tank on the falcon is overpowered because it is augmented (Quite effectively) by it's ECM.
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:29:00 - [17] Originally by: Malcanis For the 10th time: make ECCM a sensor booster script. When a T2 Sensor Booster can give +60% lock speed OR lock range OR sensor strength, there is not problem, right? If you want to specifically fit your ship vs ECM ships, fit a second SB rather than an ECCM; 1.6 x 1.5 = 2.4x normal sensor strength - very hard indeed to jam on a BC/BS or even a HAC, and you can have extra lock sped/range when ECMers aren't around. That is what a lot of us are advocating.
Moonbat Kain	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:36:00 - [18] i think most of you don't know how to use the word "tank" properly.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:38:00 - [19] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 22/08/2008 21:38:44 Originally by: Ignatious Mei Using FoF missiles requires that you are first within range of the falcon and that the FoF missiles actually go after the falcon as opposed to any other ship in the battle. You are correct that the falcon cant speed tank but it doesnt NEED to. As ECM proponents are so fond of saying the ECM is it's tank. My point is that if ECM is it's tank then being able to tank (jam) 4 BS's is overpowered. In addition, ECM is not its ONLY tank, range is it's tank as well. Range as the the tank on a sniper fit BS is fine because range is it's ONLY tank. Range as the tank on the falcon is overpowered because it is augmented (Quite effectively) by it's ECM. A falcon isn't going to be permanently removing ships from the fight like a sniper BS can... it doesn't have damage. ECM isn't only a falcon's tank.. but in a very real way also its weaponry. Thus: Sniper BS: Range/HP/DPS Tank Falcon: Range/ECM Tank Also, 1 falcon at 240km vs 4x 250km sniper battleships... do you really freaking honestly believe that the Falcon is going to survive this? Protip: it might make the warpout. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:40:00 - [20] Originally by: Moonbat Kain i think most of you don't know how to use the word "tank" properly. Tank as it applies to eve is anything that allows you to mitigate damage.
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:42:00 - [21] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 22/08/2008 21:38:44 Originally by: Ignatious Mei Using FoF missiles requires that you are first within range of the falcon and that the FoF missiles actually go after the falcon as opposed to any other ship in the battle. You are correct that the falcon cant speed tank but it doesnt NEED to. As ECM proponents are so fond of saying the ECM is it's tank. My point is that if ECM is it's tank then being able to tank (jam) 4 BS's is overpowered. In addition, ECM is not its ONLY tank, range is it's tank as well. Range as the the tank on a sniper fit BS is fine because range is it's ONLY tank. Range as the tank on the falcon is overpowered because it is augmented (Quite effectively) by it's ECM. A falcon isn't going to be permanently removing ships from the fight like a sniper BS can... it doesn't have damage. ECM isn't only a falcon's tank.. but in a very real way also its weaponry. Thus: Sniper BS: Range/HP/DPS Tank Falcon: Range/ECM Tank Also, 1 falcon at 240km vs 4x 250km sniper battleships... do you really freaking honestly believe that the Falcon is going to survive this? Protip: it might make the warpout. -Liang Your 100 percent correct, it probably wouldn't survive 4 250k snipers. I also shouldn't have to bring 4 250k snipers to deal with one ship.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:44:00 - [22] Originally by: Ignatious Mei Your 100 percent correct, it probably wouldn't survive 4 250k snipers. I also shouldn't have to bring 4 250k snipers to deal with one ship. Then stop saying that it can "tank" 4 battleships. It can't. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Ignatious Mei	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:48:00 - [23] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Ignatious Mei Your 100 percent correct, it probably wouldn't survive 4 250k snipers. I also shouldn't have to bring 4 250k snipers to deal with one ship. Then stop saying that it can "tank" 4 battleships. It can't. -Liang If you want to argue semantics to make your point, that's fine but you know what I am saying. I am arguing from a "What what happens in a everyday type of battle in eve" perspective. In a everyday battle in eve people don't fly around with 4 250k snipers in their gang. This is a internet forum, not a courtroom. Its like asking if you would rather kick a puppy or punch a kitten.
SonOf X51	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:52:00 - [24] Edited by: SonOf X51 on 22/08/2008 21:52:53 Originally by: Ignatious Mei If you want to argue semantics to make your point, that's fine but you know what I am saying. I am arguing from a "What what happens in a everyday type of battle in eve" perspective. In a everyday battle in eve people don't fly around with 4 250k snipers in their gang. This is a internet forum, not a courtroom. Its like asking if you would rather kick a puppy or punch a kitten. The kitten
Malcanis We are Legend eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:55:00 - [25] Originally by: Ignatious Mei Originally by: Malcanis For the 10th time: make ECCM a sensor booster script. When a T2 Sensor Booster can give +60% lock speed OR lock range OR sensor strength, there is not problem, right? If you want to specifically fit your ship vs ECM ships, fit a second SB rather than an ECCM; 1.6 x 1.5 = 2.4x normal sensor strength - very hard indeed to jam on a BC/BS or even a HAC, and you can have extra lock sped/range when ECMers aren't around. That is what a lot of us are advocating. OK cool, let's add in making sig distort amps work for damps/TD/TP and work up a CSM thread. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:58:00 - [26] Originally by: Ignatious Mei If you want to argue semantics to make your point, that's fine but you know what I am saying. I am arguing from a "What what happens in a everyday type of battle in eve" perspective. In a everyday battle in eve people don't fly around with 4 250k snipers in their gang. This is a internet forum, not a courtroom. Its like asking if you would rather kick a puppy or punch a kitten. I am not arguing semantics: The falcon cannot tank 4 battleships as cited earlier in this thread. It can't do it at range and it can't do it up close. Also, please remember that flying around with 4+ sniper battleships is an everyday event for large portions of the Eve PVP community. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Ralara Caldari Vivicide	Posted - 2008.08.22 21:58:00 - [27] Originally by: Ignatious Mei Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Ignatious Mei Your 100 percent correct, it probably wouldn't survive 4 250k snipers. I also shouldn't have to bring 4 250k snipers to deal with one ship. Then stop saying that it can "tank" 4 battleships. It can't. -Liang If you want to argue semantics to make your point, that's fine but you know what I am saying. I am arguing from a "What what happens in a everyday type of battle in eve" perspective. In a everyday battle in eve people don't fly around with 4 250k snipers in their gang. This is a internet forum, not a courtroom. Its like asking if you would rather kick a puppy or punch a kitten. The odds are that Each BS, (4 BS vs 1 Falcon) will be able to fire once every 3 cycles. 4 BS, 3 cycles - at any one time at least 1 BS will be firing. Pop goes the falcon. That' assuming the Falcon has nothing else in its mids and the BS have no ECCM at all. But that scenario doesn't happen. --
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.08.22 22:43:00 - [28] Originally by: Ignatious Mei Your 100 percent correct, it probably wouldn't survive 4 250k snipers. I also shouldn't have to bring 4 250k snipers to deal with one ship. It's called a fleet. You know, the other kind of pvp while your falcon pilot warps off in a pod, baffled at why his FC Borat can't learn to not pyramid-quote.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.22 23:41:00 - [29] Originally by: Ralara The odds are that Each BS, (4 BS vs 1 Falcon) will be able to fire once every 3 cycles. 4 BS, 3 cycles - at any one time at least 1 BS will be firing. Pop goes the falcon. That' assuming the Falcon has nothing else in its mids and the BS have no ECCM at all. But that scenario doesn't happen. It's also funny to note that if any two BS's are of the same race the Falcon is likely to instapop. Everyone always assumes that the Falcon has 5 Amarr racial jammers one second and 5 Caldari the next. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.23 00:05:00 - [30] Originally by: Lorz0r ECCM isn't good enough. Needs to be twice the strength. To quote your corp: You're Doing It Wrong. :) -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: 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.