EVE Search - [issue] ECM/ECCM unbalanced

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[issue] ECM/ECCM unbalanced

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Felix Dzerzhinsky Caldari Wreckless Abandon G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.09.29 14:22:00 - [31] I think ECCM should be ECM counter-measures, not defense. If you fail a cycle, there should be some kind of penalty like being jammed back forr 20 secs, or losing cap regen, or being auto scramed for a duration and so on.
Dierdra Vaal Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.09.29 14:42:00 - [32] As was pointed out before, while a 50% chance on a target with a dual ECCM seems like a very powerful amount, the falcon pilot can only achieve this by using ALL seven of his jammers on the ECCM'ing target. And if that falcon is jamming only 1 target, his buddies are probably busy shooting the crap out of the falcon (especially because it didnt fit a sensor booster or range rigs and is probably less than 120km from his target). And when a falcon is being shot, it doesnt survive for long :( No support, falcons are fine. Training Director :: EVE University CSM Representative
Smertrios Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.09.29 15:57:00 - [33] I think we need to be careful here about what the problem is. The problem is not a falcon or other Jamming ship being able to perma jam pretty much any single target. That's fine in my opinion, if you put the training in then they should be very effective at jamming any ship. The issue is that if you choose to try to counter the Jamming by fitting one or more ECCM it is very ineffective. Even by sacrificing 3 mids for ECCM on a BS you can still be easily perma jammed by a single Jamming boat(have a look at recent Cown movies for proof!) I think if you sacrifice so many slots to defend against a single form of EW then it should be much more effective than it currently is. My problem with Jamming is that no matter what you try, there is no real effective counter. Its becoming the norm to see multiple falcons in any gang for this exact reason and as a result its becoming over powered. A drastic increase in ECCM effectiveness is needed to give us a way to fight back.
Akiba Penrose The Movement	Posted - 2008.09.29 21:36:00 - [34]
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.09.30 14:46:00 - [35] Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Not a huge difference between a 6 or 7 jammer Falcon so I don't know why people are getting their knickers in a knot over this. Still being jammed 46.3% of the time with two ECCM mods.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.09.30 15:42:00 - [36] Originally by: Amarr Holymight Not a huge difference between a 6 or 7 jammer Falcon so I don't know why people are getting their knickers in a knot over this. Still being jammed 46.3% of the time with two ECCM mods. Except that you upgraded to 2 racial jammers from the 1 you had before. Although your last fit also had 1 correct racial jammer on the Falcon and two pointed at the Dominix, so it could use a bit of work there too. Here's the whole list of numbers with 2x SDA and 2x PDA, just for completeness: 5 jams(1 of each racial, 1 multi): 39% 5 jams(1 correct racial, 4 incorrect): 35% 5 jams(2 correct racial, 3 incorrect): 43% 6 jams(1 of each racial, 2 multi): 46.1% 6 jams(1 correct racial, 5 incorrect): 38.8% 6 jams(2 correct racial, 4 incorrect): 46.3% 7 jams(1 of each racial, 3 multi): 52.3% 7 jams(1 correct racial, 6 incorrect): 42.3% 7 jams(2 correct racial, 5 incorrect): 49.4% Realistically, the top one is the most likely to be used, for a total of 39% jam. Anything above 46.3% - and that implies luck - means you're facing a pretty bad Falcon pilot. Now how is this a bad thing? You're spending two slots on a countermeasure to a whole ship as expensive and skill-intensive as your own, and with full exertion it can deal with you almost half the time, instead of keeping two or three ships down most of the time like it normally can. That seems like a countermeasure just as effective as I want it to be.
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.03 03:01:00 - [37] I suppose warping while cloaked and jamming at 200km isn't enough for ya, also you dont want anything to be able to counter your precious little ship effectively.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.10.03 05:42:00 - [38] Originally by: Amarr Holymight I suppose warping while cloaked and jamming at 200km isn't enough for ya, also you dont want anything to be able to counter your precious little ship effectively. I can't even fly a Blackbird effectively, never mind a Falcon. I just happen to think that ECCM is fine - you use two slots, and turn the Falcon from jamming 2 ships to jamming 2/3 of a ship. Assuming he doesn't clue in and splits his jammers, you're essentially in the clear, and you can always overheat if you're having real trouble. Now find me two slots that will counter a HAC to that level of effectiveness. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Tharim Villains	Posted - 2008.10.03 12:47:00 - [39] Again, its not the fact that Falcons can permajam 3 bs's or that eccm doesnt work or anything like that. The problem is that the Falcon can operate at silly distances. You can deal with a Rapier, Curse, arazu and all the other recons without having to field a ship specifically fitted to counter them. You cant do that with a Falcon. Mostly because its too far away. I suggest that the Falcons max operating range is put in line with the other recons. The ship should lose its jamming capability at 40km. You know it makes sense :P
fuze Gallente Chosen Path Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.10.03 12:53:00 - [40] Yesterday I fiddled with an Oneiros setup and racial jammers. Even with PDA/SDA you could get half the jamming ability of a Falcon. Its quite apparent that falcons always should be primaried.
Dex Nederland Caldari Lai Dai Infinity Systems	Posted - 2008.10.03 13:57:00 - [41] Originally by: Tharim Again, its not the fact that Falcons can permajam 3 bs's or that eccm doesnt work or anything like that. The problem is that the Falcon can operate at silly distances. You can deal with a Rapier, Curse, arazu and all the other recons without having to field a ship specifically fitted to counter them. You cant do that with a Falcon. Mostly because its too far away. I suggest that the Falcons max operating range is put in line with the other recons. The ship should lose its jamming capability at 40km. You know it makes sense :P WTF? You do realize that every T2 Caldari cruiser is very capable of operating at 50 km - 100+ km (including the Basilisk!); 3 out of 4 of the Caldari T1 Cruisers have similar operating ranges, the Osprey being the only one not able to do so in its 'combat' role? No; the Falcon (& Rook) are very different from the other Recons, do not have the punch or close range tools of other recons. Can I agree to modifying the Falcons bonuses again? Yes. Where you are seeing a Falcon I think a Rook is the intended ship for it. Originally by: fuze Yesterday I fiddled with an Oneiros setup and racial jammers. Even with PDA/SDA you could get half the jamming ability of a Falcon. Its quite apparent that falcons always should be primaried. Duh - The Falcon (Blackbird & Rook) are designed to use jammers. The Oneiros is designed to use Remote Armor Repairers & Targeting Links. You are going to get less jamming ability of a Griffin. Founder Heiian Society
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.10.03 14:11:00 - [42] Originally by: Amarr Holymight Not a huge difference between a 6 or 7 jammer Falcon so I don't know why people are getting their knickers in a knot over this. Still being jammed 46.3% of the time with two ECCM mods. Still don't see why this is a problem for you. It takes a whole enemy ship - specifically fitted to target you - to reduce you to >50% effectiveness (discounting drones). Sounds like those ECCMs are working pretty damb well to me. I'd be tearing my hear out if I was that Falcon pilot and only getting 1 jam every other cycle on you. Talk about frustrating.
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.04 22:57:00 - [43] The problem isn't with the Falcon the ship itself we have all agreed on that I even changed the op to mirror this. The problem is a Falcon has absolutely no way of being countered succesfully unless you fit three ECCMS in which case you won't have room for anything else useful or use another Falcon. So I'm suggesting ECCM be given a boost or maybe a leadership bonus that improves the sensor strength of all ships without having to use a command ship.
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.30 11:14:00 - [44] Quote from Zulupark's Q&A session. Falcon - ECM: Yeah, afaik Nozh is looking at range bonuses on Caldari ships and he wants to improve ECCM.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.30 12:28:00 - [45] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto One Falcon, with all-V skills, faction jammers, 3x SDA II, and a T2 jam strength rig, gets 65.3% jam chance against a Hyperion, and an 86.4% jam chance against even a Kronos, assuming both have 2 overheated ECCM. Assuming you mean T1 battleships, and your guess of 2 minutes is accurate, you just wound up on the wrong side of a 0.8% chance - it happens, about 1 time in 130. If you mean to suggest that this is the case reliably, I might suggest that you fit the correct kind of ECCM in future. Is this a falcon with a psychic pilot who, having received advice from Obi-Wan, has fitted 6 Faction magentometric jammers, or is this a falcon with a normal pilot who has fitted 1 of each kind? PS Who the hell uses faction jammers?
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.30 12:29:00 - [46] Originally by: Amarr Holymight The problem isn't with the Falcon the ship itself we have all agreed on that I even changed the op to mirror this. The problem is a Falcon has absolutely no way of being countered succesfully unless you fit three ECCMS in which case you won't have room for anything else useful or use another Falcon. So I'm suggesting ECCM be given a boost or maybe a leadership bonus that improves the sensor strength of all ships without having to use a command ship. Remote ECCM. 1/3 more effective than local ECCM, and you can mount 1-2 of them on a drake that will otherwise be ignored.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.30 12:32:00 - [47] Originally by: Tharim Again, its not the fact that Falcons can permajam 3 bs's or that eccm doesnt work or anything like that. The problem is that the Falcon can operate at silly distances. You can deal with a Rapier, Curse, arazu and all the other recons without having to field a ship specifically fitted to counter them. You cant do that with a Falcon. Mostly because its too far away. I suggest that the Falcons max operating range is put in line with the other recons. The ship should lose its jamming capability at 40km. You know it makes sense :P That's fine... as long as the Falcon and rook get speed, tank, drone bays and a nifty second ability like the other recons get to match their short range EW. PS None of the other race's EW is as short-ranged as 40Km. T2 Tracking Disruptors have a 72Km optinal with skills. With rigs, you can take that past 100Km.
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.31 01:30:00 - [48] In empire wars it's quite easy to spot a target and refit accordingly though I would not use it to strengthen the argument. Hence why I fitted out a ship with two specific and the rest general miscellaneous. Remote ECCM doesn't really work very well when your solo and this is the problem for me Falcons et al are making solo PvP boring. Falcons actually stop people from engaging and combat never happens and thus causing the game to get stale as much as speed.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.31 06:36:00 - [49] Originally by: Amarr Holymight In empire wars it's quite easy to spot a target and refit accordingly though I would not use it to strengthen the argument. Hence why I fitted out a ship with two specific and the rest general miscellaneous. Remote ECCM doesn't really work very well when your solo and this is the problem for me Falcons et al are making solo PvP boring. Falcons actually stop people from engaging and combat never happens and thus causing the game to get stale as much as speed. 2 ships > 1 ship so nerf Falcons...? The kind of people that Falcons "stop from engaging" are the kind that would never give you the fights you're looking for anyway. There's no possible way that you can balance 2 ships vs 1 ship without utterly breaking at least 1 of them.
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.31 07:29:00 - [50] Firstly I don't know how you can compare ECM to TDs, ECM jams 2-4 ships out of a fight at 200km, TDs are lucky to take one, then RSDs are worthless unless used in conjunction with ECM. Secondly I see a lot of the time small gangs disengaging or not fighting because one side has a Falcon or more, pilots end up docking or warping off. If I got attacked by a gang with a falcon most times I will disengage or try escape, where if the Falcon wasn't there perhaps I would stand my ground and fight. Actually a lot of the times Falcons have actually saved me because I had nothing to do but try and escape, thing is this thread isn't about Falcon being overpowered it's about ECCM being underpowered.
Strill	Posted - 2008.10.31 07:43:00 - [51] There's no reason to support this. CCP is already working on doing something with ECCM.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.10.31 09:45:00 - [52] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto One Falcon, with all-V skills, faction jammers, 3x SDA II, and a T2 jam strength rig, gets 65.3% jam chance against a Hyperion, and an 86.4% jam chance against even a Kronos, assuming both have 2 overheated ECCM. Assuming you mean T1 battleships, and your guess of 2 minutes is accurate, you just wound up on the wrong side of a 0.8% chance - it happens, about 1 time in 130. If you mean to suggest that this is the case reliably, I might suggest that you fit the correct kind of ECCM in future. Is this a falcon with a psychic pilot who, having received advice from Obi-Wan, has fitted 6 Faction magentometric jammers, or is this a falcon with a normal pilot who has fitted 1 of each kind? PS Who the hell uses faction jammers? I was trying to say that even a psychic with way too much money can't get as obscene as you might think. I don't think I expressed that sentiment particularly well, though .
Major Death Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.10.31 10:36:00 - [53] Give ECCM and additional effect to make it usefull outside of just countering ECM. My original sig was 'Enjoy lag free play in a dynamic space MMORPG'. It was removed for lack of EVE content! ;) CCP say 'Shut up about bugs and eat your eye candy!'
Amarr Holymight Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.31 10:49:00 - [54] Originally by: Strill There's no reason to support this. CCP is already working on doing something with ECCM. Yeh I know I'm just gloating.
Postarita	Posted - 2008.11.03 15:18:00 - [55] ECCM works fine, they dont need a bost. For instance, like 1 week ago we engage, and I was flying a domi with 2x magnetometric eccm tech II, and I had sensor strenght something like 79. We had 2 falcons, but larger numbers of gang members, enemy had 6 falcons. We won and I never been jammed even 1 falcon tried hardly for like 7-10 minutes. The only problem with ECCM is that is not suitable for ships that have limited mid slots or have shield tank.

Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.