EVE Search - [VOTE] Boost ECCM Modules

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[VOTE] Boost ECCM Modules

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Marlona Sky Caldari Astroglide X	Posted - 2008.10.16 06:01:00 - [1] When ECM ships got a boost, they forgot to boost ECCM modules to match the change. Now everywhere you go (especially in low sec) there is Falcons everywhere. It is simply not possible to roam in low sec in a small gang without brining your own Falcon to jam their falcon. This is just silly. ECCM modules should get a much needed boost.
Marlona Sky Astroglide X	Posted - 2008.10.16 06:02:00 - [2]
Raquel Trotter Trotters Independent Trading	Posted - 2008.10.16 10:25:00 - [3] But falcons are caldari... nerfing caldari is not allowed ok?
Malcanis RuffRyders	Posted - 2008.10.16 15:54:00 - [4] When did ECM ships get a boost? Was that about the same time as ECM got it's strength reduced 50%?
Tusko Hopkins	Posted - 2008.12.04 14:31:00 - [5] I support this... ECCM modules are kind of costly on any ship (take a med or low slot), but to make things worst, a single ECCM module wont help you much against a falcon (except if you are flying a carrier). You need 2. Or 3.
Star Nove Blueprint Haus Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.04 14:49:00 - [6] Originally by: Tusko Hopkins I support this... ECCM modules are kind of costly on any ship (take a med or low slot), but to make things worst, a single ECCM module wont help you much against a falcon (except if you are flying a carrier). You need 2. Or 3. a falcon should not be able to perma jam a domi with a best named ECCM AND a backup fitted. /supported, boost ECCM!
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.04 15:06:00 - [7] You want to fit one ECCM and be immune to jamming? It already halves chances of successfull jam. If your BS gets jammed all the time it means falcon pilot is using more then one jammer there, you can't counteract multiple tracking disruptors/dampeners with one module, why should you be able to do it in ECM case? _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Tusko Hopkins	Posted - 2008.12.04 15:08:00 - [8] No, I do not want someone fitting one ECCM to be immune to jamming. CSM representative CSM candidate for 2nd cycle Campaign website http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameb
FunzzeR Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:59:00 - [9] Supported
Drake Draconis Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:01:00 - [10] I'd be more inclined to increase the statistical chances of immunity via skills and not buffing the module.
I SoStoned	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:50:00 - [11] ECM is not broken, nor is ECCM, it's the signal strength over range. If you'll notice (bug hunters might want to check this out) an ECM ship up close and personal has a very very low chance of jamming its target, even if it's a Falcon. That same ship at max range has a far better chance. I believe this mechanic has to do with the sensor strength falloff over range (if that even exists) which explorers have had to deal with for nearly two years. ECCM doubling your base sensor str halves the Falcon's chance to jam you with one jammer (remote ECCM II = +120% @ 50+ KM!). So he uses two, or three, or even more. ECM does not stack, so he has the exact same chance to block with any of them, and your ECCM has the same chance to block each time. It's only a matter of chance before one of the ECM modules does its job.
Poast Warrior Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.12.05 00:01:00 - [12] Edited by: Poast Warrior on 05/12/2008 00:01:14 Supported, ECCM are too ineffective. If I'm giving up one VERY expensive slot to counter ONE single form of ewar, that has absolutely no other benefit, it needs to be effective. ECCM as it stands is most certainly not effective.
Myrhial Arkenath Ghost Festival	Posted - 2008.12.05 10:47:00 - [13] Supported. Afaik ECCM is not affected by skills unlike ECM, and the bonusses on ECM ships, so at the very least ECM and ECCM should be on the same baseline. That or implement ECCM skills. Diary of a pod pilot
Alekseyev Karrde Noir.	Posted - 2008.12.05 12:11:00 - [14] Edited by: Alekseyev Karrde on 05/12/2008 12:10:56 Falcons are definatly getting out of hand, boosting ECCM is a good way to band aid that problem. --- Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam
Seiji Hannah Aliastra	Posted - 2008.12.05 12:31:00 - [15] Supported - EWAR is currently broken, one of the ways to fix it is to provide working countermeasures. Revamp of System Jump / Warp mechanics
Zhula Guixgrixks Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.12.05 14:29:00 - [16] Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 05/12/2008 14:34:48 Originally by: Star Nove a falcon should not be able to perma jam a domi with a best named ECCM AND a backup fitted. Thats just wrong. A Falcon can perma-jam ships between 10-14 sensor strength (depends on range, skills, rigs etc.) A ECCM Dominix has a strength about 44 points. 44 points without overloading and additional backup/eccm modules. Just let's do some math (again). preconditions: - 5 x racial jammer , two gallente and 3 "wrong" jammers. - jam strength of "right" jammer ~ 12.5 - jam strenght of "wrong" jammer ~ 4 probability of miss a jam cycle with a "right" jammer : p1 = 1-12/44 probability of miss a jam cycle with a "wrong" jammer : p2 = 1-4/44 probability of jam a ECCM Dominix : 1-(P1^2*P2^3) = 61% You can of course do some variations like adding 1-2 jammer, or using only gallente jammers but such synthetic tests are not representing real combat fittings for a falcon. Even having two of "right" jammers isn't very likely. Let's say it again: a good skilled Falcon/Rook has a chance to to jam a ECCM-Dominix of over 60% when using all its jammers on 1 ship. Thats far from perma-jam capability.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:13:00 - [17] well falcon have 100% chance to jam hac with right jammer, how it is chance based i ask you Quote: It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
Zhula Guixgrixks Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:43:00 - [18] Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 05/12/2008 15:51:14 Yes it has a 100% probability of jamming a non-ECCM HACs with full rack of sig amps/rigs. ECCM modules are not that popular in HAC fittings. Why is this so ? I think most HAC pilots consider real DMG more dangerous than ECM. I call it free choice. If anybody fits his ship to tank real damage, he usually uses 3-5 slots to create a viable tank. 3-5 slots, thats a lot. Even ships with natural resistances do fit some kind of tank or buffer. Skipping even most rudimentary tank leads to a disaster under enemy fire. Same kind of disaster happens when a ECM-untanked HAC meets a Falcon. Some people think, fitting 1 ECCM module should be enough to counter ECM. Why not fit 3-4 or more modules ? Thats simple, because pilots decide to fit armor or shield tanks and no real ECM-tanks. Don't tell me "I'm missing additional med slots for ECCM". Use low slots if you desperate need ECCM. "My low slots already filled with hardeners". It's your choice. Look at ships with natural ECM resistances, recon ships. They rock against Falcons but totally suck in tanking real dmg. Now look again at recons. You can "tank" them, but they'll never shine as tank monsters. Same for ships with no ECM resistances. You can ECM-harden a dmg dealing ship, but it will never shine in this role. Maybe with exception of battleships, you can pretty well ECM-harden battleships. "I fitted a reactive plating on my Maller and this Rupture still doing huge dmg to my ship. CCP boost platings!!"
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.12.05 17:08:00 - [19] falcon got around 60% to jam recon ;], cut range of falcon to range of al lrecons atound 60 km it will fix , glass overpowered ewar that can be taken off. Quote: It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.12.05 21:39:00 - [20] There have been other threads on this topic, and the math hasn't convinced me. ECCM seems fine as-is. ---------- Thanks to all those who voted for me.
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.06 01:29:00 - [21] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl cut range of falcon to range of al lrecons atound 60 km it will fix hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha -----------
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2008.12.07 08:11:00 - [22] Originally by: Poast Warrior Edited by: Poast Warrior on 05/12/2008 00:01:14 Supported, ECCM are too ineffective. If I'm giving up one VERY expensive slot to counter ONE single form of ewar, that has absolutely no other benefit, it needs to be effective. ECCM as it stands is most certainly not effective. Fail. Tracking comps do not fully counter tracking disruptors. Targeting comps do not fully counter sensor damps. Both only partially mitigate the effects of one, but (as with ECM) you will seldom see a ship fitting just one... or fleets with only 1 pilot using them (unless they're recon ships or ewar frigs).
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.12.07 08:32:00 - [23] Instead of boost eccm , why not nerf sensor boosters especially scan resolution scripts . Nowadays too many ppl fly their ships with 2-3 scan resoltuion scripted sensor boosters,which only has one stupid benefit that my ship which is normally fitted can't lock lone enemies in time before they go ****. So if we nerf scan resolution scrips then these ppl will get some free mid slots and can fit eccm-s there, and with those huge eccm increase in fittings falcons will be nerfed indirectly. This is a perfect plan.No need for eccm boost ,and ccp is happy as they can nerf again.
Baron Holbach Gallente Pernicious Creed	Posted - 2008.12.07 16:55:00 - [24] its not the ecm or eccm strength thats the problem. the problem is the range bonus on ecm ships making them able to jam at 200km range Baron B.
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.07 18:43:00 - [25] Originally by: Baron Holbach its not the ecm or eccm strength thats the problem. the problem is the range bonus on ecm ships making them able to jam at 200km range God forbid that the long range sniping race should have a long range sniping e-war capability. -----------
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.12.07 18:54:00 - [26] Edited by: Kalintos Tyl on 07/12/2008 18:56:35 Originally by: Scatim Helicon Originally by: Kalintos Tyl cut range of falcon to range of al lrecons atound 60 km it will fix hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha wharts so funny? rapier 40km cant be rigged arazu 48km cant be rigged curse 37,8km cant be rigged falcon 162km + 41km and can be ranged rigged and strenght rigged dont see range diffrence ? 5 vs 5 small gangs, arazu/rapier/curse decloacks to join ok we fight becouse we can win. falcon decloacks sorry we run becsoue 1 faclon can disable whole gang dont tell me that isnt imba Quote: It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
Idaeus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.07 19:06:00 - [27] God don't ever fly an Arazu, that ship is terrible.
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.08 07:33:00 - [28] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl Edited by: Kalintos Tyl on 07/12/2008 18:56:35 Originally by: Scatim Helicon Originally by: Kalintos Tyl cut range of falcon to range of al lrecons atound 60 km it will fix hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha wharts so funny? rapier 40km cant be rigged arazu 48km cant be rigged curse 37,8km cant be rigged falcon 162km + 41km and can be ranged rigged and strenght rigged dont see range diffrence ? 5 vs 5 small gangs, arazu/rapier/curse decloacks to join ok we fight becouse we can win. falcon decloacks sorry we run becsoue 1 faclon can disable whole gang dont tell me that isnt imba All those other recons have about 5 times more dps then falcon and twice its EHP, sure falcon is imba. And wtf with "can't be rigged"? Particle dispersion projectors work not only for ecm but for painters, tracking disruptors and dampeners; learn to play instead of whining. There is egress port maximizer rig for pilgrim/curse as well. _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Rorin Cutter Caldari Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.08 08:02:00 - [29] a falcon should not be able to perma jam a domi with a best named ECCM AND a backup fitted. /supported, boost ECCM! Yes it should, thats what falcons are for. ECM and Falcons are not broke.
Jack Dant Minmatar The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:39:00 - [30] Originally by: FlameGlow All those other recons have about 5 times more dps then falcon and twice its EHP, sure falcon is imba. And wtf with "can't be rigged"? Particle dispersion projectors work not only for ecm but for painters, tracking disruptors and dampeners; learn to play instead of whining. There is egress port maximizer rig for pilgrim/curse as well. Falcon dps really is a bit anemic, but its base EHP is actually slightly higher than that of a rapier or an arazu. If Falcon pilots decide not to fit any kind of tank or buffer in exchange for more jammers it's their decision, not part of the ship's limitations. Drop jamming range closer to the other recons and you would probably see more tank and mwd on falcons.
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.08 20:41:00 - [31] Originally by: Jack Dant Drop jamming range closer to the other recons and you would probably see nobody undocking in a falcon ever again -----------
Nephilim Xeno Pimebeka Mining Corp	Posted - 2008.12.08 21:12:00 - [32] i support this the amount of falcons and rooks that fly around in low sec recently is just silly there are even fleets that are made up by 25-50% of ECM ships only
Zel Nughat Nughat Corp	Posted - 2008.12.22 12:07:00 - [33]
fuze Chosen Path Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.12.22 13:00:00 - [34] CCP already said they were thinking of revising ECM/ECCM. The other day we tried a setup with a recon with 2 ECCM and on a BS 2 remote ECCM and got up to 200 sensor strenght. The Falcon got 1 out of 3 score. Have more remote ECCM and Falcon still has a chance of getting off one cycle. Falcons are nice ships but they way they can use their bonuses caused the rock, paper, scissors to get skewed. ECCM should be able to negate it but currently its not.
galphi Unitary Senate Unitary Enterprises	Posted - 2008.12.22 13:18:00 - [35] Yes if someone decides to increase their resistance to falcons, having to sacrifice a medium or low slot can be painful. It should be a worthwhile sacrifice. Doesn't have to be a huge boost either, say, 15%-25%.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.12.23 02:28:00 - [36] Hmm maybe boost invu fields ,those should give 100% dmg proof for my caldari ships, it is called invulnerability field it should make me invu ^^ Oh and nerf turrets when nano nerf came ccp forgot to nerf turrets' trackings to match the change.Now everywhere you go (especially in eve) there are turret ships everywhere.
Mikhale Romanov Black Hats Delta	Posted - 2008.12.23 04:19:00 - [37] Edited by: Mikhale Romanov on 23/12/2008 04:21:23 Originally by: Jack Dant Originally by: FlameGlow All those other recons have about 5 times more dps then falcon and twice its EHP, sure falcon is imba. And wtf with "can't be rigged"? Particle dispersion projectors work not only for ecm but for painters, tracking disruptors and dampeners; learn to play instead of whining. There is egress port maximizer rig for pilgrim/curse as well. Falcon dps really is a bit anemic, but its base EHP is actually slightly higher than that of a rapier or an arazu. If Falcon pilots decide not to fit any kind of tank or buffer in exchange for more jammers it's their decision, not part of the ship's limitations. Drop jamming range closer to the other recons and you would probably see more tank and mwd on falcons. Naw would just see more scorps/BB's.. much cheaper and same effect at that point. Quote: Oh and nerf turrets when nano nerf came ccp forgot to nerf turrets' trackings to match the change.Now everywhere you go (especially in eve) there are turret ships everywhere. No..there was always turret ships everywhere you go since about 80% of the ships in game use them (edit did not read the 2nd page first). null ZOMG Communism!
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.12.23 04:48:00 - [38] I agree. Currently ECCM has no purpose at all until someone tries to jam you. Which then has little strength against ECM anyway. My proposal is that 1 ECCM = 1 useless Jammer. If you have 1 ECCM fit; and 1 ECM jammer starts cycling on you. It's worth nothing. Much like Warpcore stabs; also since there's no skill which boosts your sensor strength. The current state of ECCM doesnt need to be nerfed that significantly. Instead of nearly doubling your sensor strength. Perhaps only 25% or so. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Xeno Xandovar Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa	Posted - 2008.12.23 09:49:00 - [39] /signed
Akiba Penrose	Posted - 2008.12.23 19:33:00 - [40] Got my vote
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:08:00 - [41] Here's the thing... Tracking computers help against tracking disruptors but also give a bonus at other times. Sensor boosters help against dampeners but also give a bonus at other times. ECCMs are very effective when you're being jammed, but just sit there when you're not. Rather than boosting the bonus that ECCMs give, how about giving them another role on top of the bonus to sensor strength? Another option would be to change the ECM mechanism is such a way that it again becomes possible to have an effective non-racial sensor strength on your ship (ie having RADAR on a Caldari ship), and then make the jamming ship overcome both sensor types. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Marconus Orion Astroglide X	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:41:00 - [42]
Marconius Astroglide X	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:42:00 - [43]
Ag'Ammemnon	Posted - 2009.01.15 14:51:00 - [44]
Jonas Barcal Caldari	Posted - 2009.01.15 17:26:00 - [45] Originally by: Rodj Blake Here's the thing... ECCMs are very effective when you're being jammed, but just sit there when you're not. Rather than boosting the bonus that ECCMs give, how about giving them another role on top of the bonus to sensor strength? Sure make ECCM also give a limited protection against neut/nos effects or webbing
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.15 19:15:00 - [46] Edited by: Ephemeron on 15/01/2009 19:17:32 I have proposed this several times before. I believe that 25% boost to ECCM mods across the board would be a good change. It by no means would make ECCM users invulnerable to jammers. And it by no means make dedicated ECM ships useless as people fitting those mods are gimping their setups.
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.01.15 23:52:00 - [47] ____ My Blog Is Awesome
Hamoroid Hangcock Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.01.16 01:28:00 - [48] Edited by: Hamoroid Hang*** on 16/01/2009 01:29:59* Have to admit jamming is awsome, as it renders for 20 or more sec a highsp char into a noob for that period of time Nothing feels better/worse than that. Problem is not every falcon by itself ,but the hordes of chars extra trained, to jam the living **** out of people. Nothing against boosting ECCM,but make it chance based just like jamming
ViolenTUK Vindicated Exiles V.I.R.A.L.	Posted - 2009.01.16 03:23:00 - [49] Falcons are far too strong. Every fight nowadays needs falcon support. I have seen 40 mill skill point players perma jammed by a new falcon pilot despite the fact that their dominix was dedicated to fortifing its own sensor strength. This shouldnt be possible. Dont forget that with a falcon its not just that they are certain to jam you its that they can jam you and your entire gang simultaneously too thats the most ridiculous.
Suitonia interimo	Posted - 2009.01.16 11:35:00 - [50] ECCM needs to be stronger on smaller ships. I'd suggest changing it to a flat boost of +30 Strength Midslot, +15 lowslot. That way interceptors/frigates/ and otherships that are generally fast enough to close the range gap of the Falcon can actually have a decent chance of tackling it and killing it without getting jammed easily and Falcon warping off.
Stalina Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad	Posted - 2009.01.16 12:50:00 - [51] Originally by: FlameGlow All those other recons have about 5 times more dps then falcon and twice its EHP, sure falcon is imba. All lvl 5 : Pilgrim : 985 shield, 2250 armor, 1090 hull; 6929 Effective HP Rapier : 1653 shield, 1336 armor, 1090 hull; 6381 Effective HP Arazu : 1406 shield, 1618 armor, 1090 hull; 6385 Effective HP Falcon : 2004 shield, 1195 armor, 1090 hull, 6637 Effective HP Yes the falcon has only half the Hitpoints. Now adding a little buffer to them ( only rapier and falcon used ) : Rapier with 2 LSE: 8215 shield; 18k Effective HP Falcon with 1 1600mm Rolled tungsten : 6445 armor; 16k Effective HP
Motaka	Posted - 2009.01.16 17:52:00 - [52] Originally by: ViolenTUK Falcons are far too strong. Every fight nowadays needs falcon support. I have seen 40 mill skill point players perma jammed by a new falcon pilot despite the fact that their dominix was dedicated to fortifing its own sensor strength. This shouldnt be possible. Don'T forget that with a falcon its not just that they are certain to jam you its that they can jam you and your entire gang simultaneously too thats the most ridiculous. This statement just sums up the amount of n00bs that have infested EvE lately. Guess what,the falcon pilot has probably used most of his slots to jam your domi leaving the rest of your gang to scare away the falcon or are you saying the domi was on its own and you just want to whine for another 'I WIN' module.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.16 18:02:00 - [53] People who defend current state of the Falcon refer to its balance from view of big fleet battles - at least anything more than 8 people or so. I would agree that when it comes to big scale fighting, the power of falcon is smaller because it has major weaknesses that other people can exploit. But when it comes to small scale combat, anything with less than 4 people on 1 side. Then the falcon becomes extremely powerful. It's strength - makes its own weaknesses immune to attack. Anyway, we don't need to argue over theoretical advantages and disadvantages of Falcon. All we need to do is pull statistics from EVE database - the Falcons are everywhere, most people who play multiple accounts have a Falcon alt. Most people who fight against Falcon lose. Their dominance on small scale pvp is evident in the numbers you'll find, it would be no longer a question of debate but a statement of fact.
Motaka	Posted - 2009.01.16 18:12:00 - [54] Edited by: Motaka on 16/01/2009 18:15:57 Oh boy you lot have got my blood boiling now. I find it incredible that people [and by people i mean armour tankers] are crying about having to give up a mid-slot to fit ECCM,when their still able to MWD,scramble,cap inject,sensor boost and many other things whilst running a tank but shield user continually get it up the ass. I think CCP should fix that imbalance before they even think about fixing ECM,i mean its only been imbalanced for 5 and half years _______________________________________________ Motaka ~ DirtyHarry ~ Original F-E Material
ViolenTUK Gallente Vindicated Exiles V.I.R.A.L.	Posted - 2009.01.16 22:49:00 - [55] Originally by: Motaka This statement just sums up the amount of n00bs that have infested EvE lately. No this one has. Originally by: Motaka Guess what,the falcon pilot has probably used most of his slots to jam your domi leaving the rest of your gang to scare away the falcon or are you saying the domi was on its own and you just want to whine for another 'I WIN' module. No. The Falcon would not need to use most of his mid slots to jam me. Typically one will be sufficient. As the rest of my gang would be similarly jammed it would make it difficult to scare anyone away. Even if ECCM were boosted sufficiently to be effective against a Falcon then this certainly wouldnÆt be an ôI winö button. The only ôI winö button here is the Falcons ECM modules.
ViolenTUK Gallente Vindicated Exiles V.I.R.A.L.	Posted - 2009.01.16 22:56:00 - [56] Originally by: Motaka I find it incredible that people [and by people i mean armour tankers] are crying about having to give up a mid-slot to fit ECCM,when their still able to MWD,scramble,cap inject,sensor boost and many other things whilst running a tank but shield user continually get it up the ass. I think CCP should fix that imbalance before they even think about fixing ECM,i mean its only been imbalanced for 5 and half years IÆm not crying about having to give up a single mid slot for ECCM. A pilot needs to fit his ship according to his opponent. What I donÆt like is the fact that a single falcon can jam 6 gang members who are all fortified with ECCM. That is far too strong. All fights these days have falcon pilots on both sides and the winner is either who jams first or who has the most Falcons. This is ludicrous
Tervilious	Posted - 2009.01.16 23:19:00 - [57] well tbh jamming needs to be hit hard with the nerf bat i fitted a hype with 3 Magnetometric Backup Array II and 3 ECCM - Magnetometric II and on all counts i was jammed by a falcon with one racial of each type tech II and a multi spec tech II i managed to lock the falcon for about 2 seconds which tbh just is not right and on the other hand aruzu's got hit way to hard with the nerf bat if falcons are not hit hard by the nerf bat reboost the sensor dampners and please this is not about chance i was jammed the coding i would say is at fault
Motaka	Posted - 2009.01.17 00:09:00 - [58] Originally by: ViolenTUK Originally by: Motaka I find it incredible that people [and by people i mean armour tankers] are crying about having to give up a mid-slot to fit ECCM,when their still able to MWD,scramble,cap inject,sensor boost and many other things whilst running a tank but shield user continually get it up the ass. I think CCP should fix that imbalance before they even think about fixing ECM,i mean its only been imbalanced for 5 and half years IÆm not crying about having to give up a single mid slot for ECCM. A pilot needs to fit his ship according to his opponent. What I donÆt like is the fact that a single falcon can jam 6 gang members who are all fortified with ECCM. That is far too strong. All fights these days have falcon pilots on both sides and the winner is either who jams first or who has the most Falcons. This is ludicrous If your trying to tell that 1 falcon pilot perma jammed 6 of you and you were all carrying ECCM,i am going to come out and call you a liar. A dominix carrying 1 ECCM has a magnometric sensor strength of 43,im sorry but a falcon is not going to perma jam anybody using 1 jammer.And you say there were 5 others in your gang all carrying ECCM. So in closing,GBTWoW scrub,learn to counter your enemy before crying nerf.
ViolenTUK Gallente Vindicated Exiles V.I.R.A.L.	Posted - 2009.01.17 00:22:00 - [59] Originally by: Motaka If your trying to tell that 1 falcon pilot perma jammed 6 of you and you were all carrying ECCM,i am going to come out and call you a liar. Fact mate. I am not lying. Originally by: Motaka A dominix carrying 1 ECCM has a magnometric sensor strength of 43,im sorry but a falcon is not going to perma jam anybody using 1 jammer.And you say there were 5 others in your gang all carrying ECCM. Well they do. Sorry mate. Originally by: Motaka So in closing,GBTWoW scrub,learn to counter your enemy before crying nerf. I can counter a Falcon. I use another Falcon. Thats why this is so silly. It is obvious to me who is crying here.
Tervilious	Posted - 2009.01.17 00:28:00 - [60] ERM NO that was fitted to one ship my hype and you can really tell when somone gets very aggresive about a subject and very defensive that deep down in there little soul they them selves know by the god of chance that the falcon is a win mode do all recons give you this advantage no !!!!! they dont. read what ive put and think about dont ramble think before you speak my mum taught me look at the whole picture every battle scence you can think of its not hard to work out what needs to be done
Marlona Sky Caldari Astroglide X	Posted - 2009.01.17 07:14:00 - [61] Lets keep this constructive guys. How can the ECCM work, script or skill enhancement or whatever, so you stand a chance without nerfing the falcon to hell and back?
Stalina Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad	Posted - 2009.01.17 11:02:00 - [62] Edited by: Stalina on 17/01/2009 11:04:04 well looking at the counter for damps / tracking disruptors, you actually benefit from just fitting those modules. you gain something from it, even if you are not dampened/tracking disrupted. So while my sensor booster also gives me faster locking or more locking range and my tracking comps / enhancer give me better tracking and range, ECCM gives you a few more % of not being jammed with one racial jammer. While this sounds good versus only 1 falcon ( or jamming boat ) it actually becomes worthless, looking at the number of falcons around. ECCM gives you moar sensor strength, meaning the falcon doesn't need 1 racial to jam but 2 or a mix of different racials or a racial and a multi or another of them 20 falcons in your gang. In the same time there are no "signal-distortion-amplifier-like-modules" for damps, tracking disrupts, whatever ewar, if im not mistaken.
Neesa Corrinne Ore Mongers	Posted - 2009.01.17 12:35:00 - [63] Several people in this thread have already pointed out that the countermeasures for both dampeners and tracking disruptors are useful all the time while ECCM is merely a paperweight until someone jams you. I think that two things need to be done to ECCM to make it more useful: 1) Raise the percentage of sensor strength bonus that one ECCM module gives you. The best named and T2 modules should both give somewhere in the neighborhood of 120% boost instead of 96%. 2) ECCM modules should significantly lower your signature radius. It makes complete sense that a module that is distorting your profile on someones sensors would also lower your signature radius by a percentage... say 10%. With the increased significance of signature radius in modern EVE combat, this would be an all around useful module.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.01.17 17:35:00 - [64] Edited by: Herschel Yamamoto on 17/01/2009 17:36:59 Originally by: ViolenTUK Originally by: Motaka If your trying to tell that 1 falcon pilot perma jammed 6 of you and you were all carrying ECCM,i am going to come out and call you a liar. Fact mate. I am not lying. Originally by: Motaka A dominix carrying 1 ECCM has a magnometric sensor strength of 43,im sorry but a falcon is not going to perma jam anybody using 1 jammer.And you say there were 5 others in your gang all carrying ECCM. Well they do. Sorry mate. You do realize you have to put on the right race's ECCM, right? And that "perma" is short for "permanent", not "once every three cycles", right? Originally by: Neesa Corrinne 2) ECCM modules should significantly lower your signature radius. It makes complete sense that a module that is distorting your profile on someones sensors would also lower your signature radius by a percentage... say 10%. With the increased significance of signature radius in modern EVE combat, this would be an all around useful module. Now that is an interesting proposal. Makes sense in terms of flavour, and would make the module better for generic combat. ----------- Herschel's Cruiser BPC Store
Cpt Striker	Posted - 2009.01.18 11:22:00 - [65] how about making all ecm function like an ecm burst, ie. just breaking the lock of the target, or alternatively reducing the length of time that you are jammed whilst keeping the current cycle period of ecm. this way ecm can remain at its current strength whilst allowing those who are effected by it, some opportuinty to counter it. being able to somewhat counter ecm, even if your not explicitly prepared (who can possibly fit for every eventuality) is not unreasonable imo. after all, you are affored the oportunity against all other ewar to take some action to mitigate it, ie shooting the bugger.
ViolenTUK Gallente Vindicated Exiles V.I.R.A.L.	Posted - 2009.01.18 13:14:00 - [66] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto You do realize you have to put on the right race's ECCM, right? And that "perma" is short for "permanent", not "once every three cycles", right? Everyone knows that mate. If I say Permanently I mean it. Or "Perma" in this case. 1 Race jammer is quite capable of keeping a sensor fortified Battleship permanently jammed.
Yarik Mendel Privateers	Posted - 2009.01.18 15:30:00 - [67] In most situations I find the need to have 2 eccm modules which severely gimps most ships. Please add 100% boost to the module, simple and effective.
Omber Zombie	Posted - 2009.01.18 16:56:00 - [68] Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.01.18 17:34:00 - [69] Originally by: ViolenTUK Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto You do realize you have to put on the right race's ECCM, right? And that "perma" is short for "permanent", not "once every three cycles", right? Everyone knows that mate. If I say Permanently I mean it. Or "Perma" in this case. 1 Race jammer is quite capable of keeping a sensor fortified Battleship permanently jammed. A T2 racial jammer on a max-skill Falcon with 2 rigs and 2 distortion amps has 13.77 points of jam of its good type. A Dominix with one ECCM has 43.1 points of sensor strength. Thus, a single jammer will succeed 32% of the time. I wasn't kidding when I said "once every three cycles". Bad luck and targeting time make that more annoying, but if you say a single Falcon permajammed six fortified battleships, you're simply a liar. Even if it's fitting seven racial jammers, and the races line up, it has a 0.47% chance to jam all six of you per cycle. Even if the fight only lasted two cycles, the odds of you all being jammed on both of those cycles are less than one in 44,000.
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.01.18 17:55:00 - [70] Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 18/01/2009 17:57:53 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto A T2 racial jammer on a max-skill Falcon with 2 rigs and 2 distortion amps has 13.77 points of jam of its good type. A Dominix with one ECCM has 43.1 points of sensor strength. Thus, a single jammer will succeed 32% of the time. I wasn't kidding when I said "once every three cycles". Factor in locking time for that battle ship and you have a pretty serious problem, a Faclon with racials is likely to Jam 3 battleships for 30 out of 90 seconds, adding an extra 10-30 seconds of locking time rarely gets considered. And this is with ECCM. Either way, people defending falcons are just failing to acknowledge that is poor game design, all binary mechanics which form the back bone of most ewar (including neuts) are. Beyond this, having a strong specific counter to something powerfull has the effect of creating an equalibrum in which either can be considered typical in all situations as opposed to this.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.01.18 20:28:00 - [71] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 18/01/2009 17:57:53 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto A T2 racial jammer on a max-skill Falcon with 2 rigs and 2 distortion amps has 13.77 points of jam of its good type. A Dominix with one ECCM has 43.1 points of sensor strength. Thus, a single jammer will succeed 32% of the time. I wasn't kidding when I said "once every three cycles". Factor in locking time for that battle ship and you have a pretty serious problem, a Faclon with racials is likely to Jam 3 battleships for 30 out of 90 seconds, adding an extra 10-30 seconds of locking time rarely gets considered. And this is with ECCM. Either way, people defending falcons are just failing to acknowledge that is poor game design, all binary mechanics which form the back bone of most ewar (including neuts) are. Beyond this, having a strong specific counter to something powerfull has the effect of creating an equalibrum in which either can be considered typical in all situations as opposed to this. Okay, so in 3 20-second jam cycles, you spend one jammed, and 9.8 seconds relocking the Falcon, or 6.1 with a sensor booster. Even if you don't use that, though, you have a lock on him about half the time(or a bit more often if it's random when jams are instead of every third). And remember, this falcon has a paper-thin tank - even if you use two LSEs and a DCU(which is a huge tank for a Falcon), it still only has 20k EHP, which means it can go down fairly quickly. Thing about that killboard screenshot, everything on it is dead. Also, it should be noted that I'm not trying to defend the Falcon here. It's a bit OP, and there are some solutions I'd like to see implemented(say, swapping jam ranges with damp ranges and making remote ECCM better), but the standard onboard ECCM modules buff sensor strength enough. A secondary boost to make them better in non-jam fights, like the one proposed above, would be fine, but they're good enough at their primary role. I don't think it's as ludicrous as everyone claims, but a few tweaks would be appropriate. The problem isn't on the ECCM side, though. ----------- Herschel's Cruiser BPC Store
Pattern Clarc	Posted - 2009.01.18 21:05:00 - [72] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto ...but they're good enough at their primary role. I don't think it's as ludicrous as everyone claims, but a few tweaks would be appropriate. I believe the proof is in the pudding. Considering that ecm now appears to scale quite happily in fleet fights, I think it¦s time for a either a boost to there effect counters, or a redesign of the effect of jamming. ____ My Blog Is Awesome
Zenethalos Infinity Killers	Posted - 2009.01.18 23:47:00 - [73] I support some form of change to the ECM/ECCM issue. One logical fix is impliment a skill to increase sensor strength. The abundance of falcons in a small fleet fight is astounding. I leave with a 10 man hac/recon gang that has two falcons and hit a 6-7 man gang with 3-4 falcons and 2 dps ships. We have tried fitting eccm and sacrificing mid slots and still get almost perma jammed every time and our Falc's are usually rendered useless after one cycle. I think a skill to increase your ships sensor strength is in order, that or give ECCM moduals a secondary boost so they are not usless.
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.01.19 00:21:00 - [74] On related note: we need faction and officer versions of active ECCM There's no reason why that shouldn't be in game right now
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.01.19 06:07:00 - [75] Edited by: Herschel Yamamoto on 19/01/2009 06:07:46 Originally by: Ephemeron On related note: we need faction and officer versions of active ECCM There's no reason why that shouldn't be in game right now That's a boost I can support. For that matter, I'm fine with sensor strength skills too. ----------- Herschel's Cruiser BPC Store

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.