These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

[ECM] Imagine an Arazu locking down 4+ ships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harlot Hohannson
Eye on Wang Poo
#1 - 2012-08-21 10:25:24 UTC
It would seem overpowered to be able to interfere with the LOCK RANGE or 4+ ships in a single ship right?

Well how about the damn Falcon being able to almost completely remove 4+ ships from a fight whatsoever (notwithstanding smartbombs or drones that already have a target).

I am still amazed that this bullshit is allowed to go on.

ECM is so ubiquitous it's a joke. CCP really should do something about this pathetic 'chance based' (lol) mechanic.

In before all the cowards that can't handle risk come in defending overpowered mechanics. "I can't risk having someone actually fighting while I PVP".
Noisrevbus
#2 - 2012-08-21 10:29:51 UTC
You do realize, assuming you can control range in regard to your opponents (ie., they are not much faster than you, and superior in a short-range encounter), that an Arazu can lock down 4 ships while also maintaining a point with superior damage and a reasonable tank, yes? Not only that, given a favourable setting like that, it will do it all of the time, not just having a chance to...
Harlot Hohannson
Eye on Wang Poo
#3 - 2012-08-21 10:38:28 UTC
I dont think 'lock down' means the same as 'can put a damp on them'.

Also, well done for implying ecm is chance based. It is nigh on guaranteed to jam every time. They really should change ECM from 'chance' based to falloff based. Then we will see ECM ships having to come in a bit closer to be effective.

Nice that you provide a very circumstance based defence though. ECM works every time regardless of conditions.
TraderJade
Secure Production Research and Trading
#4 - 2012-08-21 10:59:47 UTC
I feel your pain!

if only eve had modules to counter such ships, like a module which increases your sensor strength or boost your locking range. They could be called sensor booster and maybe ECCM... but i doubt ccp would ever introduce them into the game :(
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#5 - 2012-08-21 11:04:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Ptraci
That's why you would call the Arazu primary and kill it. Just like you do with the 6-9k ehp falcon. Only takes about 10 secs to pop - less than an ECM cycle. But - what if he jams everyone! Even at max skill he won't jam everyone forever.

Geez let the whine threads continue. l2 pvp
Harlot Hohannson
Eye on Wang Poo
#6 - 2012-08-21 11:05:38 UTC
Nice one dum dum,

Your argument is "All ships should fit specific modules to counter a single form of E-war."

Why do we never hear of counter measures being a requisite against other e-war? Because it isnt an overpowered piece of crapass mechanic like ECM is.

Also ECCM doesn't actually work very well and there are a very limited number of ships that have the slot layout required to even allow it alongside a viable fitting.
Pestily
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-08-21 11:08:15 UTC
ECM is broken. The only people who defend it are the people who abuse it sadly.

Saying damps are as good as ECM is ********.
feihcsiM
THE B0YS
#8 - 2012-08-21 11:16:52 UTC
ECM has its place, especially for countering gangs that spam logi ships who would be otherwise unkillable unless you have several multiples of their numbers.

I will agree, however, that the mechanic is currently broken in certain situations, especially in very small gang warfare. I'm not sure what could be done to fix it that wouldn't nerf it into the ground.
ECM strength stacking penalties once you fit more than 2 ECM modules perhaps?

It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2012-08-21 11:18:20 UTC
ECM is good for certain situations as is Dampening...and both can be quite worthless altogether if an opponent actually gathers intel and brings the appropriate counter to it.

That said...if you cannot beat it why fight it?
In my opinion pvp is not about fairness, it is about winning.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
TraderJade
Secure Production Research and Trading
#10 - 2012-08-21 11:20:43 UTC  |  Edited by: TraderJade
ECM isn't broken... there are plenty of counters, if you don't want to use em then that's not the dev's problem!

All the cheese in the world would never be enough for the ECM whiners
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2012-08-21 11:23:43 UTC
TraderJade wrote:
ECM isn't broken... there are plenty of counters, if you don't want to use em then that's not the dev's problem!

All the cheese in the world would never be enough for the ECM whiners


Quoted for truth.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2012-08-21 11:27:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Rordan D'Kherr
Because of Falcon!!!

(aka new and exciting topic since 2008)

+1 for bait title

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#13 - 2012-08-21 11:28:13 UTC
Harlot Hohannson wrote:
They really should change ECM from 'chance' based to falloff based.

I do believe it is both already. I haven't done any lengthy experimentation to verify that falloff decreases effectiveness, but then again, I doubt you have either.

Quote:
Then we will see ECM ships having to come in a bit closer to be effective.
Or you could have someone in your fleet with long range weapons... or maybe drones.... you know... just in case something is a long way off and you want to kill it. ECCM isn't the only way around ECM. Hell, even your Arazu example might be able to do something to a falcon. Hmmm....

Quote:
Nice that you provide a very circumstance based defence though. ECM works every time regardless of conditions.

No, not really. Unless you're flying frigates or T1 cruisers, then yeah, it probably works every time.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Randomize All
Doomheim
#14 - 2012-08-21 11:28:15 UTC
Most game developers think "Now you are not allowed to play" is a ridiculous game mechanic. Even the very awful League Of Legends knew this, thus 3 second lockouts are restricted to a very small number of "ships".
CCP are just plain ignorant. It's not like there aren't at least a dozen better ideas for ECM, in fact it's actually hard to think of something worse than "You cannot play".
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#15 - 2012-08-21 11:48:29 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
You do realize, assuming you can control range in regard to your opponents (ie., they are not much faster than you, and superior in a short-range encounter), that an Arazu can lock down 4 ships while also maintaining a point with superior damage and a reasonable tank, yes? Not only that, given a favourable setting like that, it will do it all of the time, not just having a chance to...


As a newcomer to the Arazu, could I ask for that fit? My pyfa efforts to come up with a 4-damp setup suffer from poor cap life.

.
Pestily
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-08-21 11:52:51 UTC
Take a Megathron, add an ECCM = 41.2 sensor strength

A falcon has a 35.6% chance to jam the megathron for each racial jammer it has fitted.

The Megathron has had to give up 25% of its mids to fit that ECCM.

A falcon can fit 6 jammers no problem.


Also bear in mind not all falcons are used in small gang pvp but also used in the 10v1 scenarios so the single guy has no chance to fight back.

All the other counters to ewar have additional benefits, sensor boosters, cap injectors, tracking computers.

ECCM has no additional benefit and isn't as effective as other counters to other types of ewar.
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#17 - 2012-08-21 12:23:32 UTC
ECM whine, how quaint...

The logic of a popular counter equals broken mechanic is embarrassingly and stunningly stupid.

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2012-08-21 12:29:34 UTC
As irritating as ECM can be. It is a fact of EVE. Come prepared or loose your ship... dust off refit and continue.

Even I have lost ships to the evil ecm. Some fight I have won even with ECM... they are killed quickly.

I would like the chance based effort of ECM to be dropped though. And maybe changed to something where if the ecm dudes cycle is lower than your Sensor Strength... there is no chance of being jammed.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#19 - 2012-08-21 12:49:07 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
As irritating as ECM can be. It is a fact of EVE. Come prepared or loose your ship... dust off refit and continue.

Even I have lost ships to the evil ecm. Some fight I have won even with ECM... they are killed quickly.

I would like the chance based effort of ECM to be dropped though. And maybe changed to something where if the ecm dudes cycle is lower than your Sensor Strength... there is no chance of being jammed.


Yeah it should be something like that....
If the "jamming field strength" of the jammer is higher than the "sensor field strength" of the target it should get jammed.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#20 - 2012-08-21 13:11:00 UTC
Actually, CCP has said that pretty soon sensor damps will be on par with ECM.

So soon an Arazu will be able toBig smile
123Next pageLast page