These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ECM, balance, and "all or nothing" - what's really wrong?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ix Method
Doomheim
#41 - 2012-10-01 11:59:12 UTC
Tippia wrote:
My favourite idea is actually not stats-related, but rather to make it a proper information-warfare module: make it mess up the overview by reducing information detail depending on how well-jammed (on a continuous scale) the ship is.

This is pretty beautiful tbh.

Travelling at the speed of love.
Herr Hammer Draken
#42 - 2012-10-01 11:59:38 UTC
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
[quote=Gillia Winddancer]I already gave my suggestion on how to chance ECM once before - be prepared for a slight wall of text of pure wisdom:

Basically instead of breaking locks ECM "hides" ships depending on their signature radius vs scan strength/distance. The stronger the dose of ECM a ship receives, the bigger the ships will be that said receiver cannot detect and lock on to.

It wouldn't drastically chance ECM the way it works compared to how it is now, but on the other hand it would also NOT be a chance-based all-or-nothing module that locks out ships completely from the game. On top of that, the ECM would be a constant effect now just like any other e-war module instead of based on cycles.

Generally the idea is that a ship that is being ECM'd would quickly lose track of the small ships whilst still be able to detect larger ships unless he gets multiple stacks of ECM on his own ship. On the other hand it would require more stacks on a big ship than on a small ship to get the same results due to the sensor strength differences.

For even better complexity, make distance of ECM vs target AND any enemy ship vs target play a role. As an example:

Ship A uses ECM on Ship B from a distance of 100km

Ship B is now is unable to lock on to or see on the overview any ship that has a signature radius of X that is beyond distance Y. The smaller an enemy ship is, the closer said enemy ship can be to B without being lockable

If Ship A moves in to 50km from Ship B then the effect of the ECM will of course be stronger. If Ship A uses multiple ECM's, the effect will be stronger. Faction specific ECM's will naturally give an even bigger effect so nothing will change in that regard. Radar ECM vs Radar, Ladar vs Ladar, well you know this already.

This change would pretty much also make ECM true to it's name unlike the way it is now. ECM is all about confusing enemy radars after all. Breaking locks like it is in EVE now is not what I would call "ECM". More like an "EMP" weapon. The ECM burst module should in fact be renamed to an EMP burst to be frank.

The added bonus with this system is that it will give small roaming gangs using small ships an advantage if this is used correctly, which is something I believe was sought after in this blob-infested capital ship environment?


Well, that's my wall of text for now.



Oh my. Is every single engagement in EVE identical each and every single time now all of a sudden? Could someone please inform me when on earth that ever happened?


Exhibit A:

Catalyst vs Hulk.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Medarr
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2012-10-01 12:03:03 UTC
Whine moar maybe CCP wil " fix " it like they did with supers...
Garonis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-10-01 12:11:18 UTC
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
I already gave my suggestion on how to chance ECM once before - be prepared for a slight wall of text of pure wisdom:

Basically instead of breaking locks ECM "hides" ships depending on their signature radius vs scan strength/distance. The stronger the dose of ECM a ship receives, the bigger the ships will be that said receiver cannot detect and lock on to.

It wouldn't drastically chance ECM the way it works compared to how it is now, but on the other hand it would also NOT be a chance-based all-or-nothing module that locks out ships completely from the game. On top of that, the ECM would be a constant effect now just like any other e-war module instead of based on cycles.

Generally the idea is that a ship that is being ECM'd would quickly lose track of the small ships whilst still be able to detect larger ships unless he gets multiple stacks of ECM on his own ship. On the other hand it would require more stacks on a big ship than on a small ship to get the same results due to the sensor strength differences.

For even better complexity, make distance of ECM vs target AND any enemy ship vs target play a role. As an example:

Ship A uses ECM on Ship B from a distance of 100km

Ship B is now is unable to lock on to or see on the overview any ship that has a signature radius of X that is beyond distance Y. The smaller an enemy ship is, the closer said enemy ship can be to B without being lockable

If Ship A moves in to 50km from Ship B then the effect of the ECM will of course be stronger. If Ship A uses multiple ECM's, the effect will be stronger. Faction specific ECM's will naturally give an even bigger effect so nothing will change in that regard. Radar ECM vs Radar, Ladar vs Ladar, well you know this already.

This change would pretty much also make ECM true to it's name unlike the way it is now. ECM is all about confusing enemy radars after all. Breaking locks like it is in EVE now is not what I would call "ECM". More like an "EMP" weapon. The ECM burst module should in fact be renamed to an EMP burst to be frank.

The added bonus with this system is that it will give small roaming gangs using small ships an advantage if this is used correctly, which is something I believe was sought after in this blob-infested capital ship environment?


Well, that's my wall of text for now.



If that was adopted players would soon work out which small ships could attack which big ships using X ecm against Y type of big ship to always 100% make them undetecable at Z range. The trick then is to find a weapon layout that can kill the big ship from Z range. Once that is figured out it will work every time. It will be like being cloaked but able to shoot at your target as long as you keep range Z. If you can scram said big ship from Z range then you can kill them every time with that particular combo. There is no random in your idea!




That's when ECCM would come into play, altering said big ship's sensor strength.
Herr Hammer Draken
#45 - 2012-10-01 12:23:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Hammer Draken
Garonis wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
I already gave my suggestion on how to chance ECM once before - be prepared for a slight wall of text of pure wisdom:

Basically instead of breaking locks ECM "hides" ships depending on their signature radius vs scan strength/distance. The stronger the dose of ECM a ship receives, the bigger the ships will be that said receiver cannot detect and lock on to.

It wouldn't drastically chance ECM the way it works compared to how it is now, but on the other hand it would also NOT be a chance-based all-or-nothing module that locks out ships completely from the game. On top of that, the ECM would be a constant effect now just like any other e-war module instead of based on cycles.

Generally the idea is that a ship that is being ECM'd would quickly lose track of the small ships whilst still be able to detect larger ships unless he gets multiple stacks of ECM on his own ship. On the other hand it would require more stacks on a big ship than on a small ship to get the same results due to the sensor strength differences.

For even better complexity, make distance of ECM vs target AND any enemy ship vs target play a role. As an example:

Ship A uses ECM on Ship B from a distance of 100km

Ship B is now is unable to lock on to or see on the overview any ship that has a signature radius of X that is beyond distance Y. The smaller an enemy ship is, the closer said enemy ship can be to B without being lockable

If Ship A moves in to 50km from Ship B then the effect of the ECM will of course be stronger. If Ship A uses multiple ECM's, the effect will be stronger. Faction specific ECM's will naturally give an even bigger effect so nothing will change in that regard. Radar ECM vs Radar, Ladar vs Ladar, well you know this already.

This change would pretty much also make ECM true to it's name unlike the way it is now. ECM is all about confusing enemy radars after all. Breaking locks like it is in EVE now is not what I would call "ECM". More like an "EMP" weapon. The ECM burst module should in fact be renamed to an EMP burst to be frank.

The added bonus with this system is that it will give small roaming gangs using small ships an advantage if this is used correctly, which is something I believe was sought after in this blob-infested capital ship environment?


Well, that's my wall of text for now.



If that was adopted players would soon work out which small ships could attack which big ships using X ecm against Y type of big ship to always 100% make them undetecable at Z range. The trick then is to find a weapon layout that can kill the big ship from Z range. Once that is figured out it will work every time. It will be like being cloaked but able to shoot at your target as long as you keep range Z. If you can scram said big ship from Z range then you can kill them every time with that particular combo. There is no random in your idea!




That's when ECCM would come into play, altering said big ship's sensor strength.


Yes but do to number of slot limits there will always be a certain combo that will always work. No matter what the big ship would do it could not defend itself. Everybody would have it worked out in short order. Big ships with low number of mid slots would be most at risk vs small ships with lots of mid slots. Since nothing is random it can be figured out due to known limits and cetain combos will always work 100% of the time.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Shaco LaRusko
Veritas Theory
#46 - 2012-10-01 13:29:28 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Cristl wrote:
'Save or die' mechanics have pissed people off since the first guy got polymorphed in D&D in the mid-seventies. ECM has pissed people off in Eve since its inception.

OP, give a suggested mechanic for ECM for us to mull over please.

I'm trying to, but drawing a blank. That is, I can't think of anything where ECM would still possibly have the "die" consequence of breaking the lock and jamming locking, but without the chance-based mechanic. These ideas have been proposed before:


  • Reducing scan res or targeting range? Damps already do that.
  • Selectively breaking locks (just breaking, not jamming)? Sure, but how?
  • Denying new locks? Maybe, but with a couple SeBos we're back to the same old problem, possibly worse.
  • Reducing max locked targets? Maybe, but the balancing on that is very hard.
  • Turning the target's mods off? That is just really weird.


I don't know. Your thoughts?


Honestly the reducing max target locks makes a lot of sense. Combine that with a lock breaking mechanic when it hits and you have a great idea. It would mean that the cycles would have to be much longer to make it not overpowered with the lock breaking mechanic. The lock breaking mechanic should randomly break x amount of current locked ships.

Lets say for instance you ecm a guardian. It max lockable targets should drop by X amount and it should randomly disengage y amounts of currently locked targets. You still have that chance based mechanic but there is a lot of skill involved on prioritizing targets and what not.
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2012-10-01 13:52:48 UTC
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
Garonis wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
I already gave my suggestion on how to chance ECM once before - be prepared for a slight wall of text of pure wisdom:

Basically instead of breaking locks ECM "hides" ships depending on their signature radius vs scan strength/distance. The stronger the dose of ECM a ship receives, the bigger the ships will be that said receiver cannot detect and lock on to.

It wouldn't drastically chance ECM the way it works compared to how it is now, but on the other hand it would also NOT be a chance-based all-or-nothing module that locks out ships completely from the game. On top of that, the ECM would be a constant effect now just like any other e-war module instead of based on cycles.

Generally the idea is that a ship that is being ECM'd would quickly lose track of the small ships whilst still be able to detect larger ships unless he gets multiple stacks of ECM on his own ship. On the other hand it would require more stacks on a big ship than on a small ship to get the same results due to the sensor strength differences.

For even better complexity, make distance of ECM vs target AND any enemy ship vs target play a role. As an example:

Ship A uses ECM on Ship B from a distance of 100km

Ship B is now is unable to lock on to or see on the overview any ship that has a signature radius of X that is beyond distance Y. The smaller an enemy ship is, the closer said enemy ship can be to B without being lockable

If Ship A moves in to 50km from Ship B then the effect of the ECM will of course be stronger. If Ship A uses multiple ECM's, the effect will be stronger. Faction specific ECM's will naturally give an even bigger effect so nothing will change in that regard. Radar ECM vs Radar, Ladar vs Ladar, well you know this already.

This change would pretty much also make ECM true to it's name unlike the way it is now. ECM is all about confusing enemy radars after all. Breaking locks like it is in EVE now is not what I would call "ECM". More like an "EMP" weapon. The ECM burst module should in fact be renamed to an EMP burst to be frank.

The added bonus with this system is that it will give small roaming gangs using small ships an advantage if this is used correctly, which is something I believe was sought after in this blob-infested capital ship environment?


Well, that's my wall of text for now.



If that was adopted players would soon work out which small ships could attack which big ships using X ecm against Y type of big ship to always 100% make them undetecable at Z range. The trick then is to find a weapon layout that can kill the big ship from Z range. Once that is figured out it will work every time. It will be like being cloaked but able to shoot at your target as long as you keep range Z. If you can scram said big ship from Z range then you can kill them every time with that particular combo. There is no random in your idea!




That's when ECCM would come into play, altering said big ship's sensor strength.


Yes but do to number of slot limits there will always be a certain combo that will always work. No matter what the big ship would do it could not defend itself. Everybody would have it worked out in short order. Big ships with low number of mid slots would be most at risk vs small ships with lots of mid slots. Since nothing is random it can be figured out due to known limits and cetain combos will always work 100% of the time.


So lets nerf webifiers, sensor dampeners, weapon disruptors, warp disruptors, sensor boosters and pretty much 95% of all modules that aren't random and can be figured out.
Callic Veratar
#48 - 2012-10-01 19:20:17 UTC

  • Each ECM module reduces max locked targets by 2
  • Each ECCM module prevents jams from 1 ECM module
  • Each ECM drone reduces max locked targets by 0.25 (for a total of 1.25)
  • Each cycle of ECM has a chance to break 1 (off race), 2 (multispec), or 3 (on race) targets following current mechanics, possibly slightly less aggressive


A full rack of jammers could still disable a single ship, but range or a partner would stop that in an instant.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#49 - 2012-10-01 19:23:30 UTC
Callic Veratar wrote:

  • Each ECM module reduces max locked targets by 2
  • Each ECCM module prevents jams from 1 ECM module
  • Each ECM drone reduces max locked targets by 0.25 (for a total of 1.25)
  • Each cycle of ECM has a chance to break 1 (off race), 2 (multispec), or 3 (on race) targets following current mechanics, possibly slightly less aggressive


A full rack of jammers could still disable a single ship, but range or a partner would stop that in an instant.

I sort of like that, but it's a bit convoluted...

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
praznimrak
Level Up
#50 - 2012-10-01 19:31:04 UTC


The solution woud be that pasiv Targeting sistem ppl use in hi sec to lock 1 target,whithout yelow boxing.that pasiv targeter suposli achiv lock on visual contact whithout using electronics,so what ecm do is it suposli jamm your electronics,so the pasiv targeter,exsiting modul in game,would be the solution,just neads some twiks,

Sory for crap english.

Thx

My youtube chanell: http://www.youtube.com/user/EveOnlineGameplay
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#51 - 2012-10-01 19:41:52 UTC
1) ECM should not keep your lock off for the entire cycle. It should *break* all your locks, but it should not hold them.
2) Create some formula by which ECM strength and ship sensor strength are used to predictably determine how often your locks should be broken. It should still be a very strong effect, but one that both parties could roughly predict beforehand.
3) Remove ECCM from the game. Scan-res sensor boosters now counter ECM.
4) There should be diminishing returns with multiple jammers against a single target.


Thoughts? The only way to make ECCM viable would be to give it a real effect that was useful beyond countering ECM, but I cannot think of any ways to do this.
G01kur Kisel
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2012-10-01 19:57:25 UTC  |  Edited by: G01kur Kisel
I like the idea that the ECM should be able to break your opponents lock each time 100 %. The skills you have trained for it will be used to reduce your ECM cooldown time so you wont be able to use it again.

The strenght of the ECM will be used instead to indicate how much of a damage you have done to a ships computer. A large ship has a stronger computer and a small ship a weaker. So if your falcon jams a frigatte this frig will be perma jammed for maybe 5 seconds, but after that it will be able to lock.

And depending on your own ECM skills, your cool down will be 10 seconds meaning you can lock the frig again after 10 seconds rendering the vessel useless 50 % of the time. 10 sec cooldown - 100 % jam for 5 sec - 5 sec passes - 5 sec left on cooldown - click again and repeat.

Falloff would be used as to how strong the ECM effect is. Same scenario would perhaps only jam the frig to 2.5 sec if the frig was in fall off of the ECM. And to add to that if this is to be implemeted I think TD should affect ECM on srenght and optimal range / falloff on this aswell.


Example 2. Falcon tries to jam a battleship. but is maybe only able to jam it for 2 seconds. but giving that BS has such a low sensor strenght it will still take you ages to relock making it very annoying relocking every 10 seconds again, and since your lock time is maybe 7 seconds. you will only be able to apply DPS for 3 seconds before getting jammed again.

This way it wont be chanced based and will function just like the other mods.

Now of course this was just examples and numbers and such are subject to change. But I think this is a fair and good implementation of how I would like to see the new ECM beeing used. Fair?
J'as Salarkin
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-10-01 20:05:39 UTC
I actually like the "chance based" system (it works for guns in falloff too you know), but totally shutting down the target seems a bit..well not well designed.

Insetad let the ECM override your targeting systems (100% cahnce it will happen), randomizing (rng at work here) which ship you will try to shot/repair of the ones you have already locked.

You can easily counter it by just targetting one single ship, which for a frigate is no big deal, but slightly annoying for a battleship.

The ECCM moduel would decrease the risk of your modules targeting the wrong ship.

In the end ECM would almost not affect 1vMany engagements at all as the single ship can still shot back at one opponent at the time, but it could have a massive impact on bigger battles where putting ecm on the logi ships or on the major damage dealers would wreak havoc.

Dont know how to balance or if its is a good idea to begin with, but it would change the ecm effect to something you can actually counter and even removing it as a tool where it seems to get the most hate from: being locked out of a fight where you are outnumbered anyway
Shi Xia
Killing With Kindness
#54 - 2012-10-01 20:55:03 UTC
It was mentioned that ECM should act more like other EWAR where it's not purely chance based. This allows ECM ships to have a tank and actually would force the ECM pilot to use some semblance of strategy and skill. Something that makes Eve unique in comparison to say... WoW. Seems to me the players who defend this mechanic don't really have any skill, or desire to be skillful at PvP.

Let's say myself and others are completely off base with that idea. Then my issue isn't necessarily with ECM ships. There's always someone who will take the easy way over skill and experience and the lazy folk need to have fun too. My beef is getting jammed out by a Caracal in a Rupture. What if ECM mods were designed to be used specifically on ECM ships (Kitsune/Falcon etc...) in the same manner that CovOps Cloaking devices can only be used by CovOps ships?

Ex: The Falcon gets a bonus that negates the modules very high CPU needs.
Cede Forster
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-10-01 21:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Cede Forster
Then again, it could be just that you are not as good as you thought at PVP and it was not the fault of ECM all along.

But keep going, i am sure eventually CCP will be annoyed enough to listen if you just keep screaming at the board. Worked for mining after all and its not like you are utterly disgracing yourself and the entire concept of "HTFU" that you believe to represent.

Carry on.


If you are bored by this: Try reading the entire thread - the complains and solutions - once while imagining that the author flies a battleship (slow speed, slow locking target) and then another time imagining the author flies a frigate/cruiser sized ship (high speed, high locking speed) - notice something? Big smile
Elzon1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-10-01 22:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Elzon1
Alrighty then, time to make a golden poast that little to no one will read... meh.

So, currently ECM is chanced based combined with ECM jammer strength. The greater the ECM strength, the greater chance to jam the target. You either jam the target or don't, absolutely nothing else is affected.

Here is my suggestion:

First, combine the sensor strength of all ships with their corresponding scan resolution so as to be proportional to each other.

This way when a ship loses sensor strength it loses the corresponding proportional scan resolution.

Take the chance based system off of ECM and apply the normal falloff mechanics, etc.

When you have enough ECM to jam a ship's sensor strength completely... it's jammed completely... simple enough?

If you jam a ship partially (in effect lower it's sensor strength) the ship's scan resolution drops in it's proper proportions, whatever CCP decides it should be.

So, even if you don't jam a ship completely you can still reduce it's scan resolution making it lock things slower.

This effect should be balanced so that it doesn't replace sensor damps, this is why I kept using the word proportional.

Edit: There could also be an effect on the number of targets the jammed ship can target. Jam the ship 50% of the way, the targeted ship can now only target half of what it originally could.

Not sue if it should be scan resolution or number of targets the ship can lock, maybe both. I don't know...
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#57 - 2012-10-01 22:43:29 UTC
Cede Forster wrote:
Then again, it could be just that you are not as good as you thought at PVP and it was not the fault of ECM all along.

But keep going, i am sure eventually CCP will be annoyed enough to listen if you just keep screaming at the board. Worked for mining after all and its not like you are utterly disgracing yourself and the entire concept of "HTFU" that you believe to represent.

Carry on.

Maybe you should try and link it to ganking being profitable, I hear that really gets things rolling.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#58 - 2012-10-02 04:05:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Ptraci
Confirming that there are no falcon or scorpion kill mails because ECM is just that powerful.

All you butthurt noobs should get some friends, primary the ECM ships, and/or accept the fact that you will not always win every single engagement. Just like the ECM boat does not always win. Today, with racial specific jammers fitted and max jamming skills (over 14 points PER ECM module), I only managed to jam 2 out of 3 tengus. "Whoa 2 out of 3 what are you complaining about ECM is too powerful nerf it nao!" - before you go that way, understand that just one tengu is more than enough to pop a falcon really quickly, end result being that I had to get off the grid really quickly. So ECM is not at all perfect, nor is it overpowered. As for random all or nothing - hey, your gun damage is random too. Sometimes you miss.
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-10-02 04:28:31 UTC
Behold the answer Electronic warfare guide

ECM

Modules used as a countermeasure:

Sensors (Multi-spectrum, Magnometric, Ladar, Radar, Gravimetric)
Sensor Backup Arrays (Multi-spectrum, Magnometric, LADAR, RADAR, Gravimetric)
Projected ECCM (used on friendly ships but don't have any effect on the own ship)
Electronics Superiority Rigs
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#60 - 2012-10-02 04:30:15 UTC
Sigh... and the thread turns into "fit a module to counter it" and "ECM isn't OP"

Good job, guys. If you posted the above, please re-read the OP.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)