These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

The Final Fix to ECM

Author
Durrr
Arzad Ammatar Defense Squadron
The Shogunate.
#1 - 2013-01-12 16:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Durrr
Disclaimer: I'll start by saying I am a pilot who is not an expert in pvp overall, my pvp career over my many toons is minimal compared to many out there. Yet, I would estimate that of my pvp experience, enough of it is in ECM ships, so as to make me somehwat of an authority on the subject. Secondly, all of these changes are intended for pvp. I have not fully thought out how these changes would affect PVE.

With Retribution came the new skills which increase sensor strength. And, while I think this is a a decent change in the sense that it mitigates the symptoms of that which is broken with ECM, it doesn't fix the underlying problem.

Proposed solution:
Why not just change the ECM module from "cannot target anyone" to "cannot target anyone other than the ship/drone currently ECMing you". This would have many benefits:

1: This would do away with all solo-pvp ecm (excluding drones, but we'll get to those), which is OP anyways (ie: dessies with jammers in mids). Simply put, there is little to no reason to put such a chance based decisive factor, on 1v1 pvp. Now I understand there may be a solo rook pilot out there, who would have a problem with this, but I believe the fix would help many more than those it would harm. Please read on.

2: This would allow you to lock drones that have you ecmed, and blow them up. This would buy the pilot using the ecm drones time (or allow them to "bug out" as a last ditch effort, just like they do currently), while still giving the target of the ecm an effective counter-measure. It will still require the target to find who is jamming them, lock it, and dismember the offending drone (keep in mind, the other drones, and the offending ship would be unlockable still) but it gives you a way to counter what was once a RNG "win" for solo fights. While this would make the ecm drones less useful, they would still have their place in the game, buying time and effectively tank (as the ship using them is not being hit) while not fully incapacitating a target.

3: This would allow those "jammed" to still shoot at the enemy falcons (any ECM ship can be included here, griffins, blackbirds, kitsunes, scorps, etc. Feel free to interchange your favorite ecm ship with the term "falcon" throughout this text) albeit only the one jamming them, (unless two such falcons worked together) while they would still be "jammed" to the rest of the fleet. This would focus falcons to work in teams of 2 or 3, increasing small gang teamwork and lowering the power of ECM blobs due to increased complexity**.

**The reason this would not scale well, is as a group grows, organization of who is jamming what becomes less clear, making for a great chance that a ship will merely be jammed (ie: and still be able to shoot the person jamming them, albeit no one else) and not "fully jammed". This would be more in line with damps or TDs which do not scale due to stacking penalties (Whereas there is no penalty currently to applying multiple ECM mods to a single ship). This would also add a component of organizational skill to the game, as an organized PVP unit can take on a larger less organized group (assuming an equal proportion of ECM in each group), whereas currently its mostly a numbers game.

What do you guys think? Please be civil with your retorts, but feel free to criticize anything I might have missed, or left out.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#2 - 2013-01-12 18:04:12 UTC
It's an interesting idea, but I don't see it in any way as a fix and it's somewhat illogical, that the jamming ship can't use it's own e-war to protect itself. Without that protection you would need to alter the ships focusing on ECM, since instead of being non-targetable they would become the only thing you could target. It also retains the RNG aspect of the mechanic, which is one of the major complaints about it. So for me your proposal is just a different way of having the ECM mechanic suck. I'd like to think it's possible to move to a clearly non-sucking state with random dice rolls being much less of a factor in the ECM mechanic.

The mechanic itself might be useful for some other module though. There seems to be some demand for a bodyguard module/ship, that allows you to force aggression away from a ship you're escorting. Something like this could fit quite nicely, but it might be better as a separate module/mechanic that allows it to be balanced separately.
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#3 - 2013-01-12 19:25:32 UTC
Normally I go into this "stop whining and get used to it" mode, but this is actually an idea that has merit. Thing is that with the increased sensor str and the rebalance of ECM itself and the ships I'm not so sure it'll be needed anymore. But again, it's quite an interesting idea I've not heard or thought of before.
Durrr
Arzad Ammatar Defense Squadron
The Shogunate.
#4 - 2013-01-13 00:33:22 UTC
I write a seemingly well thought out post on how to fix ewar and get two comments, yet "nuets" over there already has 2 pages and not one goon (at least I did't notice any). What is the world coming to.
Dan Carter Murray
#5 - 2013-01-13 04:19:09 UTC
just make jams suffer from diminishing marginal returns.

http://mfi.re/?j7ldoco 50GB free space @ MediaFire.com

Eternal Error
Doomheim
#6 - 2013-01-13 04:53:00 UTC
Dan Carter Murray wrote:
just make jams suffer from diminishing marginal returns.

This already happens mathematically (i.e. there is currently no stacking penalty, but each jammer still is less effective than the last in terms of less % chance to lock).

sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2013-01-13 04:55:48 UTC
ECM boat balancing will have to be redesigned following this. Instead of paper, they would have to be brick.
Theo Ramone
Stryker Industries
Stryker Group
#8 - 2013-01-13 07:08:13 UTC
Great, so does that mean I can have like 16 mid slots on my Falcon so I can ecm and still have a tank? The whole point with ecm is it IS your tank. If you say "Well, ecm allows you to shoot the guy jamming you" you have effectively removed every bit of tank a ewar ship has.

In other words, this idea is ******* stupid.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2013-01-13 09:11:37 UTC
Theo Ramone wrote:
Great, so does that mean I can have like 16 mid slots on my Falcon so I can ecm and still have a tank? The whole point with ecm is it IS your tank. If you say "Well, ecm allows you to shoot the guy jamming you" you have effectively removed every bit of tank a ewar ship has.

In other words, this idea is ******* stupid.

Pretty much , just like the op.

He says it is a "I write a seemingly well thought out post on how to fix ewar" . No it is not.

If you want to decrease the current strength of ecm , then you would have to boost the ecm specific ships significantly.
The recent skill books to sensor strenght already lowered their usefullness a lot.
Go and think out a better sollution, until then stop qq.

I dont understand why some ppl want to remove ewar for the game. Clearly they can only think in 1 dimensional pvp , who has the more dps/tank. Why cant u just accept that ewar has and should have its part in pvp,being it solo small scale or fleet pvp.



Bubanni
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2013-01-13 10:10:53 UTC
I like the idea, but would this mean that a falcon can never again get away when tackled? or should it break lock, but be relockable while jamming?

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934

Durrr
Arzad Ammatar Defense Squadron
The Shogunate.
#11 - 2013-01-14 04:12:24 UTC
Eternal Error wrote:
Dan Carter Murray wrote:
just make jams suffer from diminishing marginal returns.

This already happens mathematically (i.e. there is currently no stacking penalty, but each jammer still is less effective than the last in terms of less % chance to lock).



I have no idea what you mean by this. As a simple example, assuming an ecm module jam strength of 6, and a target sensor strength of 12, we can assume a 50% jam for each module activated.

After 1 module, you have 50% chance to have jammed the target.
After 2 modules, you have a 3/4 (75%) chance of having jammed the target
After 3 modules, you have a 7/8 *87.2%) chance of having jammed the target.
After 4 modules, you have a 15/16ths chance of having jammed the target.
And so on, and so forth. Each module, increases the chance of having jammed the target by 50%.

This is different than say a stacking penalty which will give you x sensor dampening (I'm using sensor dampening as an example, feel free to input damage mod, armor/shield hardener, webifier, etc.).
The 2nd sensor dampener will only be roughly 88%x (I don't have the exact figures at my disposable, but these are good estimates) effective.
The third is roughly 54%x effective
etc.
Durrr
Arzad Ammatar Defense Squadron
The Shogunate.
#12 - 2013-01-14 04:19:14 UTC
Theo Ramone wrote:
Great, so does that mean I can have like 16 mid slots on my Falcon so I can ecm and still have a tank? The whole point with ecm is it IS your tank. If you say "Well, ecm allows you to shoot the guy jamming you" you have effectively removed every bit of tank a ewar ship has.

In other words, this idea is ******* stupid.


You're assuming that the tactics do not adapt at all, which they will. Reread the point about 2-3 person falcon teams. Also, if you want to ignore teamwork (I wouldn't recommend it, but you have the option to), you could always sacrifice having a completely full rack of ECM for some buffer (or ASB) shield tank.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2013-01-14 08:43:11 UTC
Making FoF missiles suck less and introducing a projectile variant would actually be better, imo.

Any why single out ECM as evil? TD is just as horrible to a gun boat - to the point just about any unbonused hull with a slot carries one.

No, a better idea is (yet more) more viable counters rather than screwing with the mechanic.
Janna Windforce
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2013-01-14 09:11:19 UTC
I'd also add, that given range of the ECM boats, you wouldn't probably hurt them anyway - unless they are badly positioned.
On the other hand, idea of taunting ship/module is not that bad, it would be quite interesting as escort ship of haulers and such.
Uncle Gagarin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-01-14 10:00:59 UTC
Brutal truth: extremaly stupid idea from enraged kid who never flied any ECM boat but died once due to ECM ...

Before you will come with some nice idea how to improve or change something - use that thing.

Cheers,
Sam Korak
Doomheim
#16 - 2013-01-14 12:03:35 UTC
Fit a drone or two, they will kill the jammer.
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#17 - 2013-01-14 14:00:26 UTC
Bad idea. Bringing an ECM to a cheap gang against a large/expensive target is a viable strategy as part of the "bigger <> better" style of eve.

Change this and everyone flies machariels and vindicators and slams you when you try to lock them out. ECM ships are already primary in fights, those change make them just fodder.
Kn1v3s 999
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2013-01-14 15:52:16 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Theo Ramone wrote:
Great, so does that mean I can have like 16 mid slots on my Falcon so I can ecm and still have a tank? The whole point with ecm is it IS your tank. If you say "Well, ecm allows you to shoot the guy jamming you" you have effectively removed every bit of tank a ewar ship has.

In other words, this idea is ******* stupid.

Pretty much , just like the op.

He says it is a "I write a seemingly well thought out post on how to fix ewar" . No it is not.

If you want to decrease the current strength of ecm , then you would have to boost the ecm specific ships significantly.
The recent skill books to sensor strenght already lowered their usefullness a lot.
Go and think out a better sollution, until then stop qq.

I dont understand why some ppl want to remove ewar for the game. Clearly they can only think in 1 dimensional pvp , who has the more dps/tank. Why cant u just accept that ewar has and should have its part in pvp,being it solo small scale or fleet pvp.





The new skills removed nothing. You will still be permajammed with eccm.

People dont hate ewar hate broken mechanics, and ecm is totally broken for how it works

I have never saw whining/ranting threads about td, damps, target paintings, guess why.
Durrr
Arzad Ammatar Defense Squadron
The Shogunate.
#19 - 2013-01-14 21:17:38 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Making FoF missiles suck less and introducing a projectile variant would actually be better, imo.

Any why single out ECM as evil? TD is just as horrible to a gun boat - to the point just about any unbonused hull with a slot carries one.

No, a better idea is (yet more) more viable counters rather than screwing with the mechanic.


The difference being that a TD can mitigate turret dps. It does not prevent an enemy from neuting you, pointing/scramming/webbing you, EWARing you, using missiles on you, launching drones (after the fact) and focusing them on you, nor locking out logistics. All of which ECM does do, in addition to mitigating turret DPS, and ECM can often times do it to more than one target.

As for more viable counters, I was under the impression that that's what my proposed changes would do. They would add a teamwork component to ECM that doesn't currently exist, as well as a function so that ECM doesn't scale to a large basis well (as we all know, blobs suck), whereas all current counters are decided in station by one's fittings.



As for Bubanni's point about falcons no longer being able to jam a pilot who has gotten a warp disruptor point on them, I would reply once again the need for teamwork, rather than relying solely on yourself. Have a teammate SD them, Jam them, or kill them, just like any other ship in the game would.


As for Maeltstome's point. I believe Janna has already answered with part of the solution, range. The other being teamwork. Honestly if a mach/vindi is killing your ecm ships, (after these changes), something somewhere has gone very wrong and you deserve to die.



And finally Uncle Gagarin, if you're going to troll, at least allow us to get some humor out of it. Fly out to Egghelende and speak with fweddit. I'm sure they would be happy to teach you a few things about the art of proper manners. (Love those guys).
Eternal Error
Doomheim
#20 - 2013-01-15 02:43:28 UTC
Durrr wrote:
Eternal Error wrote:
Dan Carter Murray wrote:
just make jams suffer from diminishing marginal returns.

This already happens mathematically (i.e. there is currently no stacking penalty, but each jammer still is less effective than the last in terms of less % chance to lock).



I have no idea what you mean by this. As a simple example, assuming an ecm module jam strength of 6, and a target sensor strength of 12, we can assume a 50% jam for each module activated.

After 1 module, you have 50% chance to have jammed the target.
After 2 modules, you have a 3/4 (75%) chance of having jammed the target
After 3 modules, you have a 7/8 *87.2%) chance of having jammed the target.
After 4 modules, you have a 15/16ths chance of having jammed the target.
And so on, and so forth. Each module, increases the chance of having jammed the target by 50%.

This is different than say a stacking penalty which will give you x sensor dampening (I'm using sensor dampening as an example, feel free to input damage mod, armor/shield hardener, webifier, etc.).
The 2nd sensor dampener will only be roughly 88%x (I don't have the exact figures at my disposable, but these are good estimates) effective.
The third is roughly 54%x effective
etc.

That is exactly what I mean. If you have multiple targets on field, it is far more effective to spread jammers. I strongly suspect that the reason ECM is not stacking penalized is because it already suffers from diminishing marginal returns. Let's take a max skilled ECCMed guardian and round off--sensor strength of 45 without heat. Now, consider a cloud of EC-300s.
With 10 drones on the guardian, he is jammed ~20.1% of the time.
20 drones: 36.2%
35 drones: 54.5%
50 drones: 67.5%
100 drones: 89.4%

If you stacking penalize it, you simply make diminishing marginal returns happen much more quickly. The only likely practical effect is that the solo pilot who gets jammed out by that one guy with his falcon alt gets a few more shots off before dying. I agree that ECM is a broken mechanic, but stacking penalties are not the answer (nor is your proposal ITT).
12Next page