These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New ECM idea...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#21 - 2013-08-08 21:09:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
Aliventi wrote:
Phaade wrote:
So if each turret had a .1% chance to insta-kill any ship it targeted (think death-star), would that make it reasonable because "THE CHANCE IS SO LOW BRO AND BESIDES YOUR DPS IS STILL ONLY "X" SO IT'S BALANCED.

Your arguments are ridiculous and void of any concept of balance. I can tell you use ECM simply by the way you defend it. You defend it because it is so effective, and you use it to your advantage. You enjoy removing all capability from your opponent, thus rendering them obsolete. You enjoy fights where the opponent can not fight back or do anything to counter you. I reiterate: Your arguments are ridiculous and void of any concept of balance.

Your attempts at ridiculous "what if scenarios" appear to be out of desperation. Can you not prove that ECM is too powerful as you claim? There is quite a chasm of difference between saying that my argument is "void of any concept of balance" and proving that the numbers I have provided are imbalanced.

Why are you attacking me for using a perfectly balanced game mechanic? It is no more OP than a sensor damp or a tracking disruptor in certain situations. I am not attacking you for using valid game mechanics. "Oh how dare you use turrets! Those are too powerful despite their non-trivial chance to miss!" (see what I did there? Blink) I understand that many things in this game are very balanced.

Unlike all these "thoughts" "feeling" "ideas" about how ECM is OP I have proved that it is not OP using numbers. You see in the real world and in Eve things are decided and balanced upon numbers. And the numbers show that ECM is not OP.


You are wrong, it is far more ECM is more effective than both TD and SD in any situation! It doesn't make your ship simply less effective, it makes your ship completely ineffective. How can you not see the difference here?

The numbers you claim prove your point I argue prove mine. Moreover, you need to take into consideration the effect ECM has rather than simply the% chance it has to land.

Consider this: What's more effective, a ship that locks 3 ships out of a fight, rendering them incapable of doing ANYTHING, or a ship that lowers their turret range only? Or lowers their locking speed / distance only? Or increases their signature radius only?

Also, I do not consider having to fit a module specifically for the purposes of countering ONE form of Ewar, and thereby lowering your effectiveness against ALL other ship types, a reasonable counter to ECM. The only time that works out is when you know your opponents are bringing excessive ECM, you know their numbers, and you fit to counter a specific situation. You don't fit ECCM when you are going to pvp solo; you fit ECCM when you know you are guaranteed to encounter a lot of ECM.

Do you at least agree ECM is better / out of line when considering other forms of Ewar? TD / SD are much more situational than ECM. TP is irrelevant most times.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#22 - 2013-08-08 21:32:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Aliventi
Phaade wrote:

You are wrong, it is far more ECM is more effective than both TD and SD in any situation! It doesn't make your ship simply less effective, it makes your ship completely ineffective. How can you not see the difference here?

The numbers you claim prove your point I argue prove mine. Moreover, you need to take into consideration the effect ECM has rather than simply the% chance it has to land.

Consider this: What's more effective, a ship that locks 3 ships out of a fight, rendering them incapable of doing ANYTHING, or a ship that lowers their turret range only? Or lowers their locking speed / distance only? Or increases their signature radius only?

Also, I do not consider having to fit a module specifically for the purposes of countering ONE form of Ewar, and thereby lowering your effectiveness against ALL other ship types, a reasonable counter to ECM. The only time that works out is when you know your opponents are bringing excessive ECM, you know their numbers, and you fit to counter a specific situation. You don't fit ECCM when you are going to pvp solo; you fit ECCM when you know you are guaranteed to encounter a lot of ECM.

Do you at least agree ECM is better / out of line when considering other forms of Ewar? TD / SD are much more situational than ECM. TP is irrelevant most times.

"You are wrong". Prove it. I have numbers that show ECM is not OP. Try and spin them to prove your point and post them. Once you have numerical proof then I can prove your numerical proof wrong.

I have considered it. I have reached the conclusion many others including CCP has: perfectly balanced and valid game mechanic.

Please educate me about this quote " I do not consider having to fit a module specifically for the purposes of countering ONE form of Ewar, and thereby lowering your effectiveness against ALL other ship types, a reasonable counter to ECM"? I was apparently unaware that fitting an ECCM module to counter ECM, a sensor booster to counter SDs, or a TC to counter TDs, all of the sudden made you more vulnerable to every other valid game mechanic in Eve. Roll Also, consider it or not, ECCM is a perfectly valid and reasonable counter to ECM.

I do not agree, and my numbers prove, that ECM is balanced and in line with every other form of EWAR with the exception of the TP which I agree could do with some work. I can be like you and argue against numbers, but also like you I would be wrong Blink.
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#23 - 2013-08-08 21:46:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
Aliventi wrote:
Phaade wrote:

You are wrong, it is far more ECM is more effective than both TD and SD in any situation! It doesn't make your ship simply less effective, it makes your ship completely ineffective. How can you not see the difference here?

The numbers you claim prove your point I argue prove mine. Moreover, you need to take into consideration the effect ECM has rather than simply the% chance it has to land.

Consider this: What's more effective, a ship that locks 3 ships out of a fight, rendering them incapable of doing ANYTHING, or a ship that lowers their turret range only? Or lowers their locking speed / distance only? Or increases their signature radius only?

Also, I do not consider having to fit a module specifically for the purposes of countering ONE form of Ewar, and thereby lowering your effectiveness against ALL other ship types, a reasonable counter to ECM. The only time that works out is when you know your opponents are bringing excessive ECM, you know their numbers, and you fit to counter a specific situation. You don't fit ECCM when you are going to pvp solo; you fit ECCM when you know you are guaranteed to encounter a lot of ECM.

Do you at least agree ECM is better / out of line when considering other forms of Ewar? TD / SD are much more situational than ECM. TP is irrelevant most times.

"You are wrong". Prove it. I have numbers that show ECM is not OP. Try and spin them to prove your point and post them. Once you have numerical proof then I can prove your numerical proof wrong.

I have considered it. I have reached the conclusion many others including CCP has: perfectly balanced and valid game mechanic.

Please educate me about this quote " I do not consider having to fit a module specifically for the purposes of countering ONE form of Ewar, and thereby lowering your effectiveness against ALL other ship types, a reasonable counter to ECM"? I was apparently unaware that fitting an ECCM module to counter ECM, a sensor booster to counter SDs, or a TC to counter TDs, all of the sudden made you more vulnerable to every other valid game mechanic in Eve. Roll Also, consider it or not, ECCM is a perfectly valid and reasonable counter to ECM.

I do not agree, and my numbers prove, that ECM is balanced and in line with every other form of EWAR with the exception of the TP which I agree could do with some work. I can be like you and argue against numbers, but also like you I would be wrong Blink.



Lol, dude you must be dumb.

Your numbers prove nothing. Literally nothing. At all. Enlighten me as to wtf they possibly could prove, and don't you dare say "they prove ECM is balanced" because they don't. At all. In fact, they highlight why ECM is too effective.

Edit: Upon further reading, you couldn't even understand something incredibly simple, so here we go: If I have to fit a module to counter ECM (and ECM alone) my ship becomes less effective against every other ship I will encounter because I had to waste a mid slot and sacrifice tank / gank / mobility / control; all things my opponent did not have to sacrifice.

I don't require Sebo's to counter sensor dampening. I just deal with damps when I encounter them by adjusting my tactics or engagement ranges. Also, I will almost never be damped inside scram range, allowing me to either pull range and escape or do any number of other things.

I don't require TC's to counter TD'ing because I can still use all of my modules, particularly my ewar, to have an impact on the field.

TPing, I suppose you have conceded, is clearly not in line with ECM as it is far inferior.

ECM is superior to every other form of Ewar in every regard aside from occasional and uncommon situations where they are equal. This, by definition, means it is not balanced. Quite simple.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#24 - 2013-08-08 22:16:05 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Lol, dude you must be dumb.

Your numbers prove nothing. Literally nothing. At all. Enlighten me as to wtf they possibly could prove, and don't you dare say "they prove ECM is balanced" because they don't. At all. In fact, they highlight why ECM is too effective.

Edit: Upon further reading, you couldn't even understand something incredibly simple, so here we go: If I have to fit a module to counter ECM (and ECM alone) my ship becomes less effective against every other ship I will encounter because I had to waste a mid slot and sacrifice tank / gank / mobility / control; all things my opponent did not have to sacrifice.

I don't require Sebo's to counter sensor dampening. I just deal with damps when I encounter them by adjusting my tactics or engagement ranges. Also, I will almost never be damped inside scram range, allowing me to either pull range and escape or do any number of other things.

I don't require TC's to counter TD'ing because I can still use all of my modules, particularly my ewar, to have an impact on the field.

TPing, I suppose you have conceded, is clearly not in line with ECM as it is far inferior.

ECM is superior to every other form of Ewar in every regard aside from occasional and uncommon situations. This, by definition, means it is not balanced. Quite simple.

Do you know why you are losing this argument? It is because you can not come up with real proof that ECM is too powerful so you attempt to use a Argumentum ad Hominem fallacy of logic. Look it up.

So you claim that numerical proof of the chances of being jammed proves nothing? Nothing at all. Shocked Umm... I don't even know where to begin with this... The numbers show that ECM has a greater chance of failing than succeeding. For you to get a reasonable chance to jam you must spend MONTHS training a specialized character to fly a specialized bonused to ECM ship. How do you see no proof in that? The numbers do not lie. I couldn't spin those numbers to prove ECM isn't OP even if I tried.

Also, if you see it as a waste of a slot then you have made a choice. That choice may result in you being jammed more often than someone who chooses to fit one. Who am I to say your choice is wrong?

ECM is not superior. Yes, it is more devastating than other forms of EWAR. But for it to be effective it has to be in a thinly tanked ship, only lasts for 20 seconds, and has a non-trivial chance of doing nothing. You are arguing that the effects are more devastating while simultaneously ignoring the fact that the ships applying the effects won't last more than a few seconds under reasonable fire, the effect is limited in duration, and there is a chance the module isn't going to do anything. What good is being that devastating is it never hits, stops being effective, or is forced from the field before it can even take effect?
Susan Black
Ice Fire Warriors
#25 - 2013-08-09 01:15:13 UTC
Whether or not ECM is balanced is besides the point. A game mechanic can be perfectly balanced, and still be considered a bad mechanic in that it negatively impacts gameplay in some way or other.

There are several reasons I do not like ECM:

1. It is chanced based. It is the only pvp module in the game that is chanced based. And winning due to a lucky roll of the dice is not as interesting gameplay to me as winning due to better skill and tactics.

2. It prevents explosions. And I really, really like explosions. It has been my experience that bringing ECM significantly reduces my gang's ability to find someone willing to fight us. And, while people may argue that 'the numbers show it isn't op' the fact remains that people avoid it like the plague. They avoid fighting it, and they often avoid bringing it themselves because they know that other people will avoid fighting it.

This meta, in and of itself, tells me that something needs to be changed.


In many ways, I do not think that it is the idea that ECM is 'superior' or 'over-powering' that really bothers people in the end. There are plenty of things in this game that could be considered to be unbalanced or over powering--things that don't nearly produce the same negative reaction that ECM does.

It's what ECM does as a mechanic that bothers people....the idea of sitting there, twiddling your thumbs, waiting until you can once again lock your targets.

We can tweak it, nerf it, boost it, adjust it, and etc. But the bottom line, in my opinion, is that the very nature of what the mechanic does is poorly designed.


www.gamerchick.net @gamerchick42
BlakPhoenix
Load Up Blast Everything
DARKNESS.
#26 - 2013-08-09 02:07:05 UTC
@Aliventi

If ECM isn't as powerful as TD and SD, why don't you ever see alt's with SD's everywhere? How about Pilgrims around every gate camp?

Hmm, maybe it's because they're not as powerful...


Quote:
All level 5 Falcon vs. Sensor Comp. 5 ship:
Jammer vs Rifter: 14.2/9.6 sensor strength = 100% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Stabber: 14.2/15.6 sensor strength = 91.02% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 73.95% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Tempest: 14.2/24 sensor strength = 59.16% chance of jamming


Per jammer, these ships can field multiple jammers and this makes small gang/solo less effective since the less pilot's you are against the more powerful your jams become.

Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 73.95% chance of jamming per jammer ever 30 seconds

Shall we try these numbers with only using 3 jammers? Ok!
Jammer vs Rifter: 14.2/9.6 sensor strength = 100% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Stabber: 14.2/15.6 sensor strength = 99.93% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 98.23% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Tempest: 14.2/24 sensor strength = 93.19% chance of jamming per 30 seconds

How do your numbers stack up now? Many ECM pilots use upwards of 5 (even if not all are racially aligned) giving a blanket affect on any less than 3 pilots. The only true counter to ECM is being able to lock the jamming ship and sending drones after it before it jams you. Since these ships use cloaks (and as such can pop up at any point in a fight) and can jam from outside your drone control range this is not always possible to do.

As other have pointed out, there are ways to counter other ECM WITHOUT the need of modules. TD, you change your trajectory. SD, you change your range. With ECM once you are jammed you are helpless, until you gain upwards of 100km from the jamming ship.
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2013-08-09 02:45:18 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
words[/spoiler]

Counterpoint: it's an unfun chance-based stunlock mechanic. I don't give a **** if it's balanced. Rock-Paper-Scissors is perfectly balanced and you don't see nerds lining up to play that across the Internet.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#28 - 2013-08-09 02:47:14 UTC
BlakPhoenix wrote:
@Aliventi

If ECM isn't as powerful as TD and SD, why don't you ever see alt's with SD's everywhere? How about Pilgrims around every gate camp?

Hmm, maybe it's because they're not as powerful...


Quote:
All level 5 Falcon vs. Sensor Comp. 5 ship:
Jammer vs Rifter: 14.2/9.6 sensor strength = 100% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Stabber: 14.2/15.6 sensor strength = 91.02% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 73.95% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Tempest: 14.2/24 sensor strength = 59.16% chance of jamming


Per jammer, these ships can field multiple jammers and this makes small gang/solo less effective since the less pilot's you are against the more powerful your jams become.

Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 73.95% chance of jamming per jammer ever 30 seconds

Shall we try these numbers with only using 3 jammers? Ok!
Jammer vs Rifter: 14.2/9.6 sensor strength = 100% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Stabber: 14.2/15.6 sensor strength = 99.93% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 98.23% chance of jamming per 30 seconds
Jammer vs Tempest: 14.2/24 sensor strength = 93.19% chance of jamming per 30 seconds

How do your numbers stack up now? Many ECM pilots use upwards of 5 (even if not all are racially aligned) giving a blanket affect on any less than 3 pilots. The only true counter to ECM is being able to lock the jamming ship and sending drones after it before it jams you. Since these ships use cloaks (and as such can pop up at any point in a fight) and can jam from outside your drone control range this is not always possible to do.

As other have pointed out, there are ways to counter other ECM WITHOUT the need of modules. TD, you change your trajectory. SD, you change your range. With ECM once you are jammed you are helpless, until you gain upwards of 100km from the jamming ship.

Oh my gosh! Someone is actually arguing with numbers! Big smileBig smileBig smileI am going to like your post for that reason alone. Also, ECM cycle time is 20 seconds not 30.

I am not going to argue "Why don't you see more of ship X" because that is pointless. Unless you have cold hard numbers as to the use of each ship then don't bother.

Everyone argues that ECM is OP because the Falcon is effective. So your issue is a SPECIALZED BONUSED ship is effective. Heaven forbid that should be the case. In fact that is EXACTLY how it should be. That pilot invested MONTHS of training to be that effective. That is one of the things that makes Eve Online awesome. Why would you bother training in to specialized ships if you weren't going to be more effective than a generalized ship?

But that doesn't make ECM OP. Oh no. That makes a perfect Falcon with 3 racial jammers running across a quarter of the potential ships in Eve powerful. The other 75% of ships will make that Falcon less than useful. Even in the best circumstances it is not a blanket effectiveness you get with the other EWARs because at most a generalized falcon would have 1 of each racial jammer if it is shield tanked or 2 of a race and 1 of each of the others if it is armor tanked. You just don't see triple racial jammers on falcons unless they know what they are going up against.

So yes. Your numbers are valid. But your fit isn't. And yes, Falcons do split jammers and match them up racially to be more effective. They would be fools not to. Which is another downside to ECM: You need a specialized module that only is effective on 25% of the potential ships in Eve to be effective. Thank you for adding another point as to how ECM is balanced. I will have to add that in.

They are ways to counter ECM without a module. Sensor comps to V helps a lot. Info gang link help. FoF missiles work. Smartbombs for ECM drones. Warp away and warp back. Or wait out the jam. You have just as many options to defeat ECM as you do defeating other EWAR. It is up to you to take them.
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#29 - 2013-08-09 02:53:09 UTC  |  Edited by: IbanezLaney
ECM is fine.

I am going to tell everyone who wrongly thinks otherwise the counter for it - and I'll even tell you for free.
The concept behind how to do this is really outside the box and might cause some confusion among people and even a few brains to melt down with its insane complexity but here goes.


You ready for this????






















Train it and use it yourself.

I know - shocking right!!!!!!

Who would have thought that you can jam the enemy ECM ship with your own.Big smileBig smileBig smile

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#30 - 2013-08-09 02:56:39 UTC
Gorn Arming wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
words[/spoiler]

Counterpoint: it's an unfun chance-based stunlock mechanic. I don't give a **** if it's balanced. Rock-Paper-Scissors is perfectly balanced and you don't see nerds lining up to play that across the Internet.

Then propose a solution that isn't a chance based solution, like the one proposed in the OP of this thread, that is still balanced when compared to other types of EWAR. It is a very challenging thing to do. No one, afaik, has proposed a solution that non-chance based, still effective and balanced. Once that happens, if it ever does, I would be very glad to support it. Until then we have the very balanced ECM. Smile
Solutio Letum
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2013-08-09 03:24:55 UTC
Heres your problem OP

You fail to understand that a ship needs to prep for a fight by fitting something on it, warp jaming and webbing is a form of EW, it is counter'ed with ECM, or damps, thats just how it is, its supposed to be powerful against that, did you ever hear people cry the gallente blasters pass into your hull to easily? why is that? maybe its because guns are made to pass into hull no?

Did you ever fit something to resist ECM? like instead of fitting all your ships in a fleet with Web/Scram, why dont you all fit one of both split then fit a bit of ECCM on the scram ships, or maybe a few sensor boosters to resist to an arazu? if you are range fitted that is.

ECM is fine said from someone who pilots logistics ship, ever since the re balance it has been awesome, i am has much scared of ECM then Damps
Sorry for the spelling in advance
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2013-08-09 04:40:48 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
Gorn Arming wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
words[/spoiler]

Counterpoint: it's an unfun chance-based stunlock mechanic. I don't give a **** if it's balanced. Rock-Paper-Scissors is perfectly balanced and you don't see nerds lining up to play that across the Internet.

Then propose a solution that isn't a chance based solution, like the one proposed in the OP of this thread, that is still balanced when compared to other types of EWAR. It is a very challenging thing to do. No one, afaik, has proposed a solution that non-chance based, still effective and balanced. Once that happens, if it ever does, I would be very glad to support it. Until then we have the very balanced ECM. Smile

If I thought I had a clean solution I'd have made a thread about it.

The biggest problem is definitely ECM drones; I've simply started fitting smartbombs on anything larger than a destroyer that I intend to solo in. I'd like to see them changed to apply a penalty to the target's sensor strength rather than jamming it outright--they'd make it immensely easier to land a jam with an actual jamming module, but someone would at least have to spend a midslot at some point. ECM might also become usable on unbonused hulls in some circumstances.
Gigolo Jo
Matari Exodus
#33 - 2013-08-09 06:07:08 UTC
So can we please come back to the discussion of my suggested changes without arguing with numbers since this is not the point here. As said, the mechanics as they are are ruining the game experience. And I hope we all want to improve the game and not tweak it in a manner that we can easier win fights with our skills and prefered ships.

My past video(s): DRONE HARASSMENT My latest video**: **V.Ex.o.R.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#34 - 2013-08-09 06:51:04 UTC
Gigolo Jo wrote:
So can we please come back to the discussion of my suggested changes without arguing with numbers since this is not the point here. As said, the mechanics as they are are ruining the game experience. And I hope we all want to improve the game and not tweak it in a manner that we can easier win fights with our skills and prefered ships.

Replacing one chance for another chance is not the answer. Taking modules away from a ship is not the answer. Module cycle times would make it so your version of ECM would worse than TP which are already the weakest EWAR. EWAR is designed to take ships out of the fight. Not only does your solution not do that, but it doesn't even make a noticeable impact on the the ship being ECMed due to quick module cycle times.

tl;dr: Your solution is not the solution to replace ECM. That solution is not chance based, still effective, and balanced. Your solution fills none of those 3 important criteria.
Aldap
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2013-08-09 06:59:15 UTC
I actually think this thread is going great :-) Finaly a thread that gets to the core of it.

The point is showed so well, and I actually appreciate Aliventi point of view, and his words makes it so clear that once a pilot is facing ECM it turns PvP into PvN(umbers), in just two pages there we go.

Already as it is, worth bumping every week until CCP do something about it.

An interesting article about Solo PvP: http://themittani.com/features/new-eden-solo
General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-08-09 11:25:30 UTC  |  Edited by: General Guardian
Some really interesting thoughts here on ecm, and a great debate too. But I am both for AND against ecm. In small gang or solo PvP, its a major pain in the ass. Especially if you're solo, being permajammed no matter what the chances and numbers are, you've still got that chance that your going to float around in space doing nothing useful until you explode because you were just "unlucky"

On the other hand, that ecm is needed for larger fleets to counter many setups, so nerfing ecm isn't really the answer.

I think trying to help individuals out vs too many forms of ecm would benefit both worlds, as no one wants to participate in a fight only to be jammed for the entire fight because of overwhelming ecm.

I think ships need sensor compensation. The more ecm (drones or modules) active on your ship. The faster your sensor strength increases. And when none are active, it slowly returns no normal. This will force ecm pilots to switch jams during larger fights, and in the case of solo PvP eventually you'll be unjammable. Technically it shouldn't be possible for any one pilot to be permajammed.
Ju0ZaS
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2013-08-09 13:39:28 UTC
I'm bumping cause a mechanic to jam mods for a tipe period or a cycle time seems like it would be an interesting new thing. It would be more complex than the way it is now IMO. I wonder how it would work with grouped weapons... Well, I suppose nothing a professional programmer can't handle to make it work properly. I mentioned introducing scrips last time, perhaps if you don't have any loaded you'd have a small chance to jam every weapons, Ewar mod, RR mod. But if you fit a script you'd have twice the chance to jam the specific type of modules you want.

Are you going to fight me or do you expect to bore me to death with your forum pvp?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2013-08-09 13:43:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
I really like OP's idea. Its a major pain in the ass to tackle something and have them escape due to ECM drones breaking lock and them warping off.

Drones on most ships are a supplementary item, but ECM drones are capable and very often remove your entire ship from the equation, no other supplementary or even primary system does that.

If like the OP said, ECM had a random chance to shut down one or more of your modules for 30 secs, different story, if it happens to be warp scrambler fine.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-08-09 15:26:37 UTC
ECM IS OP.CCP instead of fixing jumpclones, energy n. and nos, fiddle with ship, ogb, should stick their head deep into the ground and not take it out until ECM, all forms of it, is not so OP.
I frig worth under 10m perma jamms a ship that costs 3x or even 4x its value, where is the logic of that.
A ship, decloaks 70km, 80km 90km and perma jamms, while his friends web, scram you and go to work.
WAKE UP CCP.
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#40 - 2013-08-09 16:10:58 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
Phaade wrote:
Lol, dude you must be dumb.

Your numbers prove nothing. Literally nothing. At all. Enlighten me as to wtf they possibly could prove, and don't you dare say "they prove ECM is balanced" because they don't. At all. In fact, they highlight why ECM is too effective.

Edit: Upon further reading, you couldn't even understand something incredibly simple, so here we go: If I have to fit a module to counter ECM (and ECM alone) my ship becomes less effective against every other ship I will encounter because I had to waste a mid slot and sacrifice tank / gank / mobility / control; all things my opponent did not have to sacrifice.

I don't require Sebo's to counter sensor dampening. I just deal with damps when I encounter them by adjusting my tactics or engagement ranges. Also, I will almost never be damped inside scram range, allowing me to either pull range and escape or do any number of other things.

I don't require TC's to counter TD'ing because I can still use all of my modules, particularly my ewar, to have an impact on the field.

TPing, I suppose you have conceded, is clearly not in line with ECM as it is far inferior.

ECM is superior to every other form of Ewar in every regard aside from occasional and uncommon situations. This, by definition, means it is not balanced. Quite simple.

Do you know why you are losing this argument? It is because you can not come up with real proof that ECM is too powerful so you attempt to use a Argumentum ad Hominem fallacy of logic. Look it up.

So you claim that numerical proof of the chances of being jammed proves nothing? Nothing at all. Shocked Umm... I don't even know where to begin with this... The numbers show that ECM has a greater chance of failing than succeeding. For you to get a reasonable chance to jam you must spend MONTHS training a specialized character to fly a specialized bonused to ECM ship. How do you see no proof in that? The numbers do not lie. I couldn't spin those numbers to prove ECM isn't OP even if I tried.

Also, if you see it as a waste of a slot then you have made a choice. That choice may result in you being jammed more often than someone who chooses to fit one. Who am I to say your choice is wrong?

ECM is not superior. Yes, it is more devastating than other forms of EWAR. But for it to be effective it has to be in a thinly tanked ship, only lasts for 20 seconds, and has a non-trivial chance of doing nothing. You are arguing that the effects are more devastating while simultaneously ignoring the fact that the ships applying the effects won't last more than a few seconds under reasonable fire, the effect is limited in duration, and there is a chance the module isn't going to do anything. What good is being that devastating is it never hits, stops being effective, or is forced from the field before it can even take effect?



Wow, you aren't getting it.

Your numbers still prove nothing. They don't have a "less than 50% chance of working" in fact, they typically have a greater than 60-70% chance of working per module. You apparently don't take into consideration the fact that you can be jammed from ranges well over 70km. Define "reasonable fire" at 70+km (keep in mind I don't give a crap about blob warfare).

I am illustrating numerous circumstances in which ECM is superior to other forms of Ewar. Because there are vastly more situations in which ECM is superior than situations in which ECM is inferior, it is inherently not balanced. Thank you for conceding your own argument: "Yes, it (ECM) is more devastating than other forums of Ewar." It's about time.

As I've stated, just because something has a certain % chance to work or fail does not make it balanced or unbalanced. The impact ECM has when it does work, which coincidentally is more than half the time, is devastating, and is not in line with any other Ewar. How can you not understand this?

Oh, and in that statement you, yourself, have resorted to ad hominem.