Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Someone suggested in another thread that ECM would not break your locks but reduce the max. amount of targets you can lock, which I found to be a rather interesting mechanic. And I guess ECCM's would partially counter that.

It'd reduce the effectiveness of ECM in small engagements while allowing to completely shut down certain ships if the ECM is well focused.

Here's the post in the other thread about ECM :
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4205163#post4205163

Id rather see ECM function as an Anti Drone EWAR platform in the sense that successful Jams limit your drone control bandwidth. Still using the same coinflip mechanic you either lose control of drones, or you don't. Drones must be reconnected to and reassigned following a successful jam.

ECM still compared to ECCM of course.

My original idea for ECM, which I will repeat here since it keeps getting buried in time...

1) Increase the power of ECM overall. Before people pitch a fit, however...

2) Instead of a flat "all or nothing" roll of the dice for ECM have it operate on a per module basis on the target. Meaning turrets and anything that can be considered an "offensive" module (such as targeting computers, painting lasters, scramblers, disruptors, energy leeches, etc).

Meaning... let's say a Coercer is targeting you with it's 8 laser turrets. Under previous ECM rules, let's say your jammer had a 20% chance of working.

Under my idea, you fire your ECM at it, with a 30% chance of jamming. The game makes 8 rolls of the ECM dice, one for each turret, with each turret having a 30% chance of being jammed.

So odds are even lower than before that you will shut it down completely with just one jammer... but the odds are also very, very likely to shut down some of it's stuff with each cycle.

This would mean that every ECM ship could do some damage reliably, while reducing the odds of an ECM deciding a battle with a single lucky roll.

Balance!

Well, a logistics has 10 max. locked targets, so you'd need to put some effort there to really gimp his ability to lock things. An inty, on the other hand, is only 5 max. locked, so that's much easier to put down to <2.

I think the idea is definitely worth looking into, it has a quite interesting mechanic imo.

Changing ECM to a mechanic that reduces the max. amount of targets you can lock would render ECM-Boats obsolete. They are THE primary target anyways and would get volleyed of the field in the first seconds of the fight. One targetlock is enough to do that.

Dampeners can also reduce your target lock to a point where you are in the same positon as jammed by ECM-Modules. And they are 100% reliable.

Almost every argument you have made can be said of the current system, so you've wasted a wall of text. I believe there is a counter, ECCM, which you have not addressed at all.

In your scenario, the ecm ships only go for each other, instead of being actually useful and breaking the locks of the DPS. all the ECM boat needs is one target, so one eccm module, scripted, would make it pointless to try to break the ecm ships lock, making them focus on other more useful targets.

Ship choice is up to the pilot. if they want to fly a useless ship, that's their doing. Oh no, this idea my be both overpowered and useless! Much like guns when jammed. different ship have different everything, from lockable target #'s to range. You want a counter, well they're still there. Eccm, dampers if a person wants to guard against ecm, they just need a module slot, like everything else. Balance. do I want to be able to target anything, if the enemy brings ecm? will they bring it?

Your argument is that nothing is broken, but caldari are the only ones who's module is chance based for being useful, every other race has an impact with their ewar as soo as they activate it.
ECM is broken, and always has been.

My position is that ECM *feels* more overpowered than it is.

May I explain?

Spending 20 seconds unable to make any controls work feels like an eternity. The rapid light missile guys know all about this.

A solution might be to reduce the jam time from 20 seconds to 10. It wouldn't *feel* so bad. You wouldn't feel the fight was over and you're just killing time waiting to be killed.

In this case of course, the ECM cycle times would need to go down, and the probability of a jam per cycle would need to be reduced to compensate (because you get 2 jam chances in the same time frame and probability is additive in this case).

This would make ECM jams more of an annoyance that catch the unwary and less of a game-over affair (particularly for small scale warfare).

I also think, speaking as a heavy drone user, that drones should not be able to automatically retaliate against the jamming ship.

Why?

Because the drones are guided by your ship (why else is there a control range?) and if your ship's sensors are borked because of jamming, they should not be able to direct the drones to the jamming source.

ECCM

ECCM is currently simply a probability reducer.

What it should be is an active, directed module which you direct at the jamming ship. What it should do is apply HEAT to his jamming modules WHILE THEY ARE ACTIVATED.

When he turns off his ECM modules, your ECCM should also turn off so that you have to continually and actively attack his ECM modules when he re-activates them.

*that* would be a lot more fun.

You are correct. Here is a quick and dirty analysis of what is useful against what:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApJily1SXkKRdEVyc0tTbng0VDhEZXhKQll2TTk0cnc#gid=0

0 means 'not useful' whereas 1 means 'always useful'. 0.5 means 'sometimes useful'.

I have been generous with defender missiles and FoF since I am only considering EWAR effectiveness, not overall combat effectiveness.

Summary:
EWAR: ECM > TD > DAMPS = SMARTBOMB > NEUT = DEFENDER MISSILE

WEAPONS: Sentries > Combat drones > Autocannons = FoF missiles > blasters = howitzers = pulse lasers = short range missiles > railguns = beam lasers > long range missiles.


The analysis seems to suggest to me that every fleet should be made up of ishtars, dominix, navy vex, gila, armageddons, rooks, falcons and scorpions only.

If you can't fly any of that, take a hurricane with auto-cannons and FoF missiles :-)

If it were really necessary to remove the RNG from ECM, I'd make it function sort of like capacitor warfare. For each lock that a ship has, generate a number "maximum lock strength" based off of the ship's sensor strength and the signature radius of whatever it has locked. Lock strength increases from 0% to 100% of the maximum lock strength within the lock time for that target.

When a ship is hit with an ECM cycle, each lock has it's lock strength reduced by the ECM's jamming strength. If a lock reaches zero strength, that particular lock is broken. This includes attempts to lock - the locking process can be interrupted through the same mechanism. Well-timed ECM could make it very difficult for a ship to lock new targets even if it's current targets remain locked.

ECCM modules would both provide their current function (increased sensor strength) and also provide two additional benefits: an immediate boost to lock strength on all targets, and a weaker-than-sebo bonus to scan resolution*. ECM modules would have to have their cycle times and strength values changed to be balanced in the new system. Since lock strength regenerates at a rate related to lock time, a ship targeted with sensor damps scripted for scan res AND ECM would be extra screwed.

*The justification for this is that the module that counters most other forms of ewar (Neuts/cap boosters, damps/sensor boosters, TDs/Tracking Computers) is also useful when you're not being targeted by that type of ewar. ECCM was the exception, because increased sensor strength is not very useful when you're not being targeted by ECM, or in some niche near-unscannable fit.

That said, ECM is fairly balanced right now, so it isn't really necessary to change it. But if I had to design ECM with no RNG, I'd do it this way.

Rubbish you've obviously never flown logi, or in a fleet larger than 20. Now that ad-hominem attacks are done:

The proposal i made ( probably not original, others must have made it before) states that ECCM only gives you a base of 0 targets, and with scripts, 1 target. Where the idea gets a little op is that when taken below 0, you can't be locked by friends either, So the ECCM is not an absolute counter like you believe. All other counters in the game are not absolute either, they only mitigate the damage. Tracking enhancers don't completely negate the tracking disruptors, nor so sensor boosters negate the damping. the disrupting and damping are still happening, you've just put on enough of a counter that they're not as effective.

Same with the ECCM, you can get a maximum target count of 1, provided you fit scripted eccm, no matter how much ECM thrown at you, unless you have friends with projected ECCM. It still means they have to lock and support you.

Just because you have a single ECM used against you doesn't mean that you're screwed when its in effect. you will have less targets but still be able to target, even if you're not using ECCM. Its not an IWIN button as you accuse, like current ECM when it works. It has an active counter, that provides a real effect, not just a modifier to the roll of the die.

Soloists deserve the least say in anything, as eve is a MMO, and the game is designed around teamwork. Soloists will go solo no matter what, so i don't have to really cater to them, BUT solo PVP actually gets a benefit: provided you have you eccm, you can still get that one target. If no Eccm, you still have a chance, if they didn't bring more than one ECM mod. If they did, well, it should have been anticipated, and the loss is the fault of the unprepared and unlucky. Nothing is stopping you from doing the same.

I have, and do fly ECM ships, although i mostly fly logi. Logi pilots will hate me for this, because logi's lockable targets are the lifeblood of the fleet. Logi autolock 2-6 other logi, depending on fleet comp, and also autolock those in leadership roles.
one of the DPS gets redboxed, they're locked as soon as they're broadcast, and since switching primaries to find someone not being covered by logi is basic, logi are locking and unlocking constantly. any reduction in targeting capabilities means dead ships. ECM ships could be more effective spreading their ECM over logi then they are currently. They would no be looking to completely blot out that targeting of the logi, but to mess with their priorities.

So the proposed ECM is a little less powerful but people in fleets will feel it more and adjust doctrine. Eccm doesn't completely counter it, but provides a chance. Soloists may not like it, but they pick their battles and and are special snowflakes in any case.

You clearly didn't read the linked post "properly"