These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

How should we 'fix' ECM?

Author
Hamatitio
The Forsakened Few
We Forsakened Few
#1 - 2011-12-15 20:30:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Hamatitio
Well it seems with the hybrid buff, the playerbase has moved onto the chance based mechanic of target jamming ECM.

This topic is a discussion as to what the players would feel the best solution would be. I'll update this post periodically with the various ideas that are put forth.

I'll start us off with one:

+10-15% (this increases time) to the cycle time of all highslot modules. Dedicated ECM ships would be able to boost this amount upwards of perhaps 30-40%.

This percent boost would always apply, and be stacking penalized as the other forms of ECM. This would also make EC-xxx drones not ridiculously imbalanced in 1 v 1 fights.

It would hinder logistics, neut ships, and lower incoming DPS, without being chance based, and ensure that a dedicated ECM ship is still viable to bring to a fight.

Other contributed ideas:
-Make ECM a lock breaker module, keep 20 second duration.
(this could perhaps be added with the removal of racial jamming modules, and a buff to multispecs, allowing less mid slot utilization on already fragile ships)

-Diminishing returns, 10 second jam time initially, reducing each time.
General Paul
Ronin Cartel
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#2 - 2011-12-15 20:40:36 UTC
I don't get what highslots have to do with ecm.. and why dedicated ecm would boost this?

Really.. wut?
Hamatitio
The Forsakened Few
We Forsakened Few
#3 - 2011-12-15 20:45:20 UTC
General Paul wrote:
I don't get what highslots have to do with ecm.. and why dedicated ecm would boost this?

Really.. wut?


You dont understand that a ECM module would change from a chance based removal of all targets, to a blanket DPS/Logistics/Neuting whatever highslot module reduction in effectivenes?
General Paul
Ronin Cartel
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#4 - 2011-12-15 20:52:39 UTC
But in order to balance ecm you would severely hamper logistics, dps, alpha, salvaging (lol)

And what use does a highslot bonus give to dedicated ecm ships?>

I'm sorry maybe this is over my head. You seem to be changing everything but ecm
General Paul
Ronin Cartel
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#5 - 2011-12-15 21:00:01 UTC
Unless your suggesting that ecm should 'dampen' highslots..? In which case this would surely be better used as a fix to sensor dampeners..

Sorry I think I figured out what you were suggesting.
Hamatitio
The Forsakened Few
We Forsakened Few
#6 - 2011-12-15 21:10:10 UTC
General Paul wrote:
Unless your suggesting that ecm should 'dampen' highslots..? In which case this would surely be better used as a fix to sensor dampeners..

Sorry I think I figured out what you were suggesting.


You got it.

Except then, if you say this should be sensor damps, then what fix would you suggest for ECM? Remove it entirely?
General Paul
Ronin Cartel
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#7 - 2011-12-15 21:12:25 UTC
ECM seems fine to me, ecm drones are widely suggested to be overpowered.

I see plenty of falcon lossmails on the killboard though.
Hamatitio
The Forsakened Few
We Forsakened Few
#8 - 2011-12-15 21:17:10 UTC
General Paul wrote:
ECM seems fine to me, ecm drones are widely suggested to be overpowered.

I see plenty of falcon lossmails on the killboard though.


Its not a matter of them being solo pwn mobiles, its a matter that chance based mechanics are garbage.
General Paul
Ronin Cartel
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#9 - 2011-12-15 21:28:46 UTC
Thats very subjective.
Zachis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-12-15 21:30:14 UTC
Interesting idea! It fits within the racial EWAR design for Caldari as well, namely to reduce incoming DPS. But, in a way that doesn't completely cripple the target ship.

Obviously, the percentages would need to be worked out, but a very clever solution.

Of course, a lot of folks will dislike the fact that it removes a GTFO tool from fights if implemented this way. But, it gives room for balancing and tweaking much more than the current randomness does.
Mumtaz Khan
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2011-12-15 21:47:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mumtaz Khan
Working as intended etc. etc.

Why do you people keep insisting on fixing things that aren't broken? Just accept the fact that you got owned by someone who spends more time learning to play than complaining.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2011-12-15 21:51:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Hamatitio wrote:
Well it seems with the hybrid buff, the playerbase has moved onto the chance based mechanic of target jamming ECM.

This topic is a discussion as to what the players would feel the best solution would be. I'll update this post periodically with the various ideas that are put forth.

+10-15% (this increases time) to the cycle time of all highslot modules. Dedicated ECM ships would be able to boost this amount upwards of perhaps 30-40%.

This percent boost would always apply, and be stacking penalized as the other forms of ECM. This would also make EC-xxx drones not ridiculously imbalanced in 1 v 1 fights.


Your idea is pretty good, but I would make it reduced damage/effect. Otherwise it doesn't protect against alpha strikes and guess who is going to be primary Lol

The foundation for this tech is in game already, see Incursion system penalties.

Reasons why this idea is good:

- Not chance based
- Makes ECM subject to stacking penalties like everything else
- Which in turn allows CCP to finally balance ECM drones against the other EWAR drones
- Doesn't make the victim feel like he can't do anything
- ECM no longer is a "get out of jail card".

It would also boost active tanking somewhat (assuming that ECM drones + strong active tank becomes viable for some stuff, perhaps even midslot ECM depending on how strong it is for unbonused ships), which is probably a good thing.
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#13 - 2011-12-15 22:00:02 UTC
seen this come up every few months. My latest veiws are mostly the same.

The effect is too strong for too long and does not scale or stack any penelties, a jam from a griffin is as good from a widow as long as the cycle works - welcome to 20 seconds of being 100% useless.

ECM imo should jam properly like now for 10 seconds and then 10 seconds cool down, or a 5 sec jam and 5 second damp effect etc etc.

20 seconds full on no targetting WAY to strong and always has been, its the fun sucking vampire in any fights ESP small gang.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#14 - 2011-12-15 22:04:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Diminishing returns on jam cycle duration seems like a pretty reasonable nerf.
(Say: 20 seconds, then 10, then 5, then all it does is break lock, and then immune)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#15 - 2011-12-15 22:06:13 UTC
I've always liked two rather different solutions:

One is to remove the jamming time — make it work like an ECM burst that doesn't affect your ability to lock targets; it just kills all your current target locks (and you're free to relock immediately).

The other is that ECM reduces the number of available target locks — this one is mechanically trickier because you have to decide how many lost targets a given jamming strength corresponds to and how to make the bonuses work without making the whole thing silly.
1-Up Mushroom
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2011-12-15 22:07:28 UTC
Mumtaz Khan wrote:
Working as intended etc. etc.

Why do you retards keep insisting on fixing things that aren't broken? Just accept the fact that you got owned by someone who spends more time learning to play than complaining about ****. Oh, you're not butthurt? Then quit bitching about things you don't know about.


umadbro?
5 Senses In A Person... 4 Seasons In A Year... 3 Colors In A Stoplight... 2 Poles On The Earth... ONLY 1-UP MUSHROOM!!!  If You Like My Sig, Like Me!   Remember EVE is EVErything!
Mortuus
Reprisal LLC
#17 - 2011-12-15 22:08:04 UTC
ECM has killed small gang, first one to bring it usually wins.

However, maybe the answer is a blanket increase in ship signal strength and a buff to ECCM modules. Then reduce the ECM cycle to 10 so a lucky jam doesn't mean auto-death.
Mumtaz Khan
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2011-12-15 22:09:33 UTC
1-Up Mushroom wrote:
Mumtaz Khan wrote:
Working as intended etc. etc.

Why do you retards keep insisting on fixing things that aren't broken? Just accept the fact that you got owned by someone who spends more time learning to play than complaining about ****. Oh, you're not butthurt? Then quit bitching about things you don't know about.


umadbro?


troll harder
stoicfaux
#19 - 2011-12-15 22:31:37 UTC
1. Reverse Target Painter. If you're ECM'd, your target's sig size is reduced, which reduces the effectiveness of your guns and missiles. However, you're still able to fight, and smaller guns can still hit big targets.

2. Make Scan Resolution (lock time) a factor in weapon accuracy. ECM would make your scan resolution worse, thus reducing the damage you do and makes lock times longer.

tl;dr - Turn ECM into a damage debuff, instead of the current 'stun' mechanic it is today.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Nephilius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2011-12-15 22:40:59 UTC
Mumtaz Khan wrote:
Working as intended etc. etc.

Why do you retards keep insisting on fixing things that aren't broken? Just accept the fact that you got owned by someone who spends more time learning to play than complaining about ****. Oh, you're not butthurt? Then quit bitching about things you don't know about.


I'm with this guy, ECM serves a purpose, it has a role and trying to nerf or change it will cause more problems than it will fix. You can't shield tank effectively with it, so if you miss a cycle you are probably going to explode into space pixie dust. If ECM really is that powerful, why isn't everyone using it? Hell, I have the skills trained up and I don't even use it.
"If."
123Next pageLast page