These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 approach to ECM: discrete targeting units
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lugh Crow-Slave
#41 - 2014-12-24 09:15:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Yes all of that is the same with ECM and webbing them back painting and trackin disrupting them are all things you would need to refit also if they are faster then you you can't get closer w/o a prop mod so tell me again how you are countering it with out a fitting to do so?

I've already explained it several times but you don't seem willing to listen. Put simply: player skill doesn't affect how long it takes for you to un-jam. Other EWAR gives you a lot more wiggle room in terms of potentially being able to do something to get past the EWAR. With ECM the only way past it is find a way to not have the effect get applied in the first place.


It may not take as much on the defenders end but it takes much more on the end of the user than other forms of E-War.

Once you are jammed you're jammed yes but that doesn't mean the mod is bad or unbalanced.

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#42 - 2014-12-24 09:35:54 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
I guess that would also apply for ECCM and remote ECCM.

It's kinda surprising that there are no hulls with native bonuses to remote ECCM, remote tracking, or remote sensor boosting modules.


The Oneiros and Scimitar both have bonuses to remote tracking computer effectiveness and range. I don't think that people currently use them that often, but I have in the past and can tell you with certainty that they're astonishingly powerful, particularly in highsec.
Generaloberst Kluntz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2014-12-24 11:49:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Generaloberst Kluntz
I fall to see a single good argument for changing ECM meta in this thread. All of them are basically moved by a (sub) conscious desire of NERFING. Most of those clearly don't understand it, and it's not your fault.
See, the problem is, lots of bad PvPers and FCs have a prejudice towards ECM. When clearly damps are worse and a bit OP imo.
Other forms of EWAR are widely used and useful even in unbonused hulls, while in order to use jams properly you give up on tank entirely most of the times. You have to be on the ball with positioning and knowing when to align or warp out. Most people who hate this kind of EWAR haven't actually used it (or used it the wrong way).
The main argument I've seen so far is "at least against -insert other EWAR here - I can do something" but that's only true if you're solo, in which case you're already at disadvantage against more that one target - and let's be honest, solo Falcon/Griffin/Blackbird/Rook/Scorpion/Kitsune kills are laughably rare. If you're in fleet and you're jammed, somebody else is already pointing/shooting/droning that pesky leecher and he's prone to die or warp out. So yes its balanced, considering tank, low speed and chance to jam, and mainly piloting skill.
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#44 - 2014-12-24 18:00:41 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

I've already explained it several times but you don't seem willing to listen. Put simply: player skill doesn't affect how long it takes for you to un-jam. Other EWAR gives you a lot more wiggle room in terms of potentially being able to do something to get past the EWAR. With ECM the only way past it is find a way to not have the effect get applied in the first place.


Sensor Compensation Skill: +4% sensor strength per level, which translates to 20% less likely to be jammed if you skill it up to level 5.

Also, you should try flying a blackbird and go up against a vexor and let me know how that permajamming capabilities work for you. Because if you have someone permajammed, its impossible to get forced off grid by that person.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#45 - 2014-12-24 21:00:22 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:


Sensor Compensation Skill: +4% sensor strength per level, which translates to 20% less likely to be jammed if you skill it up to level 5.

Also, you should try flying a blackbird and go up against a vexor and let me know how that permajamming capabilities work for you. Because if you have someone permajammed, its impossible to get forced off grid by that person.


not even a vexor your so soft that the drones from an unbonused boat will have you running off

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2014-12-24 21:11:45 UTC
Generaloberst Kluntz wrote:
Other forms of EWAR are widely used and useful even in unbonused hulls, while in order to use jams properly you give up on tank entirely most of the times. You have to be on the ball with positioning and knowing when to align or warp out. Most people who hate this kind of EWAR haven't actually used it (or used it the wrong way).

Hopelesshobo wrote:
Also, you should try flying a blackbird and go up against a vexor and let me know how that permajamming capabilities work for you. Because if you have someone permajammed, its impossible to get forced off grid by that person.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=13133752
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16746676
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=18024073
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=14092767
Just a sampling of my history with ECM jammers. I'm no stranger to ECM, in fact I probably have more experience with it than any of you. If I call for a nerf to ECM, it's only because I believe from my own use that it is overpowered.

But I'm not calling for a nerf. I explicitly stated this in the OP:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
additional balancing bits:

1.) Chance to jam would need to be increased a bit to compensate for the greatly increased chance of target maintaining one or more locks.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Foxicity
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2014-12-24 21:13:02 UTC
Reaver, independent of the balance of the proposed change, I think I have a simplified proposal that keeps the spirit of it.

Sensor strength stays, ECM jam chance stays unchanged, but successful ECM attacks are made per-active-lock and a successful jam makes you unable to activate mods on that active lock. Other ships are targetable but jammed targets count against your active locks max.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#48 - 2014-12-24 21:17:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
so you linked two kills in where you just have a dead ECM ship

and two more where and two more where you have one ECM ship involved in a blob?


if this was to prove you fly ECM congrats no one said you didn't but that has nothing to do with you having a poor idea.

it was an interesting take on ECM sure but just not a good idea

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2014-12-24 21:25:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I do blob warfare. Want me to tell you the story about all those Abaddon killmails I got on? The first day we went against CVA I was in an Armageddon (back when they still used lasers) so I got on a lot of Abaddon killmails. The next time we went out I brought a scorpion and didn't get on any killmails because I was busy jamming stuff that we weren't killing. I put about 30+ jam cycles with amarr jammers into enemy guardians and didn't get a single jam in. They brought a scorpion, and it started jamming me before I noticed. Once I got a chance to lock targets again, I jammed their scorpion. We had a jam war, his scorpion vs mine. I definitely got more jams in.

But that's just one of my war stories. Point is, I've used plenty of ECM in combat and am rather familiar with the use of the Blackbird and Scorpion. I have even flown armor fit scorpions. Are you trying to deny that I have experience with ECM?

Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
if this was to prove you fly ECM congrats no one said you didn't but that has nothing to do with you having a poor idea.

it was an interesting take on ECM sure but just not a good idea
I already linked the ones who said I didn't in the above post.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2014-12-24 21:30:09 UTC
Foxicity wrote:
Reaver, independent of the balance of the proposed change, I think I have a simplified proposal that keeps the spirit of it.

Sensor strength stays, ECM jam chance stays unchanged, but successful ECM attacks are made per-active-lock and a successful jam makes you unable to activate mods on that active lock. Other ships are targetable but jammed targets count against your active locks max.

It's an interesting idea but I think it won't balance very well. Consider tank-fit vs jam-fit ECM ships. Shield-tank, they have only 2-3 slots to devote to jammers and so they can easily give up that many locks to jam opponents. Jam-fit, they'll have a paper tank but won't be able to get all of their jams on targets, unless that's the point you're getting at. Jam fit would still be useful for hard to jam targets, but wouldn't be able to have a whole bunch of targets jammed at once.

All in all, I still think your idea would be a really weak change since most of the time even a jam fit doesn't have very many targets jammed out. Even successfully jamming one opponent can make the jam ship worthwhile, but get two out and you're definitely pulling your weight.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#51 - 2014-12-24 21:57:16 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

But I'm not calling for a nerf. I explicitly stated this in the OP:


Let's see, currently 1 jammer can cause ALL the locks to break. Your suggestion is that each jammer can break 1 random lock. This means that to jam out a Guardian (Face it, the primary role of ECM is to jam out enemy logi when they are on the field), you will have to have a total of 10 jammers if they are not using a sig amp. Now, for blob warfare, you really won't need to jam out all 10 because of all the broadcasts going off, it can get rather hectic with the number of people who are broadcasting for reps. That being said, for maybe a fleet of 2 Guardians and a Vindi patrolling hisec, how are you going to be able to break the tank of the Guardians when they only need 2 people locked up?

So to be balanced against a logi ships, the jam chance would have to be increased by 10 fold, which would make it either stupid OP when used against something that can only lock 5 targets. So prevent it from being OP, it can't be increased by 10 fold, which means its an overall nerf when used against logi ships.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#52 - 2014-12-24 22:28:55 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I do blob warfare. Want me to tell you the story about all those Abaddon killmails I got on? The first day we went against CVA I was in an Armageddon (back when they still used lasers) so I got on a lot of Abaddon killmails. The next time we went out I brought a scorpion and didn't get on any killmails because I was busy jamming stuff that we weren't killing. I put about 30+ jam cycles with amarr jammers into enemy guardians and didn't get a single jam in. They brought a scorpion, and it started jamming me before I noticed. Once I got a chance to lock targets again, I jammed their scorpion. We had a jam war, his scorpion vs mine. I definitely got more jams in.

But that's just one of my war stories. Point is, I've used plenty of ECM in combat and am rather familiar with the use of the Blackbird and Scorpion. I have even flown armor fit scorpions. Are you trying to deny that I have experience with ECM?

Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
if this was to prove you fly ECM congrats no one said you didn't but that has nothing to do with you having a poor idea.

it was an interesting take on ECM sure but just not a good idea
I already linked the ones who said I didn't in the above post.


Neither of them said you didn't tough one said try it on a vexor the other said most people you seem to be taking the people disagreeing with you as personal attacks when all they are is pointing out ECM works and is balanced in its current state even if it doesn't always feel that way

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Mario Putzo
#53 - 2014-12-24 22:55:05 UTC
Just use ECM to target drones/drone boats, and missiles.
1 Module Line (scrap the racial dependent ones keep multispec)

2 Scripts.

1) Drone System Disruption -causes a static interference between host ship and drone reducing communication range.
- Reduces Drone Control Range by a set %. 100% of the time.


2) Missile Guidance Disruption - causes a static interference to missile guidance, resulting in reduced ability to guarantee range
- Reduce Missile Flight Time by a set %. 100% of the time.

3) ECCM and Remote ECCM - **** that protects against ECM or should if it wasn't a coin flip anyway.
- Reduces the projected effect of ALL Electronic Warfare (exception Webs and Points.)


Why. Taking ships "out of the game" entirely is pretty ******* gay.
Why. Because Drones and Missiles are the only weapon sets without direct EWAR vulnerabilities.
Why. Because **** drone boats in particular.
Why. Because **** missile ranges too.
Why. Because 200 Malus or Celestis, is ******* gay to.

In addition to the above the following shall be changed all Missiles will receive 100% increase to Missile EHP, and increased resistances.

Why. Because **** firewalls if dudes can stop missiles from reaching them in the first place.

*Note ECM Burst will remain unchanged.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#54 - 2014-12-24 23:03:10 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Just use ECM to target drones/drone boats, and missiles.
1 Module Line (scrap the racial dependent ones keep multispec)

2 Scripts.

1) Drone System Disruption -causes a static interference between host ship and drone reducing communication range.
- Reduces Drone Control Range by a set %. 100% of the time.


2) Missile Guidance Disruption - causes a static interference to missile guidance, resulting in reduced ability to guarantee range
- Reduce Missile Flight Time by a set %. 100% of the time.

3) ECCM and Remote ECCM - **** that protects against ECM or should if it wasn't a coin flip anyway.
- Reduces the projected effect of ALL Electronic Warfare (exception Webs and Points.)


Why. Taking ships "out of the game" entirely is pretty ******* gay.
Why. Because Drones and Missiles are the only weapon sets without direct EWAR vulnerabilities.
Why. Because **** drone boats in particular.
Why. Because **** missile ranges too.
Why. Because 200 Malus or Celestis, is ******* gay to.

In addition to the above the following shall be changed all Missiles will receive 100% increase to Missile EHP, and increased resistances.

Why. Because **** firewalls if dudes can stop missiles from reaching them in the first place.

*Note ECM Burst will remain unchanged.




just no for so many reasons

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Mario Putzo
#55 - 2014-12-24 23:04:05 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Just use ECM to target drones/drone boats, and missiles.
1 Module Line (scrap the racial dependent ones keep multispec)

2 Scripts.

1) Drone System Disruption -causes a static interference between host ship and drone reducing communication range.
- Reduces Drone Control Range by a set %. 100% of the time.


2) Missile Guidance Disruption - causes a static interference to missile guidance, resulting in reduced ability to guarantee range
- Reduce Missile Flight Time by a set %. 100% of the time.

3) ECCM and Remote ECCM - **** that protects against ECM or should if it wasn't a coin flip anyway.
- Reduces the projected effect of ALL Electronic Warfare (exception Webs and Points.)


Why. Taking ships "out of the game" entirely is pretty ******* gay.
Why. Because Drones and Missiles are the only weapon sets without direct EWAR vulnerabilities.
Why. Because **** drone boats in particular.
Why. Because **** missile ranges too.
Why. Because 200 Malus or Celestis, is ******* gay to.

In addition to the above the following shall be changed all Missiles will receive 100% increase to Missile EHP, and increased resistances.

Why. Because **** firewalls if dudes can stop missiles from reaching them in the first place.

*Note ECM Burst will remain unchanged.




just no for so many reasons


Well you could have at least listed one reason if there is so many.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2014-12-24 23:24:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Let's see, currently 1 jammer can cause ALL the locks to break. Your suggestion is that each jammer can break 1 random lock.
Go read it again and get back to me on that please. I never said anything like that.



Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Neither of them said you didn't tough one said try it on a vexor the other said most people you seem to be taking the people disagreeing with you as personal attacks when all they are is pointing out ECM works and is balanced in its current state even if it doesn't always feel that way
I am aware ECM works. I know how it works. I would definitely say, through my experience with ECM, tracking disruption, and sensor dampening, that ECM is certainly the most powerful of the three. There is a reason it is the most popular. But the other two are quite competent as well. That has nothing to do with my post. Check the bolded statement below:



Mario Putzo wrote:
Just use ECM to target drones/drone boats, and missiles.
1 Module Line (scrap the racial dependent ones keep multispec)

2 Scripts.

1) Drone System Disruption -causes a static interference between host ship and drone reducing communication range.
- Reduces Drone Control Range by a set %. 100% of the time.


2) Missile Guidance Disruption - causes a static interference to missile guidance, resulting in reduced ability to guarantee range
- Reduce Missile Flight Time by a set %. 100% of the time.

3) ECCM and Remote ECCM - **** that protects against ECM or should if it wasn't a coin flip anyway.
- Reduces the projected effect of ALL Electronic Warfare (exception Webs and Points.)


Why. Taking ships "out of the game" entirely is pretty ******* gay.
Why. Because Drones and Missiles are the only weapon sets without direct EWAR vulnerabilities.
Why. Because **** drone boats in particular.
Why. Because **** missile ranges too.
Why. Because 200 Malus or Celestis, is ******* gay to.

In addition to the above the following shall be changed all Missiles will receive 100% increase to Missile EHP, and increased resistances.

Why. Because **** firewalls if dudes can stop missiles from reaching them in the first place.

*Note ECM Burst will remain unchanged.


Full of win. Especially the bolded part.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Shakira Akira
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2014-12-25 01:21:21 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Shakira Akira wrote:
And of course in warfare, its doesn't matter who you fight.

I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to "win" a fight without caring about the other sides fleet comp.

You forum warriors love to spout off about how utterly important it is to know exactly what you're up against even before undocking, and how utterly complacent everyone is for admitting they don't know. Well realistically there will always be fights you didn't expect, usually the majority of them.



I agree.. but to set up a form of warfare that will counter everything no matter what the enemy brings, is ridiculous as well.
Shakira Akira
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2014-12-25 01:26:36 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Yes all of that is the same with ECM and webbing them back painting and trackin disrupting them are all things you would need to refit also if they are faster then you you can't get closer w/o a prop mod so tell me again how you are countering it with out a fitting to do so?

I've already explained it several times but you don't seem willing to listen. Put simply: player skill doesn't affect how long it takes for you to un-jam. Other EWAR gives you a lot more wiggle room in terms of potentially being able to do something to get past the EWAR. With ECM the only way past it is find a way to not have the effect get applied in the first place.



No.. your skill doesn't determine how long you're jammed for,, but whether the jam succeeds or not is dependent on your skill.. and on your ships sensor strength, and your distance to the jamming ship, and the other pilots skill.

Other EWAR gives no wiggle room, you can't make a web less effective with your skills either, you can't get a TP to make your sig smaller by your skills either..

Yes, you're right. the only wya to counter ECM is for it to fail, which requires you to also fit your ship to be resilient, and you have to train your skills up to make you resilient.
Shakira Akira
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#59 - 2014-12-25 01:29:04 UTC
Generaloberst Kluntz wrote:
I fall to see a single good argument for changing ECM meta in this thread. All of them are basically moved by a (sub) conscious desire of NERFING. Most of those clearly don't understand it, and it's not your fault.
See, the problem is, lots of bad PvPers and FCs have a prejudice towards ECM. When clearly damps are worse and a bit OP imo.
Other forms of EWAR are widely used and useful even in unbonused hulls, while in order to use jams properly you give up on tank entirely most of the times. You have to be on the ball with positioning and knowing when to align or warp out. Most people who hate this kind of EWAR haven't actually used it (or used it the wrong way).
The main argument I've seen so far is "at least against -insert other EWAR here - I can do something" but that's only true if you're solo, in which case you're already at disadvantage against more that one target - and let's be honest, solo Falcon/Griffin/Blackbird/Rook/Scorpion/Kitsune kills are laughably rare. If you're in fleet and you're jammed, somebody else is already pointing/shooting/droning that pesky leecher and he's prone to die or warp out. So yes its balanced, considering tank, low speed and chance to jam, and mainly piloting skill.



I couldn't even kill a damn merlin with my griffin and I had the guy jammed the entire fight. we lost our 2 dps before, I was the last guy alive and the other side took off for some reason, so it was me and the merlin. He couldn't kill me cause I had him jammed everytime he got in range to hit me, but he just shrugged off my dps.
Shakira Akira
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2014-12-25 01:35:32 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


Why. Taking ships "out of the game" entirely is pretty ******* gay.



This is the biggest fucken fallacy of ECM ever. You are NOT out of the game because you're jammed. It's no fucken different than being TDed while the enemy is outside your locking range. Or webbed to **** and doing 27km/s..