These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Improve Sensor Backup Arrays and ECCM Scanning Arrays

Author
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#1 - 2013-07-25 20:18:17 UTC

ECM is alright in it's current form, and my suggestion does NOTHING to change the balance of ECM Jams to ECM countermeasures. CCP's addition of Sensor comp skills was a pretty nice kick in the pants to ECM.

Instead, this thread is about addressing the Utility of anti-ECM Modules, because they HAVE no utility in and for themselves.

Sensor booster & Signal Amps increase your lock range and scan resolution, both of which are useful even if you aren't combating Sensor Dampeners.
Tracking Enhancers & Computers increase your tracking and turret damage projection, both of which are useful even if you aren't combating Tracking Disruptors.

However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

As such, I suggest that ECCM and backup arrays not only increase your sensor strength, but reduce your signature radius as well. Then these modules gain utility outside the presence of EWAR. A reduced signature radius means you take reduced damage from turrets and missiles!!

Now, to be fair, the sig reduction needs to be small, or these modules would become stupidly overpowered. Something like 5% sig reduction for a backup array, and maybe a 10-15% sig reduction for the ECCM module. This is because the effect of sig radius on damage is quite non-linear.

For turrets, this would alter the chance to hit. You can google for the formula, but the jist of it is this:

A random number between 0 and 1 is rolled for every shot. If it is below the chance to hit value, you score a hit, and your damage modifier is 0.5 + your random number (0.5 at low end, 1.5 at high end, 3 with critical hits which we will ignore).

If their "chance to hit" is 0.5 (average), then a 10% reduction in Sig Radius will reduce your chance of being hit by 15%.
If their "chance to hit" is 0.8 (easy target), then a 10% reduction in Sig Radius will reduce your chance of being hit by 5%.
If their "chance to hit" is 0.2 (hard target), then a 10% reduction in Sig Radius will reduce your chance of being hit by 30+%

The reduction of incoming dps will be similar in magnitude. Realize, you can change these "chance to hit" values by smart flying. If in flying, you severely limit the angular velocity, and the chance to hit will be be large, and the sig reduction will have only a small impact.

Finally, this doesn't completely counter target painters (which boost a target's signature 25-70%), but will help some.
Zor'katar
Matari Recreation
#2 - 2013-07-25 20:36:06 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

That's not entirely true. Don't they make you harder to scan down?
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#3 - 2013-07-25 20:39:50 UTC
Maybe put a really small bonus to locking range and/or scanres on ECCM modules, i mean it increases your sensor strength after all.

My Condor costs less than that module!

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#4 - 2013-07-25 20:47:57 UTC
TehCloud wrote:
Maybe put a really small bonus to locking range and/or scanres on ECCM modules, i mean it increases your sensor strength after all.


But then it would compete with Signal Amplifiers and Sensor Boosters.

Sensor Strength is already tied to your Sig Radius in the Scan formula, so the change in "effective" sig radius of your ship seems very much in line with these modules. And as long as the effect was mild, it adds utility without being broken.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#5 - 2013-07-25 20:50:37 UTC
Zor'katar wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

That's not entirely true. Don't they make you harder to scan down?


Yes, they do make you harder to scan down... but since the scan formula is hard capped, and with the recent introduction of probe strength modules, as well as the fact everyone can now use 8 probes, I don't consider that a real benefit. Additionally, people that are trying to make their ships "hard to scan" aren't going to engage in PvP (if they have a choice). This would make the modules useful in PvP (damage reduction is always welcome). It would also, perhaps, make them useful in PvE too.

Doddy
Excidium.
#6 - 2013-07-25 20:57:42 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Zor'katar wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

That's not entirely true. Don't they make you harder to scan down?


Yes, they do make you harder to scan down... but since the scan formula is hard capped, and with the recent introduction of probe strength modules, as well as the fact everyone can now use 8 probes, I don't consider that a real benefit. Additionally, people that are trying to make their ships "hard to scan" aren't going to engage in PvP (if they have a choice). This would make the modules useful in PvP (damage reduction is always welcome). It would also, perhaps, make them useful in PvE too.



I think you will find people who want to pvp are trying not to be scanned down all the time :). hell most roaming gangs have to hit a safespot at some point when a bigger fleet roll sthrough. The problem is that scanning is so simple now that to make it trully harder to scan you down you would need to fit so many eccm it would gimp your fit, rather than the one that is an effective ecm counter. Also as sig radius is also involved in the probing mechanic it does not make any meaningfull difference to larger ships anyway.

The sig radius reduction is a good idea. However it would be extremely hard to balance right, which is why ccp have so far not given us modules or rigs to reduce our sig radius. Would it apply to projected eccm as well? Wouldn't that impact on game balance pretty hard as well? It would be kinda cool but game-changing. At the moment to reduce your sig you need gang bonus (need a friend running skirmish links), implants (expensive) or drugs (side-effects).
Doddy
Excidium.
#7 - 2013-07-25 21:05:52 UTC
Just so you realise your single eccm module would be almost as strong as a full halo set (billion isk) or loki links (700mil isk plus a friend) and the same as strong x-instinct (20 million isk for 30 mins with side-effects and is illegal).
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#8 - 2013-07-25 21:08:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Doddy wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Zor'katar wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

That's not entirely true. Don't they make you harder to scan down?


Yes, they do make you harder to scan down... but since the scan formula is hard capped, and with the recent introduction of probe strength modules, as well as the fact everyone can now use 8 probes, I don't consider that a real benefit. Additionally, people that are trying to make their ships "hard to scan" aren't going to engage in PvP (if they have a choice). This would make the modules useful in PvP (damage reduction is always welcome). It would also, perhaps, make them useful in PvE too.



I think you will find people who want to pvp are trying not to be scanned down all the time :). hell most roaming gangs have to hit a safespot at some point when a bigger fleet roll sthrough. The problem is that scanning is so simple now that to make it trully harder to scan you down you would need to fit so many eccm it would gimp your fit, rather than the one that is an effective ecm counter. Also as sig radius is also involved in the probing mechanic it does not make any meaningfull difference to larger ships anyway.

The sig radius reduction is a good idea. However it would be extremely hard to balance right, which is why ccp have so far not given us modules or rigs to reduce our sig radius. Would it apply to projected eccm as well? Wouldn't that impact on game balance pretty hard as well? It would be kinda cool but game-changing. At the moment to reduce your sig you need gang bonus (need a friend running skirmish links), implants (expensive) or drugs (side-effects).


I would recommend the Projected ECCM also reduce sig radius, although I'd recommend local ECCM be more effective than projected ECCM.

As for use in a fleet warfare, where you buddy broadcasts for reps you suddenly project ECCM on him to reduce his sig radius... That would be a welcome tactic. Realize, the reduction I'm suggesting would be mild, so an unbonused TP would more than counter the effect! Furthermore, these absolutely must abide by stacking penalties!

As for balancing. A 7.5% increase in tracking has the exact same effect as a 7% reduction in sig radius. A 30% increase in tracking has the exact same effect as a 23% reduction in sig radius. If they can balance TC's and TE's, they can balance this mechanic.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#9 - 2013-07-25 21:15:14 UTC
Don't forget that a sig radius reduction can be as much a penalty as a benefit, when your logi ship has to re-lock your fleet and they have there sig reduced it could probe to be fatal..

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Doddy
Excidium.
#10 - 2013-07-25 21:20:52 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Doddy wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Zor'katar wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
However, fitting a backup array or an ECCM provides no DIRECT benefit to your ship.

That's not entirely true. Don't they make you harder to scan down?


Yes, they do make you harder to scan down... but since the scan formula is hard capped, and with the recent introduction of probe strength modules, as well as the fact everyone can now use 8 probes, I don't consider that a real benefit. Additionally, people that are trying to make their ships "hard to scan" aren't going to engage in PvP (if they have a choice). This would make the modules useful in PvP (damage reduction is always welcome). It would also, perhaps, make them useful in PvE too.



I think you will find people who want to pvp are trying not to be scanned down all the time :). hell most roaming gangs have to hit a safespot at some point when a bigger fleet roll sthrough. The problem is that scanning is so simple now that to make it trully harder to scan you down you would need to fit so many eccm it would gimp your fit, rather than the one that is an effective ecm counter. Also as sig radius is also involved in the probing mechanic it does not make any meaningfull difference to larger ships anyway.

The sig radius reduction is a good idea. However it would be extremely hard to balance right, which is why ccp have so far not given us modules or rigs to reduce our sig radius. Would it apply to projected eccm as well? Wouldn't that impact on game balance pretty hard as well? It would be kinda cool but game-changing. At the moment to reduce your sig you need gang bonus (need a friend running skirmish links), implants (expensive) or drugs (side-effects).


I would recommend the Projected ECCM also reduce sig radius, although I'd recommend local ECCM be more effective than projected ECCM.

As for use in a fleet warfare, where you buddy broadcasts for reps you suddenly project ECCM on him to reduce his sig radius... That would be a welcome tactic. Realize, the reduction I'm suggesting would be mild, so an unbonused TP would more than counter the effect! Furthermore, these absolutely must abide by stacking penalties!

As for balancing. A 7.5% increase in tracking has the exact same effect as a 7% reduction in sig radius. A 30% increase in tracking has the exact same effect as a 23% reduction in sig radius. If they can balance TC's and TE's, they can balance this mechanic.


Sigh, no. While you are dealing with only turret tracking, sig radius also effects missile damage, lock times, probing times and bomb damage. So insted of balancing one factor you are actually balancing 4 or even 5. And in the case of missiles sig is the limiting factor (it is angular velocity for turrets) and for bombs it is the only factor.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#11 - 2013-07-25 21:25:31 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Just so you realise your single eccm module would be almost as strong as a full halo set (billion isk) or loki links (700mil isk plus a friend) and the same as strong x-instinct (20 million isk for 30 mins with side-effects and is illegal).


Mind link Loki Links provide a 35.16% reduction in sig radius... which is far, far more potent.
Non-mindlinked is 23.44%
Command Ship is 21.56%.

So, 20% for a single module is too much.

X-Instinct provide 7.5-15%. This makes my numbers seem way out of whack. Although, I'd argue that X-instinct is probably out of whack. Like I said, a 7.5% increase in tracking speed (from a TE) is equivalent (as in completely negated) by a 7% reduction in Signature Size. That seems fairly inline to me.

A full Halo set provides a ~22% reduction in sig radius. This would be equivalent to 2x ECCM, or 3x Backup Arrays.
A full Nomad set provides a 27% reduction in agility. This is equivalent to 2x nanofibers, or 1.5x Inertia Stabs.

So I don't think the numbers I suggested are all that off.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#12 - 2013-07-25 21:35:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Doddy wrote:

Sigh, no. While you are dealing with only turret tracking, sig radius also effects missile damage, lock times, probing times and bomb damage. So insted of balancing one factor you are actually balancing 4 or even 5. And in the case of missiles sig is the limiting factor (it is angular velocity for turrets) and for bombs it is the only factor.


I realize there are other factors that are influenced by Sig Radius. That's one of the reasons I suggested fairly conservative values.

A 5% reduction in sig size means missiles do approximately 5% less damage.

Missile Damage = Base damage * min ( 1, S / E , S/E * speed portion). A 5% reduction in S means a 5% reduction in damage. In contrast, a TP boost sig radius by 25% (unbonused, unskilled) to 75% (bonused, skilled, and linked) up to the maximum damage (= Base Damage)

Lock speed is a double edged sword. On small stuff, this may make insta-lock t3 cruisers in lowsec less effective at catching properly fit frigates. IMO, that is not a big deal. A 10% change in sig size is equivalent to fitting on a CDFE or not.

In terms of probe scanning, the formula is already limited so nothing will become unprobable. It might make it easier to reach that unprobable level with frigates and cruisers, but again, I don't see this as a big change that unbalances the game.

In short, I think the proposed changes add some real utility to the ECCM and backup array modules, while not being overpowered or breaking any key area of game play.
Doddy
Excidium.
#13 - 2013-07-25 22:14:02 UTC
Conservative values would be you know 1 or 2 % not 20%.....

Nomad set is a low grade set and is used by freighter pilots plus fitting nanos or inertias have negative side effects.

A 5% reduction in damage is greater than the damage reduction of a 3rd eanm on a t1 ship for example (not that anyone should be fitting 3 eanms but its an easy correlation). It is basically a massive buff far more powerful than a sebo or tc.

Truth is the whole tcs and sebos as counters to SD and TD is a red herring in the first place. If you are fitting a sebo it is because you need it, if you are damped its (more than) cancelled out and you can no longer do what your purpose was. A sniper T3 that has sebos and is damped is rather worse off than the brawler Tier 3 that didn't have a sebo and was damped. With tracking mods its the same, if your kiting fit has TEs to let you kite outside an enemies range then having them doesn't counter the guy tracking disrupting you at all, the guy in the brawler with no tracking enhancers supposedly countering the td would still be better off.

Would your mechanic mean that ecm would counter the sig res reduction as well? It obviously can't overcounter them like the other ewar can so its already a fundamentaly stronger utility even if ecm being active on the ship did remove the sig radius change.
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
#14 - 2013-07-25 22:46:04 UTC
this would be a stealth buff to t3.

I run a tengu with sensor backup and eccm (see gurista alot and I don't like vultures so want them tie work for it). I get jam resistance, hard to probe and now you want to give me sig tanking. Which tengu doesn't need tbh.

then you have loki which has its own sig radius kung fu, which can be strong. It doesn't need to be stronger.


Both the above and potentially other ships also will run the risk of negating ccps stopping unproble. With HG talons, and my above sensor backup and eccm I am already hard to find. Sig radius to stength ratio already is nice....cut my sig radius down even more and basically I am unprobable as that ratio is now getting even lower.


Basically you get more jam resistance and get that much harder to probe down. You already get 2 for the price of 1. Doesn't really need a 3rd bene. that 2nd bene granted is situational but it is there. Sometimes its just that little tweak of the radius to strength ratio that has a prober get oh so close....but not close enough.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#15 - 2013-07-25 22:54:27 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Conservative values would be you know 1 or 2 % not 20%.....

Nomad set is a low grade set and is used by freighter pilots plus fitting nanos or inertias have negative side effects.

A 5% reduction in damage is greater than the damage reduction of a 3rd eanm on a t1 ship for example (not that anyone should be fitting 3 eanms but its an easy correlation). It is basically a massive buff far more powerful than a sebo or tc.

Truth is the whole tcs and sebos as counters to SD and TD is a red herring in the first place. If you are fitting a sebo it is because you need it, if you are damped its (more than) cancelled out and you can no longer do what your purpose was. A sniper T3 that has sebos and is damped is rather worse off than the brawler Tier 3 that didn't have a sebo and was damped. With tracking mods its the same, if your kiting fit has TEs to let you kite outside an enemies range then having them doesn't counter the guy tracking disrupting you at all, the guy in the brawler with no tracking enhancers supposedly countering the td would still be better off.

Would your mechanic mean that ecm would counter the sig res reduction as well? It obviously can't overcounter them like the other ewar can so its already a fundamentaly stronger utility even if ecm being active on the ship did remove the sig radius change.


A.) I never suggested 20% sig reduction for a single module. I said 5% for the lowslot, and 10-15% for the midslot. Looking at the numbers, I concede 10% seems more appropriate. It's not ultra-conservative (1-2%), as I want the modules to actually have utility!

B.) I'm familiar with the Nomad set. I brought it up to show that generally the special implant sets are equivalent to 2-3 "extra modules" on your ship. I suppose even stating it like that doesn't really drive home the effect, but within the scope of things, the 5% for a backup array and 10% for the midslot ECCM modules is right in line with the Halo set. A single modules is NOT as powerful as a Full Halo set (20.3%). The lowgrade Halo gives a 14.2%, which implies 15% would be out of line, but a value around 10% is fairly reasonable.

C.) A 3rd EANM gives a 20% * .57 = 11.4% increase in resistances (13.6 with Armor comp skills). That's a 11.4% damage reduction, twice that of the lowslot backup array. And the 4th EANM (lol) would give 20*.27 = 5.4 % damage reduction, which is still better, even with skills!!!!!!

D.) The fact that TCs and sebos are useful outside of SD's and TD's is the ENTIRE REASON for this post. ECCM and backup arrays have NO POINT outside of ECM. That is precisely what I wish to change...

E.) My mechanic doesn't mean ECM woudl counter the sig reduction. TP's way more than counter the sig reduction. ECM moreless counters the ship. If I put a scripted TD on a TC/TE ship, I don't necessarily counter both aspects of the TC/TE. ECM doesnt' need to fully counter every aspect of the ECCM, and I would not give ECM a sig boosting aspect (ECM is mostly fine where it is, and my suggestion here does NOTHING to change that balance!)

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#16 - 2013-07-25 23:10:19 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
this would be a stealth buff to t3.

I run a tengu with sensor backup and eccm (see gurista alot and I don't like vultures so want them tie work for it). I get jam resistance, hard to probe and now you want to give me sig tanking. Which tengu doesn't need tbh.

then you have loki which has its own sig radius kung fu, which can be strong. It doesn't need to be stronger.


Both the above and potentially other ships also will run the risk of negating ccps stopping unproble. With HG talons, and my above sensor backup and eccm I am already hard to find. Sig radius to stength ratio already is nice....cut my sig radius down even more and basically I am unprobable as that ratio is now getting even lower.


Basically you get more jam resistance and get that much harder to probe down. You already get 2 for the price of 1. Doesn't really need a 3rd bene. that 2nd bene granted is situational but it is there. Sometimes its just that little tweak of the radius to strength ratio that has a prober get oh so close....but not close enough.


Yes, the modules would have some utility. The buff is no different for T3's than it is for AHACs or Interceptors or AF's or any other ship that uses low sig to reduce incoming damage.

The point is, the sensor backup arrays and ECCM would have utility beyond, "Please don't jam me". I would recommend the benefits stack with links (like Passive Defense and Shield Harmonizing stack with EANM's and IF's).

As for the unprobable. You can already put enough ECCM on your ship to meet the unprobeable requirement:
sig radius / sensor strength < 1.08.
However, CCP (a year+ ago) modified the probe mechanics so even if you meet this requirement, your ship's signature size is capped to make you always probe-able to someone with implants and perfect skills. I haven't done the math yet, but I heard you don't even need implants if you setup your covops right and have perfect skills.

Jam resistance is very useful when facing jams... Nice, but irrelevant when NOT facing jams.
You aren't "much harder to probe down" unless you are in a ship that is already pretty hard to probe down. In general, these modules have very little effect on you getting probed out, unless you are fitting many of them!
So, both of the benefits you listed are very, very situation. Adding an actually useful boon to the module is very reasonable!
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
#17 - 2013-07-26 03:58:41 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Jam resistance is very useful when facing jams... Nice, but irrelevant when NOT facing jams.



True, but you never know 100% that you won't be facing jams in pvp. Its on the player to take that 50/50 chance on a no plans lets go roam they won't get jammed and fitting something else.


My philosophy was is there a better mid or low for this? when I did pvp. Nano often times is the wth low slot filler for example (cruiser and below at any rate) . Damage mod won't fit or is stacked penaltied so why bother might be a common reason...so what should go here? Not saying nano a bad choice but if you opt to moar speed over a backup array and meet Mr falcon that becomes a case of you made a judgement call and its not paying out well ATM for you. Way it goes sometimes.

this not the only mod like this. Why I like arty wolves for example...cuts through the whole point or scram debate (as it only has the one slot for it with a prop mod fit). Kite with point. AC wolf with scram....you got a 50/50 chance ole boy/girl is AB powered. If you chose wrong...the day jsut got interesting lol.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2013-07-26 06:19:53 UTC
"but reduce your signature radius as well" oh no... here it is again
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#19 - 2013-07-26 14:49:38 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
"but reduce your signature radius as well" oh no... here it is again


oh no?

And what I suggested is good or bad why?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#20 - 2013-07-26 15:42:44 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Jam resistance is very useful when facing jams... Nice, but irrelevant when NOT facing jams.



True, but you never know 100% that you won't be facing jams in pvp. Its on the player to take that 50/50 chance on a no plans lets go roam they won't get jammed and fitting something else.


My philosophy was is there a better mid or low for this? when I did pvp. Nano often times is the wth low slot filler for example (cruiser and below at any rate) . Damage mod won't fit or is stacked penaltied so why bother might be a common reason...so what should go here? Not saying nano a bad choice but if you opt to moar speed over a backup array and meet Mr falcon that becomes a case of you made a judgement call and its not paying out well ATM for you. Way it goes sometimes.

this not the only mod like this. Why I like arty wolves for example...cuts through the whole point or scram debate (as it only has the one slot for it with a prop mod fit). Kite with point. AC wolf with scram....you got a 50/50 chance ole boy/girl is AB powered. If you chose wrong...the day jsut got interesting lol.


I understand fitting choices have consequence. But I don't understand your commentary!!!

Nano isn't a "low slot filler". It has quite an enormous amount of utility, increasing both your agility and speed! It also costs nothing to fit, but comes with a drawback of less hull HP.

Points and Scrams have enormous utility in PvP, by preventing an opponent from warping off and/or mwding away. Sure, if you try to control your range using only a scram you often fail, but I don't see the relevance to this topic.

In contrast, a warded backup cluster costs CPU & PG, and only provides you benefit when you run into jams. It has no utility outside of such a scenario! I'm asking for a small amount of utility beyond the "what if" jams cases. Seriously, if you are fitting up that wolf, and you have 15 pg and 1 cpu enough to spare, when are you EVER going to fit a backup array over a nano or a TE? Only when you KNOW you are running into jammers, and even then you'll debate such a fit. However, if that module also served as a 5% sig reduction (== slight damage reduction), it certainly gains some utility even if you don't run into jams (especially on frigate hulls).
12Next page