These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Winter] Ewar Tweaks for Retribution

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
xo3e
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#141 - 2012-11-03 10:56:36 UTC  |  Edited by: xo3e
this changes are p inconsistent

what is the point in boosting sensor strength if ecm mechanics is broken.

problem with ECM is that pilot that got jammed cant use his own skill to counteract. he can just go die being jammed or let his opponent escape.

you cant fix this by adding 4 shet skills

Signature removed. Navigator
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#142 - 2012-11-03 11:21:50 UTC
To elaborate a bit on unbonused TDs being a bit too good still. I propose the following:

Set the T2 Tracking Disruptor to 16% optimal and 16% tracking reduction. With a script this becomes 32%. With Turret Destabilization V, this becomes 40%. On tranquility this would be 50.25% and with the current iteration 47.73%.

Change the TD strength bonus on specialized ships to +12.5% per level. This results in 65% TD strength. On tranquility it's currently 62.81% and 65.63% with the current iteration.

All nice even numbers.
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#143 - 2012-11-03 11:29:04 UTC
Hey Fozzie. These are all good changes. I have only one critisism.


CCP Fozzie wrote:

*Add four new racial sensor compensation skills that increase each type of Sensor Strength by 5% per level (Requires Electronics 4, rank 3 skills in the Electronics category)




I think this skill should not affect ship sensor strength but the effectiveness of ECCM modules...

That's it. Good work though
Holy One
Privat Party
#144 - 2012-11-03 11:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Holy One
Quote:


If anything you might want to take this further - drop ECM optimal significantly and leave the falloff untouched, so that ECM is more focused against point-blank gankwagons and of diminishing value against even mid-ranged targets. Of course, you might also need to look at further incentivising those point-blank gankwagons in the first place...


This is so absolutely correct my roids are throbbing with the sheer righteousness of it.

ECM should be a short range counter to high dps and gtfo tool. It should be effective in this regard but place your ship in peril. It should not be the Falcon Alt decloaking and jamming you from 50km until you are dead.

Also damps need to be chance based on a par with ECM. Or they will just become the new fotm for faggots.

:)
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#145 - 2012-11-03 12:21:30 UTC
Excellent. I'm glad you're taking my and others' suggestion to simply add sensor boosting skills to allow for pilots to have the option of being more resistant to ECM. It is a simple and moderate step.

I can't say that I'm pleased about another range nerf, though. ECM range on a Falcon with max skills, 2 SDAs, and a Particle Dispersion Projector is 66km + 53km falloff. This is comparable with other EWAR. Not only is there no need for it, but it won't even be noticable. Nor will it effect counter-ecm tactics.

Buffs to Damps: looks good.

Nerf to TDs: setting up for the missile changes, are you? Unfortunately, like the ecm range nerf, a reduction of 5% of base is totally insignificant. No one will even notice the difference. Also, when you consider the need to balance TD effectiveness vs Tracking Computers in preparation for TD/TCs affecting missiles, you're going to have to go much farther. However, you are going in the right direction.





http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Unseen Spectre
Shadow Eye Ops
#146 - 2012-11-03 12:41:40 UTC
Hi
I have one small question for you (which some of you probably may find stupid or irrelevant :) ).
I do not have much experience with using recons myself but it just seems (just based on the description and fitting specifications of the ship) to me that with a both the suggested missile changes and EWAR changes a Rook will be “hit” twice .
Therefore, my question is what do you think the usefulness of the Rook will be going forward considering both the EWAR and missile changes?
Lili Lu
#147 - 2012-11-03 13:11:33 UTC
Desert Ice78 wrote:
Fozzie, we need a serious buff to the tank of the falcon to go with this general nerf to it's only tank: ECM.

Otherwise I'm looking at yet another ship to spin in my hanger.


Are you sure your alliance is "why so serious" or is it "are you serious?"What?

If you want a tank on your Falcon start sacrificing a couple mids like every other recon does. All you really need is at most 4 ecm to perform your role. Noone says you have to be able to jam every possible ship if you are in a fleet with other ecm boats anyway.

If you aren't plated and a brick you could fit mobility and a tank that a logi can rep up. It is precisely because ecm has been so powerful that ecm pilots eschew a tank, load every possible mid with and ecm, and cry paper thin yada yada yada. If you had any experience with other recons you would know that you can't sacrifice mobility and tank and still expect to survive.

I'm being "so seriously", try some agility in the lows and a few shield mods in the mids. You won't have some purely afterthough plate hp that can't really be effectively repped and just makes you a brick. Look at the stats for recons, they all have roughly equal hp. If your Falcon is paper thin then so are the others and they often have to get quite a bit closer to perform their role. ECM is not your only tank unless you make it so.
Sylph leonard
Create New Corporation
#148 - 2012-11-03 13:24:24 UTC
The new skills being rank 3 seems a little high, making them rank 2 would seems more appropriate.

Also are you guys gonna do anything with ECCMs as it could use some buffs. Giving them something like %30 reduction to jam cycle, TD, SD, TP effectiveness on top of what they already do for example.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#149 - 2012-11-03 13:42:05 UTC
Can you just nerf EC-300s?

Also, I don't know what you're thinking about for ECM...

But seriously one of the first things that should be looked at if you're not doing a total mechanic overhaul is STACKING PENALTIES for multiple ECM mods on the same ship.

Where I am.
MystLynx
Lulzsec Space
#150 - 2012-11-03 14:04:57 UTC  |  Edited by: MystLynx
Quote:
*Add four new racial sensor compensation skills that increase each type of Sensor Strength by 5% per level (Requires Electronics 4, rank 3 skills in the Electronics category)


NO THANK YOU!

That wont change anything about the metagame, except delaying my (and the one of numerous players i guess) skill plan with a useless rank 12 skill.

also

THIS

Bloodpetal wrote:
Can you just nerf EC-300s?

Also, I don't know what you're thinking about for ECM...

But seriously one of the first things that should be looked at if you're not doing a total mechanic overhaul is STACKING PENALTIES for multiple ECM mods on the same ship.


<3
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#151 - 2012-11-03 14:23:35 UTC
another option to nerf ecm is reducing the bonus on ecm rigs the op range rig adds 20% and the strength rig adds 10%.
the rigs for the other e-war add only 5% strength and non for range slightly lobsided i would say as well as the sig distortion amp that boosts ecm only.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#152 - 2012-11-03 14:35:22 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Hey Fozzie. These are all good changes. I have only one critisism.


CCP Fozzie wrote:

*Add four new racial sensor compensation skills that increase each type of Sensor Strength by 5% per level (Requires Electronics 4, rank 3 skills in the Electronics category)




I think this skill should not affect ship sensor strength but the effectiveness of ECCM modules...

That's it. Good work though

Absolutely wrong. What you propose is buffing ECCM to make them mandatory just like these new skills, but unlike skills ECCM can not be put onto any ship requiring it.

Why the hell anyone still insists on making fights determined at the fitting screen?

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
2manno Asp
Death By Design
#153 - 2012-11-03 14:57:54 UTC  |  Edited by: 2manno Asp
Fozzie, why can't we simply change the effects of ECM?

instead of preventing a ship from locking (effectively rending all modules useless, sans prop mods, as they require a lock), what about preventing individual modules from working in the event of a succesfull jam?

perhaps one type of ecm module would prevent a point or web from working, another might shut off high slots for a time, another might cause heat to build up faster (sort of like a stuxnet virus).

this gives the jammee a fighting chance to work with whatever remains working on his/her ship, instead of just shutting everything down.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#154 - 2012-11-03 15:09:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
The changes to tracking disruptor are a JOKE. 5%? Sensor dampners effectiveness DO NOT NEED to be increased. Sensor dampners are all ready effective. Which idi0ts have convinced you sensor dampners aren't effective?

Tracking disruptors SHOULD be NERFED to the level of target painters, but will only get 37% effectiveness with optimal or tracking scripts. You and your whole 'TEAM' is r3t@rd3d and have created and will implement a few SILLY forseen fails. I've already stopped commented on some of these threads because I have every intention of ABUSING THE FU*K out of your changes, but NOT THIS THREAD.

I suggest you REALLY think this threw. ECM should break locks ONLY (no 20 second wait for locks) and use ALOT of cap, but have short duration. All the modules mentioned should use ALOT of cap, except for target painters = /

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
ScoRpS
Moist Wanted.
OnlyFleets.
#155 - 2012-11-03 15:18:11 UTC
ECM needs a radical overhaul. As it is it's abused and no fun at all and has been for a long long time.

A single module that totally negates jamming 100% similar to triage would be nice.

Or a sliding scale system based on sensor strength. jamming strength 24 cannot jam ship with sensor strength of 25. Taking the chance element completely out.

ECM drones should have same penalty reducing them to anti frigate/tackle only.

As it is 0utbreak condemns the use of ecm in our own gangs favoring tactics and strategies over jamming. We like our prey to be live and kicking!
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#156 - 2012-11-03 15:30:31 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

*Add four new racial sensor compensation skills that increase each type of Sensor Strength by 5% per level (Requires Electronics 4, rank 3 skills in the Electronics category).


4 more unsexy skills to train. Ugh

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed
Eridanii
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2012-11-03 15:34:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Eridanii
I welcome the slight buff to Sensor Damps but I don't think it really makes or breaks anything. It helps damps in normal scram-range situations.

Max skilled Arazu with two damp rigs before and after buff
Range reduction 58.57% vs 64.43%
Ship with 140km lock range vs 2 damps before and after
~28.5km / ~22.5km
vs 3 damps before and after
~19.0km / ~14.0km

I don't think they will become the new go to ECM but I think we'll see increased effectiveness at locking down targets around scram ranges.

Range damps only work if you can dictate range and the gal boats bonus'd for damps are kind of bricks and can't always dictate range. Once you close to point-blank, the damps are worthless, leaving them as a situational ewar mod which I am alright with. ECM works the same at point-blank all the way to optimal leaving it the preferred ewar mod for neutralizing someone.

I like the idea of having ECM be the short-range ewar as Caldari's racial counter to Gal blasters and Damps being the long-range ewar for Gallente's counter to Caldari sniping. Reducing ECM optimal by a lot and increasing falloff would be a great way to implement this.
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2012-11-03 15:35:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Schneider
I'll just leave this here.. http://themittani.com/features/ecm-not-nerf-we-deserve-fix-we-need

ECM needs an overhaul, nerfing range, adding a bunch of skill to effect will do nothing and might even cause more problems along the way.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Julius Foederatus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2012-11-03 15:42:07 UTC
Damp bonuses were not boosted enough. It needs 10% per level, not 7.5%. Either that or we need a targeting range nerf across the board.
Deerin
East Trading Co Ltd
#160 - 2012-11-03 15:49:36 UTC
ECM:

I hate the fact that we are getting 4 new skills that we'll just HAVE TO train. I don't know if what I'm about to ask is possible but:

Link these 4 skills together. So I could train Minmatar sensor str for L1, gallente sensor str for l2 minmatar again for l3 gallente agian for l4 and caldari for l5. With this I will end up with 10% minmatar 10%gallente and 5% caldari jam str. If I chose so I could also train all minmatar so I can get 25% sensor str bonus.

This would add a unique flavour to all characters. You would have to be careful when choosing as the changes are irreversible.

Furthermore, I think it is a technical problem to implement the stacking penalty for ecm. But there is another way around.

Make it so that each ecm effect beyond the first on the ship increases ships sensor strength by 10% (Capped at 150%)

This would cause the sensor strength to increase by 40% when being attacked by a single flight of ecm drones. It wouldn't have huge effect on dedicated ewar ships as their jam str is already high and they won't really put more than 2 jammers on a single ship. If they do then that ship probably has ECCM and I don't think it is a bad idea for an ECCM ship to enjoy this sort of protection.

TD:

I believe a flat -5% reduction on base effectiveness would have been a better tweak (i.e.15.1% instead of 20.1%) TD's are quite powerful atm.

Damps:
I see no meaningful change here. Damps already had a decent range. I'm actually content with damps as they are. Maybe a little bit reduction on cap consumption???please???

Painters:
Make painters scrpited. One script = target painting. Other script = target signature reduction. So that target painting ships can also be used defensively in gangs when a teammate is under heavy fire. Would give a nice flavour to minmatar ewar.