Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You ask for one other example. I provided one. Learn to issue better challenges if you have a problem with that.

He undocked in a fit specifically designed to counter your ship. Why didn't you do the same to him?




Yes, he changed his fit specifically to counter you, i.e. he adapted and he overcame (you).

Why is it a problem when someone who you've allowed to prepare a hard counter to your ship beats your ship with said hard counter?

One ECCM cuts your effectiveness with 1 Multi (multis are bad, but just for the sake of argument) from 45% to (drumroll) 23%, and provides no other substantive benefit. That's a ~50% decrease in effectiveness.

One Afterburner cuts the effectiveness of his 1 web from a 60% velocity decrease to a (drumroll) 7% velocity decrease. That's a ~90% decrease in effectiveness. And, the Afterburner provides other benefits.

The numbers on the item don't matter for their own sake. What matters is their practical effect.

For the third time I'm not complaining about my loss or how it happened. He meta-gamed using an alt as a proxy and then landed on me to kill me. What was I meant to do? Dock and switch to 7 racial jammers as soon as he was on scan? Don't be ridiculous. There is no way I could have survived that fight based on the information I had before he landed.

ECCM also helps you avoid being scanned down if you're a booster. ECCM utility might be limited but is failsafe.



So? At least the web still gets applied, unlike the jams which just do nothing.

What were you supposed to do? I can answer that one. Accept that you can't win every single fight?
If ECCM was as unbalanced as you are suggesting everyone would fly around with 2 midslots full of it and no-one would ever get jammed.

Sure you could. Don't take the fight if you're going to let your enemy prepare specifically to counter your ship.





Are you actually going to address how I just showed you a defensive module that is literally 50% more powerful than the mod you are whinging about?

Jams are still applied. That the effectiveness of their application is represented as a changing probability of jammed or not-jammed is just the nature of a chance based mechanic.




You're asking for a system of guaranteed jams. Howbout no.


And ECCM is not a hard counter to ECM. 2 ECCM on a SFI, however, is a hard counter to a terribly fit Rook. Mostly because your Rook is terribly fit.

Before I turned the AB on, the Web was slowing me down by 60%. After I turned the AB on, the Web slowed me down by only 7%. Seems pretty close to off to me.

I'm not saying it's the same thing, I'm saying that your insistence on looking only at the % the item information displays and being offended by the high number is ridiculous.

That the effectiveness of ECM modules' application is represented as a changing probability of success or failure is just the nature of a binary chance based mechanic.



So, you're saying that, to combat the "fact" that ECCM is too powerful, you want to nerf ECM? Kay...

Posting in yet another stealth Nerf-ECM thread.


Multispecs on a ship whose only form of tank is ECM.



The Rapiers and Pilgrims helping you fight your primary targets, frigates, might have something to do with that.

You make false claims, I provide counterexamples to disprove your claims. That, it seems, is our dharma in this thread.

An Afterburner provides a 142% bonus to a Rook's speed. An ECCM module provides only a 96% bonus to the same Rook's sensor strength. That's a 47.9% larger bonus than the ECCM provides. I'll spot you the 2.1% and ask you what your issue with Afterburners is?



Once again, you're looking at the numbers on the module rather than their practical effect. The Afterburner reduces the effect that a web from, say, a combat recon provides by a larger amount than an ECCM reduces the likelihood of a jam landing.



Those Light Neutron Blaster IIs coming towards you must have been petrifying.

But do go on about how the T1 cruisers you just managed to kill using two recons demonstrates your skill in flying said recons.

Anyway,

primary and exclusive, despite having one whole letter in common are, in fact, two different words.

A Rook is not a great fast tackle ship, as you're finding out (or refusing to admit, whatever). It's also not a very good solo ship (as you really found out, since either the Rapier or Pilgrim would have allowed you to demolish the SFI... well, except for the whole "brawling with an untanked rook" gameplan those HAMs suggest).

So you're claiming that it doesn't count as a stat buffing module because it has other uses? That ECCM is more powerful than an afterburner because it provides a smaller bonus and no other benefits?
Again, you're the one who keeps insisting that ECCM is overpowered because it gives a big number boost.

The primary hull bonus for webs is range not strength.



Your badly fit T2 ECM boat gets neutralized by a fit designed specifically to counter it. My Afterburner example specifically makes mention of Webs coming from a Recon.

Find where I said that a 20% chance means one out every 5 jam attempts WILL land. Quote and link please. Otherwise stop trying to set up straw men.



You were harping on your killing three whole cruisers, one at a time, in your pair of recons as evidence that you're not just camping Plexes for frigates in a pair of recons. Or as evidence that you know how to fly a rook, I'm not sure which.
It's not either.

Let me try to make it clear what I'm saying: A Rook with no tank has very little business brawling with HAMs. There are brawly Rooks that do cool things with HAMs, but they all fit tanks. Had you dropped the point, switched to HMs and used your other Recon as your tackle, you would have done much better. Because, as I said before, an untanked Rook is not a good choice to provide initial tackle and then short range DPS.



Are you even reading your own posts now?
You're literally claiming that ECCM is overpowered because an Afterburner is a much more effective counter to webbing than ECCM is to ECM.

"Infact webbing is so ineffective against AB that in eft an SFI with AB II active will still travel faster than base velocity when hit with a t2 web"
Counter renders EWAR module entirely ineffective.
"ECCM reduces ECM effectiveness by so much that you might go an entire day without ever getting one off"
Counter renders EWAR module somewhat ineffective.



It's a mathematical term used to generate the overall probability of one or more events happening in N independent attempts.

Your entire argument boils down to "someone fit a hard counter to my ship and beat me with it: Nerf the counter."

You claimed that ECCM provided a bonus 50% more powerful than any other module used to defend against EWAR: I pointed at the fact that an Afterburner provides a bonus almost exactly 50% more powerful than ECCM and is used to defend against EWAR... and that's really the only claim you've made to support your argument that isn't "I got beat by a guy who fit his ship specifically to beat me."