EVE General Discussion

Did..... did you just say


"Nerf Falcon"

?

lol highsec warlord tears

I read your blog post. Bottom line is that EVE has more in common with chess than traditional video games. I keep telling people, if you want gudfights all the time, then go play Battlefield 4 or something. More often than not, the outcome of a fight is determined before ships are even on grid. Your opponent went to the trouble to field 14 fragile, not-so-deepsy ECM boats in a fight and you lost. That's how EVE works. Had they brought 14 brawling machs, you still probably would have lost. It's never fun being on the losing end of a skirmish in this game.

Next time you go roaming, perhaps try bringing your own ECM fleet with which to dogpile the opponent. You'll win and it'll feel good.

Goddamn I've missed "Nerf Falcon" threads.

WTF WAS "proteus" anyway?

Sadly, no. I've got the RLs real bad which prevents me from having the magic combination of time and being at home required to actually log in. So subs are going dark until I rid myself of this life-thing.

If you step back and take a look, ECM is arguably the least destructive of the EWAR varieties with the exception of TPs. A sensor dampener can lower a ship's targeting range to the point that it can't lock anything. Tracking disruptors lower the tracking on a ship to the point it can't actually hit anything. How frustrating is it that you can lock a target, but you can't track well enough to even hit it? Of course, TDs don't work against logistics, EWAR, or missile boats. That would make TDs less effective than ECM.

In other words, ECM, damps, and tracking disruption all have the potential to remove enemies from the fight. ECM and damps prevent you from locking, and TDs prevent your guns from doing anything effective. ECM is balanced in the way that it has a non-trivial chance of outright failing none of the other EWARs have. In fact SDs, TDs, and TPs never miss. ECM effects lasts 20 seconds whereas SD and TD effects last for as long as the module is activated.

Another balancing factor is that ECM is a mid-slot module in a race that is purely shield tanking. The other three races can fill their mids with EWAR and put together a reasonable armor tank. It is no mystery that this is why the CFC celestis fleets are so successful. They are combining never miss EWAR with a bonused ship that can tank long enough for logi to rep them. Caldari ships can put together a tissue paper armor tank at best.

One more reason ECM is less effective than the other types of EWARs is that to be effective in all situations a ECM ship needs to fit 4 specialized modules compared to the 1 generalized module that TDs, SDs and TPs enjoy. This means that tank is often sacrificed to reacha bare minimum of effectiveness.

"That is all fine and dandy," You say "but ECM is still too powerful". Why don't we take a look at some numbers?

Take a T2 Minmatar jammer. The ECM Phase Inverter II has a Ladar jam strength of 3.6.
Jammer vs Rifter: 3.6/8 sensor strength = 45% chance of a jam or 55% chance of doing nothing.
Jammer vs Stabber: 3.6/13 sensor strength = 27.69% chance of a jam or 72.31% chance of doing nothing.
Jammer vs Hurricane: 3.6/16 sensor strength = 22.5% chance of a jam or 77.5% chance of doing nothing.
Jammer vs Tempest: 3.6/20 sensor strength = 18% chance of a jam or 82% chance of doing nothing.

See? hardly anything wrong with ECM. Even against the most basic frigate it will fail more times than it will succeed. Imagine if your guns, hardeners, point, MWD, etc. had that fail rate. *shudder*

You see your issue is not truly with ECM. Your issue, is in fact, with the ECM bonused hulls. Take a Falcon with all level 5 skills fit with racial jammers, 2 Sensor Distortion Amps, and one ECM strength rig and let's look at those numbers again.

All level 5 Falcon vs. Sensor Comp. 5 ship:
Jammer vs Rifter: 14.2/9.6 sensor strength = 100% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Stabber: 14.2/15.6 sensor strength = 91.02% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Hurricane: 14.2/19.2 sensor strength = 73.95% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Tempest: 14.2/24 sensor strength = 59.16% chance of jamming

That really isn't OP at all. Considering the vast amount of training one has to accomplish to become a perfect Falcon pilot. In comparison the time it take to train a racial sensor comp to 5 or fit an ECCM module is trivial. In addition a Falcon has a tissue paper tank, a non-trivial chance of missing a jam, and unlike the other forms of EWAR it doesn't last forever.

Now you are likely to bring up a rather painful point in small gang and solo PvP: The ECM drone. Why don't we take a look at those?

EC-300 drone strength is 1.
Jammer vs Rifter: 1/9.6 sensor strength = 10.41% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Stabber: 1/15.6 sensor strength = 6.41% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Hurricane: 1/19.2 sensor strength = 5.23% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Tempest: 1/24 sensor strength = 4.16% chance of jamming

EC-600 drone strength is 1.5.
Jammer vs Rifter: 1.5/9.6 sensor strength = 15.62% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Stabber: 1.5/15.6 sensor strength = 9.61% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Hurricane: 1.5/19.2 sensor strength = 7.81% chance of jamming
Jammer vs Tempest: 1.5/24 sensor strength = 6.25% chance of jamming

Neither of those scream OP at all. "Now that isn't the real story" you exclaim "Most ships have 5!" True:
(How to calculate: Link calculator: Link (P (X>=1)) is the important number)

5 EC-300 jam strength 1:
vs Rifter: 42.28% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Stabber: 28.19% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Hurricane: 23.55% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Tempest: 21.02% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
For 25m3 of drones these do seem a touch too powerful. I would recommend a reduction in jam strength down to .75.

5 EC-600 jam strength 1.5:
vs Rifter: 57.22% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Stabber: 39.66% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Hurricane: 33.40% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
vs Tempest: Or 27.58% chance of jamming with 5 drones.
For 50m3 of drones these seem very well balanced for their size.

You see in the grand scheme of things ECM is neither OP, broken, wrong, out of place, or any of the other things people claim ECM is. It is merely a different and perfectly valid form of EWAR. It is high-risk high-reward, only truly effective on bonused hulls (as it should be) which at best can manage a tissue paper tank when fitting jams, and doesn't last forever like the other forms of EWAR. All things considered, it is perfectly in line with the other forms of EWAR. What's so wrong with that?

I think the post below the one I quoted does a pretty good job of explaining that you're usually just as boned with TD or damps, except those land 100% of the time.

Cool story bro.

But wouldn't read again.

Way back when, before multiple nerfs to ECM, and also directly to the Falcon, ECM was op. A big reason for that was the fact that you could be perma jammed, and from a range much further than is possible now.

Yes I know technically you can still be perma jammed, but it used to be that if an ECM boat (or worse a falcon) appeared on the scene, you were going to be perma jammed no matter what. Now there is a CHANCE of being jammed, and a chance that it might continue through multiple cycles.

I really don't see it as OP any longer. Especially after the addition of it being made a chance based mechanic with only two possible results. It works, or it doesn't.

And if it works yay... If it doesn't, that ECM boat is going to die soon-after.

In the grand scheme, that curse that just landed on grid poses a far greater threat than the falcon that landed before it.