These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Metacide ECM

Author
Lugh Crow-Slave
#1 - 2015-02-03 08:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Currently there are a great deal of ECM mods for each type of sensor with the meta four being the only real choice in most cases.


I feel the meta four/t2 have a nice balance in the sensor strength so what i propose to change is how the mods use heat.

the current T2 would stay the same giving its overheat to the Jam strength

then there would be two other groups

First one lower strength than the T2
lowered the cycle time when heating (with maybe a small boost to jam strength) so you have more chances to get a jam but if it lands its for a much shorter duration
this one would also need to produce more heat or depending on the cycle reduction it could be to strong on dedicated ships

lowest strength
and would increase the cycle time when heating (if it's possible with a further reduction in jam strength). This gives you fewer chances to jam but it will land for longer


This would give you much more choice in a fight as an ECM boat over just hoping your jam lands.

Personally the one that would increase the jam time is not one i'm fond of but I'm just one person so i put it up anyway.




in short your choices would be
1 better chance to jam
2 shorter cycles
3 longer cycles
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#2 - 2015-02-03 08:53:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
For metacide i was hoping for:

Meta 0:
T1 - standard with moderate CPU and cap use

Meta 1:
Limited - Cheapy/nooby/crappy with low CPU and cap use
Scout - Long range but weak
Enfeebling - Strong but short range

Meta 5:
T2 - LR and strong with high CPU and cap use.

Meta 6:
Caldari - XLR and strong with high CPU and cap use
Guristas - LR and Xstrong with high CPU and cap use.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Lugh Crow-Slave
#3 - 2015-02-03 09:03:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Daichi Yamato wrote:
For metacide i was hoping for:

Meta 0:
T1 - standard with moderate CPU and cap use

Meta 1:
Limited - Cheapy/nooby/crappy with low CPU and cap use
Scout - Long range but weak
Enfeebling - Strong but short range

Meta 5:
T2 - LR and strong with high CPU and cap use.

Meta 6:
Caldari - XLR and strong with high CPU and cap use
Guristas - LR and Xstrong with high CPU and cap use.



Problem with ECM is you are almost forced to go with the one with the highest strength even when you have to compromise tank/range/dps

a few years ago you had a choice with range or power but with the meta now shifted to faster ships you can't kite all that well with ECM boats



the idea above not only has you making choices at the fitting screen but also in a fight.

long cycles on weak ecm would work great on frigates but short cycle times would be less effective

the lower chance to hit on cruisers would make the longer duration one a poor choice but one that rapidly cycles could cause them to waist time relocking

battle ships and T2 cruisers would need the higher jam strength of the T2 ecm to get any reliable hits
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4 - 2015-02-03 09:18:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
that seems unlikely. a blackbird now has a range of 77+78km. If you arent at least a little out the way at this range then nothing is.

A griffin certainly has a meaningful choice between being within light missile and drone range with extra ECM str or outside of LMR and drone range with reduced ECM str, (or fitting more expensive and cap hungry jams).

edit-

infact i already do this when my standard griffin has 2x range rigs instead of 2x str rigs.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Lugh Crow-Slave
#5 - 2015-02-03 09:41:57 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
that seems unlikely. a blackbird now has a range of 77+78km. If you arent at least a little out the way at this range then nothing is.

A griffin certainly has a meaningful choice between being within light missile and drone range with extra ECM str or outside of LMR and drone range with reduced ECM str, (or fitting more expensive and cap hungry jams).

edit-

infact i already do this when my standard griffin has 2x range rigs instead of 2x str rigs.


but you don't need to use the lows on the griff for tank so the ecm mods there cover what the rigs would do and the stacking penalty makes it almost pointless to use rigs and lows


but even going in as close as 30 km with the multies on black birds+ you are fine and don't need much more range than that and with most ships having gotten sensor strength buffs and the new targeting skills even with a boosted rook you have less than a 50% jam chance on some cruisers lowering that any further and it wont much matter how far from the fight you are.
Aran Hotchkiss
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#6 - 2015-02-03 10:09:00 UTC
I disagree with the notion that a shorter cycle time is weaker and a longer cycle time being stronger - the increased/decreased length of jam-time is exactly counterbalanced by the increased/decreased vulnerability duration when that jams fails. A longer cycle time increases the reward if you hit a successful jam, but just as equally increases the risk you're at if you fail jams.

The only exception to this is given that you have to re-lock targets after a successful jam, taking shortened cycles to its extreme would be incredibly strong - even if you fail a jam, you can cycle it again before they've finished getting a target lock on you.

You should have enough control over your herd of cats to make them understand. If they constantly make misstakes, get better cats.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2015-02-03 10:11:37 UTC
Aran Hotchkiss wrote:
I disagree with the notion that a shorter cycle time is weaker and a longer cycle time being stronger - the increased/decreased length of jam-time is exactly counterbalanced by the increased/decreased vulnerability duration when that jams fails. A longer cycle time increases the reward if you hit a successful jam, but just as equally increases the risk you're at if you fail jams.

The only exception to this is given that you have to re-lock targets after a successful jam, taking shortened cycles to its extreme would be incredibly strong - even if you fail a jam, you can cycle it again before they've finished getting a target lock on you.


this is why i stated they would be weaker and that they would have to generate much more heat as to keep you from doing it for more than a few cycles on the one that shortens it


and why i said the longer one would also need weaker strength even to the point where over heating weakened it further
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2015-02-03 10:41:08 UTC
Shorter cycle time is lethal, even as an overheat option. Reason being the relock penalty on the target would be crippling. You'd likely end up taking them out even more effectively.
Aran Hotchkiss
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-02-03 11:13:26 UTC
What I meant was that changing cycle time does not increase or decrease the power of the module - if you gave me two modules, regardless of cycle times if one had a stronger jam strength then I would take that one.

It's a similar case of say you're playing some fantay game

a 50% chance to crit for 100% bonus damage or a 10% chance to crit for 500% bonus damage (they both work out to an average of a 50% increase) - statistically they do the same thing, it's up to the player to decide if they want more consistent damage or wilder variation.

In a nutshell, giving the shorter duration module a boost to jam strength will make it flat out better, likewise giving the longer module a penalty will make it flat out worse.

You should have enough control over your herd of cats to make them understand. If they constantly make misstakes, get better cats.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#10 - 2015-02-03 11:20:41 UTC
Aran Hotchkiss wrote:
What I meant was that changing cycle time does not increase or decrease the power of the module - if you gave me two modules, regardless of cycle times if one had a stronger jam strength then I would take that one.

It's a similar case of say you're playing some fantay game

a 50% chance to crit for 100% bonus damage or a 10% chance to crit for 500% bonus damage (they both work out to an average of a 50% increase) - statistically they do the same thing, it's up to the player to decide if they want more consistent damage or wilder variation.

In a nutshell, giving the shorter duration module a boost to jam strength will make it flat out better, likewise giving the longer module a penalty will make it flat out worse.


not how it works with ecm as afk pointed out the faster you cycle the more chances you have in that short time use a sensor damp to lower their scan res and it turns into a mess.

now if this thing builds heat so fast you maybe have it for 3-4 cycles its not worth using on a frig with low sensor strength as odds are you have 80-100% jam on even T2 frings but a cruiser or a BS this could either burn out several of your jams just over heating the one or keep the opponent locked down just long enough to swing his tank
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#11 - 2015-02-03 11:25:39 UTC
As far as I remember, CCP Fozzie hinted during last Fanfest they want to scrap the current ECM mechanics altogether and replace it with something else. If I remember correctly, he was not happy, and many seem to agree there, that ECM is the only Ewar where there's no countermeasure; if you are jammed, you cannot do anything to counter act this (save for drones), whereas other Ewar has things you can do to counter it (Damps, get closer, use Sebo/Sigamp; TP, move faster/out of range; TD, use TC/TE, move slower or aligned to your target or move closer, etc.). With ECM, you can only slightly reduce the chance of receiving a complete black out.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Aran Hotchkiss
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#12 - 2015-02-03 11:26:50 UTC
Good lord I missed the important detail of this being when they are heated - I'd thought you were proposing two modules which had these differences as their baseline stats.

I still don't think tinkering with the jam strengths is necessitated though.

You should have enough control over your herd of cats to make them understand. If they constantly make misstakes, get better cats.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#13 - 2015-02-03 11:33:00 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
As far as I remember, CCP Fozzie hinted during last Fanfest they want to scrap the current ECM mechanics altogether and replace it with something else. If I remember correctly, he was not happy, and many seem to agree there, that ECM is the only Ewar where there's no countermeasure; if you are jammed, you cannot do anything to counter act this (save for drones), whereas other Ewar has things you can do to counter it (Damps, get closer, use Sebo/Sigamp; TP, move faster/out of range; TD, use TC/TE, move slower or aligned to your target or move closer, etc.). With ECM, you can only slightly reduce the chance of receiving a complete black out.


Drones F.o.F smart bombs not to mention one ECCM makes it almost impossible for you to be jammed
Lugh Crow-Slave
#14 - 2015-02-03 11:33:56 UTC
Aran Hotchkiss wrote:
Good lord I missed the important detail of this being when they are heated - I'd thought you were proposing two modules which had these differences as their baseline stats.

I still don't think tinkering with the jam strengths is necessitated though.


for the long jam it probably would as once you became jammed you would be shut down for more than 20s
Aran Hotchkiss
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#15 - 2015-02-03 11:47:49 UTC
Arguing from a numbers perspective

Say you have a 50% chance to jam

Regardless of cycle speeds, if you target a ship and apply your ECM you can statistically expect to have him jammed half of the time. Whether you're cycling every half second or cycling every minute or anywhere inbetween, you're most likely to jam him half the time.

Sure if you can land an extended jam on a ship then you've scored a solid blow, however, given that you have to heat that module before it cycles, if your jam fails... well from personal experience there is a huge sense of naked vulnerability when you pile all four jams on that coercer in your face and they all fail. I don't want to imagine that when I have to wait 50% longer before I can try jamming agian. (Risk v. reward y'all)

Now whilst purely on numbers tweaking cycle time doesn't impact on the % time jammed, in practice thing's are skewed in shorter cycle time's favour, both because A) The issue afkalt (and me too if you read up) mentioned, and B) if thing's are going pearshaped, five fleeting seconds of being un-tackled is all that you need to disengage. If I could fit five second jams to my kitsunes I would feel very safe indeed because if something catches me and starts whaling on me I'd have a much better chance of getting away than if I had 30 second jammers.

You should have enough control over your herd of cats to make them understand. If they constantly make misstakes, get better cats.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#16 - 2015-02-03 11:48:31 UTC
Can we remove racial jammers while we are at it, and just use the multi spectrums.
The racial jammers are actually a huge part of what creates the 'zero tank ECM ship' meta. Since unless you have perfect fleet intel before hand or carry spares and a chance to refit occurs you have to rainbow fit currently to be 'effective'.
If instead multispectrum was all that existed (I wouldn't be against a mode shift that takes a while to turn a multispectrum into a current racial stat wise as long as it took a while to change so you can't do it right at the start of a fight) you wouldn't be seeing rainbow fits, so there is allowance for spare slots to fit tank without not being 'optimal' for ECM.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#17 - 2015-02-03 11:58:31 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Can we remove racial jammers while we are at it, and just use the multi spectrums.
The racial jammers are actually a huge part of what creates the 'zero tank ECM ship' meta. Since unless you have perfect fleet intel before hand or carry spares and a chance to refit occurs you have to rainbow fit currently to be 'effective'.
If instead multispectrum was all that existed (I wouldn't be against a mode shift that takes a while to turn a multispectrum into a current racial stat wise as long as it took a while to change so you can't do it right at the start of a fight) you wouldn't be seeing rainbow fits, so there is allowance for spare slots to fit tank without not being 'optimal' for ECM.





Then just fly multi no one makes you use the racial ones.



But ecm is extremely powerful so the reward comes with a high risk if you fail.



I'm not to set on my own idea and it was just set there to get things started but removing choice is not what ecm needs
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#18 - 2015-02-03 15:05:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
long cycles on weak ecm would work great on frigates but short cycle times would be less effective

the lower chance to hit on cruisers would make the longer duration one a poor choice but one that rapidly cycles could cause them to waist time relocking

battle ships and T2 cruisers would need the higher jam strength of the T2 ecm to get any reliable hits


Because of the interaction between ecm module cycle time and ship locking time, shorter ECM cycle time is always more effective. Simply breaking their locks every few seconds means they have to spend time relocking targets. If that time is long enough then they could get jammed again before they even lock anything. This is why ECM module cycle time is 20 seconds.

No matter the change, you have to look at all reasonable (and even some unreasonable) use cases. Like 30 second cycle time vs a frigate or a BS, and perhaps a 10 second cycle time vs a frigate or a BS. I know 20 seconds seems like a long time to be jammed. But trust me. Making it faster would be permajamming Hell when combined with scan resolution dampening.

I would not object to CCP running a test case on sisi with the Kitsune getting a cycle time bonus instead of an ECM strength bonus. The results could be very telling.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#19 - 2015-02-03 20:14:53 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
Daichi Yamato wrote:
For metacide i was hoping for:

Meta 0:
T1 - standard with moderate CPU and cap use

Meta 1:
Limited - Cheapy/nooby/crappy with low CPU and cap use
Scout - Long range but weak
Enfeebling - Strong but short range

Meta 5:
T2 - LR and strong with high CPU and cap use.

Meta 6:
Caldari - XLR and strong with high CPU and cap use
Guristas - LR and Xstrong with high CPU and cap use.

I like this balance as long as the range of the T2 is less than the Scout but higher than standard, and the strength of the T2 is less than the Enfeebling but higher than standard.

The shorter/longer duration variations proposed by Lugh also has merit but I am unsure how to implement it without having 5 Meta modules.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin

Lugh Crow-Slave
#20 - 2015-02-03 22:23:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:


The shorter/longer duration variations proposed by Lugh also has merit but I am unsure how to implement it without having 5 Meta modules.


I did mention the meta 5 in the op? so why would it be without?
Soldarius wrote:


Because of the interaction between ecm module cycle time and ship locking time, shorter ECM cycle time is always more effective. Simply breaking their locks every few seconds means they have to spend time relocking targets. If that time is long enough then they could get jammed again before they even lock anything. This is why ECM module cycle time is 20 seconds.

No matter the change, you have to look at all reasonable (and even some unreasonable) use cases. Like 30 second cycle time vs a frigate or a BS, and perhaps a 10 second cycle time vs a frigate or a BS. I know 20 seconds seems like a long time to be jammed. But trust me. Making it faster would be permajamming Hell when combined with scan resolution dampening.


again this is why it would generate much more heat so doing it for 3-4 cycles would likely burn it and its surrounding modules out.
12Next page