These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ECM revamp idea: ECM to effect target resolution.

Author
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2015-11-30 21:10:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
ECM's purpose is sound. Stop powerful force projection such as high dps ships or logistics. I have considerable sp into electronic warfare, but ECM play? I just do not enjoy it. Random chance events is outdated for anything aside from "critical hits" and the black or white, lock or no lock seems a bit dated.

So here is the idea and mechanically would work the same as a tracking disruptor in that it affects a fitted weapon's stats. Have ECM debuff a weapon's targeting resolution. Resultant effect would be an effective reduction of applied damage on small sig ships by reducing high damage hits and wrecking shots while increasing miss chance.

In terms of existing ecm types, these would be removed, just the multispectral ecm. It also adds two forms of counter. You can make use of target painters, or the ECCM.

ECCM can be one of two things. First, it can be potentially remade into a resolution boosting module and renamed, although this could be overpowering a bit as it would increase a ship's effective dps, or it can be a reducer of the effectiveness of ecm.

ECM burst would need to be done differently. It would best be done if it gave penalty based on cycle time of the module. Makes burst ships a bit more of a threat and potential new doctrines.

projected ECM burst instead would put up a prolonged field. Not for cycle time of the bust module, but say sixty seconds of a spacial disruption.

Disadvantage and counter points? Well, if too powerful, missile ecm doctrines could become the norm. However if painters are an effective counter, and the ECCM effective enough, it provides a simple one module fix to it. Thoughts?


DISCUSSION SO FAR


What about four types of ECMs. Turrets, missiles, remote engineering and one for remote electronics falloff.


  • So turret one is like original with target resolution?
  • Missile ECM increases a missile explosion radius?
  • Engineering ECM to reduce a ships efficiency at transporters and neutralizers?
  • Electronics one for reducing range of ewar and remote buff modules?


I think that could work better.

Edit: To maintain a bit of flexibility, perhaps the ECM can do all four, then have scripts to specialize?


IDEA TWO


White noise field generator conversion.

ECMs are converted from a debuff to a buff of sorts. It reduces the signature size of all affected. Bursts again would be a duration. The simple way would be to have that direct. But a more interesting and tactical means could be to have an internal value modifier applied. A ship's sensor strength compares to this value to create an internal modifier. The different ecm sensor types would be either the effect, or the sensor hole as a means to allow friendlies to still quick lock.

This should be combined with remote rep modules having a resolution effect as well. This means ECM will affect logistics by reducing their ability to effectively apply reps, but at the same time, it would make it harder for your fleet to land hits. As such, powerful ECM does become a double edged sword.

Lastly, white noise would best be combined with my proposal for Weapon Tiericide V2 in which DPS application would become and important factor. Precise weapons allowing a fleet to land shots meaning potentially higher net damage vs a high damage weapon.

ANOTHER NICE ALTERNATIVE

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6196633#post6196633

Valacus wrote:
I'd rather have ECM reduce the number of targets the ship in question is capable of locking, with the floor being 1. That way you eliminate things like, "Come help, have rattlesnake tackled!" "Omw, undocking in a griffon", but you don't nerf ECM's effectiveness against things like logi, who often have to maintain a cap chain in order to be effective. You'd also have to use more than one jam on a target, as opposed to one jamming scorpion or falcon being able to keep 4 different ships permajammed.



And the skill bonus could be fairly simple to do as well. One additional point of jamming per ship skill level. Not in game, but is there a skill that directly affects ecm strength? If so then that could go to range or something. ECCM prevents X number of jams depending on ?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Chocolate Pickle
V.O.I.D.
Empire of Disrespect Dishonor Apathy
#2 - 2015-11-30 21:35:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Chocolate Pickle
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tracking_Disruptor_I

This is what you've turned ECM into.

It has no effect on missiles, drones, logistics, or other ewar. You've made it pointless.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3 - 2015-11-30 21:43:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Chocolate Pickle wrote:
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tracking_Disruptor_I

This is what you've turned ECM into.

It has no effect on missiles, drones, logistics, or other ewar. You've made it pointless.


Not quite tracking disruptors, but true, would be a similar effect in feel. It would be possible to have it double bonused to missiles or missile specific by making it affect a missile's explosion radius. Follows along with accuracy. That note, potentially make ECM an anti missile version of the tracking disruptor?

As for the logistics.... hrm... I do hate having multi role items.

What about four types of ECMs. Turrets, missiles, remote engineering and one for remote electronics falloff.


  • So turret one is like original with target resolution?
  • Missile ECM increases a missile explosion radius?
  • Engineering ECM to reduce a ships efficiency at transporters and neutralizers?
  • Electronics one for reducing range of ewar and remote buff modules?


I think that could work better.

Edit: To maintain a bit of flexibility, perhaps the ECM can do all four, then have scripts to specialize?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Valacus
Streets of Fire
#4 - 2015-11-30 22:56:44 UTC
I'd rather have ECM reduce the number of targets the ship in question is capable of locking, with the floor being 1. That way you eliminate things like, "Come help, have rattlesnake tackled!" "Omw, undocking in a griffon", but you don't nerf ECM's effectiveness against things like logi, who often have to maintain a cap chain in order to be effective. You'd also have to use more than one jam on a target, as opposed to one jamming scorpion or falcon being able to keep 4 different ships permajammed.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#5 - 2015-12-01 00:26:06 UTC
Add target resolution to remote-rep and remote-cap modules. Then this idea makes sense.

It won't work for ewar effects as all modules are the same size.


Also, have a read of my comments from many moons ago about an ECM rebalance.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6110008#post6110008
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2015-12-01 00:49:59 UTC
Valacus wrote:
I'd rather have ECM reduce the number of targets the ship in question is capable of locking, with the floor being 1. That way you eliminate things like, "Come help, have rattlesnake tackled!" "Omw, undocking in a griffon", but you don't nerf ECM's effectiveness against things like logi, who often have to maintain a cap chain in order to be effective. You'd also have to use more than one jam on a target, as opposed to one jamming scorpion or falcon being able to keep 4 different ships permajammed.


This would probably require to remove or reduce the RNG side of it. It also make ECM completely useless while solo since you can't break the last lock in any way.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#7 - 2015-12-01 01:03:14 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
Add target resolution to remote-rep and remote-cap modules. Then this idea makes sense.

It won't work for ewar effects as all modules are the same size.


Also, have a read of my comments from many moons ago about an ECM rebalance.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6110008#post6110008


Resolution style effect to repping would be interesting indeed. The remote target spectrum breaker would be interesting, but from a lore side of it, difficult to implement. One of the side effects of using the spectrum breaker is you lose your own locks. If they take away the self lock breaking thing either on you or your target, then it is a potential. A white noise field of some sort...

That is also an interesting idea, a buff/penalty deal. Apply white noise to make it effectively reduced sig size. This will reduce damage from all sorts, but also make it tough to lock onto as well. Once more, painters and such are counter.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#8 - 2015-12-01 10:49:36 UTC
The only thing wrong with ECM is people do not understand ECM

It is not overpowered or is not broken in fact many other forms of Ewar are much stronger

ECM is also not underpowered but it does take more piloting and sp to pull off properly


Varyah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-12-01 12:35:58 UTC
A much better idea that is not so similar to other ewar mechanics is to make locked targets unusable but not lose locks. The most frustrating thing with ECM is that you not only lose the ability to shoot something but you also have to retarget everything which might take a long time, otherwise it would be fine. Optionally add other modules that prevent locking new targets.

Lore/explanation wise: ECM would disrupt the connection between targeting system and weapon system.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2015-12-01 12:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Making it affect sensor resolution is in effect exactly the same as making it affect tracking. The net result is that it hurts tracking. So then it would be a tracking-scripted tracking disruptor. We have those and better yet, we can alternatively script them for disruption optimal range and falloff, or leave them unscripted for a mix.


I'd like to see a rebalance of ECM to make it less binary, but it needs to leave it unique. Here's some ideas that have come around--I posted several of them immediately below the OP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=452551&find=unread




Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
The only thing wrong with ECM is people do not understand ECM

It is not overpowered or is not broken in fact many other forms of Ewar are much stronger

ECM is also not underpowered but it does take more piloting and sp to pull off properly

I understand ECM. I know how it works. I know how to use it effectively. The Scorpion is one of my favorite ships and you can bet your last ISK I know a lot of ways to fly it effectively.

I agree that ECM is neither overpowered nor underpowered. It is highly effective when used properly but there are a lot of factors and variables that make effective employment often difficult and sometimes next to impossible. It is not always the best solution and ultimately you need to know your opponent.

That being said, I feel very strongly that ECM is under a severe need for change. The binary nature of ECM is unfun to both the user and the victim, and it stifles gameplay rather than encouraging more.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2015-12-01 13:22:40 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
The only thing wrong with ECM is people do not understand ECM

It is not overpowered or is not broken in fact many other forms of Ewar are much stronger

ECM is also not underpowered but it does take more piloting and sp to pull off properly




I feel the same as Reaver. While ecm is fairly decent in what it does, and a good overall balance, it also isnt much fun for either party. The binary nature means somebody will be getting mad and swearing. Also, binary makes little sense. Works..... Doesnt.... Now it works again...

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-12-01 13:35:12 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Also, binary makes little sense. Works..... Doesnt.... Now it works again...

Yeah, in one fight my Scorpion had a jamming war with another Scorpion. I may have had a higher jam chance but I was mostly tank fit. He probably had a Caldari Jammer like I did because he jammed me a few times successfully. But I kept him jammed for much longer, 3-4 cycles which was at least a minute of game time, and with the strong time dilation we were experiencing it was several minutes of player reaction time. In that short battle, random chance gave me a strong edge over the other Scorpion, and while I never successfully jammed any of their logi during the entire fight, winning over that Scorpion allowed me to jam other Abaddons multiple times. I may have saved a few battleships on our side, all due to some coin flips, not skill.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2015-12-01 14:39:23 UTC
ECM is the red-headed stepchild of the EWAR family.
Iskandar Fehrnah
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2015-12-01 15:06:27 UTC
What about if ECM "unlocked" targets over a few seconds, depending on the sensor strength of the affected ship ?

it would remove the randomness effect while not changing the mechanic too much.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2015-12-01 15:18:07 UTC
Iskandar Fehrnah wrote:
What about if ECM "unlocked" targets over a few seconds, depending on the sensor strength of the affected ship ?

it would remove the randomness effect while not changing the mechanic too much.


Problem would be cycle time. Even an instant only lock prevention can take larger ships permanently out of combat if cycled unless cycle times are increased as well or some immunity period after. Doesnt sound very engaging. That is the issue with a binary result. They are less of an adapt and counter play. More just suck it up til you can pop the target

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Valacus
Streets of Fire
#16 - 2015-12-01 15:26:43 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Valacus wrote:
I'd rather have ECM reduce the number of targets the ship in question is capable of locking, with the floor being 1. That way you eliminate things like, "Come help, have rattlesnake tackled!" "Omw, undocking in a griffon", but you don't nerf ECM's effectiveness against things like logi, who often have to maintain a cap chain in order to be effective. You'd also have to use more than one jam on a target, as opposed to one jamming scorpion or falcon being able to keep 4 different ships permajammed.


This would probably require to remove or reduce the RNG side of it. It also make ECM completely useless while solo since you can't break the last lock in any way.


The RNG element of ECM is stupid anyways. RNG is rarely a good mechanic in MMOs. Leaving the fight in the hands of RNJesus isn't what I call fun. And as for soloing, so what? The current mechanic just makes it broken for soloing. If it disappeared from soloing altogether I wouldn't shed a tear.
Iskandar Fehrnah
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2015-12-01 15:53:58 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Iskandar Fehrnah wrote:
What about if ECM "unlocked" targets over a few seconds, depending on the sensor strength of the affected ship ?

it would remove the randomness effect while not changing the mechanic too much.


Problem would be cycle time. Even an instant only lock prevention can take larger ships permanently out of combat if cycled unless cycle times are increased as well or some immunity period after. Doesnt sound very engaging. That is the issue with a binary result. They are less of an adapt and counter play. More just suck it up til you can pop the target


I am not sure I made myself clear enough so I will give a detail walktrough of how this would work.


  1. Ship A engages ship B which is equiped with ECM.
  2. Ship A locks ship B. And B locks A.
  3. B engages ECM against A
  4. A lock over B weakens over a few seconds, and eventualy breaks (The ECM module neads to be activated during all this time.). Meanwhile Ship A can still act as if he has a lock.
  5. A can relock B.


Of course the unlocking time is the key point of balance here and I don't realy know the duration it should have.
Cristl
#18 - 2015-12-01 16:20:49 UTC
ECM is reasonably balanced - the only problem with it is the 'save-or-die' binary nature.

If we just use the jam percentage to roll separately against each target-requiring module we'd deal with it fine. Then modify the jam time to depend on the target ship's size somehow, so that modules on a battleship were jammed for longer than on a frigate.

Bingo, no need for a complicated re-balance since the expected value of modules disabled would remain constant, and there'd be no major frustration from feeling completely helpless.
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#19 - 2015-12-01 16:42:17 UTC
Cristl wrote:
ECM is reasonably balanced - the only problem with it is the 'save-or-die' binary nature.

If we just use the jam percentage to roll separately against each target-requiring module we'd deal with it fine. Then modify the jam time to depend on the target ship's size somehow, so that modules on a battleship were jammed for longer than on a frigate.

Bingo, no need for a complicated re-balance since the expected value of modules disabled would remain constant, and there'd be no major frustration from feeling completely helpless.


I don't agree. The whole, "you are not allowed to lock anything" mechanic needs to go. If ECM must effect target locking, then it should not be a blanket removal of your locking capability, but a handicap to it. So if you are jammed, you lose a certain number of target locks. I'd even be prepared for the jamming extent to bring your target locks to zero if you are jammed by enough modules to remove all of your lock slots, but that is one ship using multiple modules to fully jam one other ship, not one ship permajamming multiple people. If the jam floor must be zero, then ECCM modules should not only buff your sensor strength, but also boost the number of target locks you are capable of by 1 or 2 so that ECCM is not 100% useless when not being used to counter ECM, much like sensor boosters and tracking computers are not useless even when that ship is not being disrupted or damped.
Cristl
#20 - 2015-12-01 17:09:36 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Cristl wrote:
ECM is reasonably balanced - the only problem with it is the 'save-or-die' binary nature.

If we just use the jam percentage to roll separately against each target-requiring module we'd deal with it fine. Then modify the jam time to depend on the target ship's size somehow, so that modules on a battleship were jammed for longer than on a frigate.

Bingo, no need for a complicated re-balance since the expected value of modules disabled would remain constant, and there'd be no major frustration from feeling completely helpless.


I don't agree. The whole, "you are not allowed to lock anything" mechanic needs to go. If ECM must effect target locking, then it should not be a blanket removal of your locking capability, but a handicap to it. So if you are jammed, you lose a certain number of target locks. I'd even be prepared for the jamming extent to bring your target locks to zero if you are jammed by enough modules to remove all of your lock slots, but that is one ship using multiple modules to fully jam one other ship, not one ship permajamming multiple people. If the jam floor must be zero, then ECCM modules should not only buff your sensor strength, but also boost the number of target locks you are capable of by 1 or 2 so that ECCM is not 100% useless when not being used to counter ECM, much like sensor boosters and tracking computers are not useless even when that ship is not being disrupted or damped.

So you didn't read my comment at all then? Here is a version in very short sentences with some bullet points etc.

- ECM no longer breaks locks (nota bene, Mr Valacus)

- Instead, each target-requiring module rolls separately, using the current percentage chances. These modules are weapons, remote repairers, ewar, points, webs, scrams, neuts, vamps, resebos etc.

- Any module which fails its roll is knocked out for a duration which depends on the target ship's size

An example:

Instead of your Omen losing locks or nothing at all, you might lose 2 lasers and the web, but the other 4 lasers and the point were okay.
12Next page