These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Fixes to counter ECM, ideas so far. CCP, PLEASE !

First post
Author
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#21 - 2016-10-04 14:14:02 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Max Trix
Removed Post and those quoting it for Ranting and Personal Attacks. Please keep it civil or the thread will be closed for good.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Valkin Mordirc
#22 - 2016-10-04 18:08:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
I dunno, ECM is called cancer for a reason. There are some core reason why people hate it so much.



Mainly because it's extremely powerful in small engagements, Two Rooks can shut down an entire small gang if they are lucky enough. And I think that's the problem with it in general. In large scale engagements it loses it's effectiveness, not stacking like damps, TD's and TP's and the micromanagement is annoying on a fleet scale.


It's all based on RNG, so skill in being a decent jammer pilot is diminished. Just lock and hope for a cycle to land. Keep range and stay aligned. The RNG is extreamly annoying because you don't have control over it, neither party does. I was in a fleet once, and we had engage a Drake fleet. It was a fun fight, but they had a scorp supporting them. A Hyperion pilot of ours managed to get tackle on him. He had fitted his hype with two ECCM mod. Giving him like 40 in sensor strength. He had the Scorp basically dead to rights at that point. Everyone else was to far away to be able to tackle scorpion, but he was breaking fast enough that no one was really worried about it

However due to a random roll of numbers. The Scorp was able to jam the hype and warp away to safety and warp back on the field at a safe distance.

There was no skill in the scorpions piloting that saved him. His other fleet mates didn't save him. He just got lucky. Which honestly to me, sounds like a **** mechanic.

Because of all that, it's also a very safe option for someone to fly. Lock target jam him, if he gets close to you and you suddenly miss a jam, just be aligned and warp out before he has time to relock you. For Battleships (Not a Solopwnmobile I know) dealing with a single jammer without or even with drones is a pain in the ass, most of them also don't have the mobility to get near a jammer. Cruisers and the such, being faster have a better chance of getting close to the jammer, but have lower sensor strength, making permajamming easier.



That's why jammers are annoying. It's completely RNG requires less skill than the other Ewar types. And it's basically a I WIN (Maybe, probably, but maybe) Button. No one likes to be unable to anything, and hoping for the chance to do something, because some jackwagon is in a kitsune aligning at 30km towards a random moon, wanted to fly ECM.
#DeleteTheWeak
GsyBoy
Doomheim
#23 - 2016-10-04 20:19:02 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I dunno, ECM is called cancer for a reason.


ECM is not cancer, it is a current gaming dynamic, cancer is cancer

https://www.twitch.tv/gsyboy

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#24 - 2016-10-04 21:01:59 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I dunno, ECM is called cancer for a reason.


That reason being that it's currently fashionable to slap the "cancer" label on anything you don't like.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
#25 - 2016-10-05 05:04:12 UTC
ECM just got a huge nerf with the merge of Sensorboosters with ECCM. It's not yet ballanced (and will never be especialy in small fleets), but at least fitting the counter to it is not such a big waste of a medslot anymore.
Wimzy Chent-Shi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2016-10-05 08:05:30 UTC
Story goes "I knew there was a griffin, I took my chances, did not work, CCPLS change the game so I can win and they lose next time."
Cause making eccm scriptable in otherwise useful mod was not OP enough. Sebos are great. You fit them. End of story.

Come get some cancer @ my blog !

"This clash of opinions is like cutting onions. We are creating something here, that's productive, ...and then there is also salt." -Wimzy 2016

Eriana Stenory
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2016-10-05 11:37:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Eriana Stenory
The only fact i MAY agree with, is that ECM range are, for some ships, just too big. But that's all and enough.
This is the only thing I don't like : being able to ECM while being almost safe, but it's part of the game currently (but in this case, you won't do anything solo / small gang against a decent tanking ship)

I really love flying my Grfffin Navy, I like to ECM but I also like to do some decent dps, but, i'm everything but "safe" when I ECM with an optimal ECM range at 5, you have plenty solutions dealing with it. (Drones, Smartbombs, AutoTargeting missiles...)

So no, still, ECM shouldn't be nerfed, I'm not "perma jamming everything", especially destroyers and bigger ships. It's always the difference between feeling being perma jammed, and never be able to jam someone. Just fit your ship taking ECM into account, or just don't cry about it.

Wimzy Chent-Shi wrote:
Story goes "I knew there was a griffin, I took my chances, did not work, CCPLS change the game so I can win and they lose next time."
Cause making eccm scriptable in otherwise useful mod was not OP enough. Sebos are great. You fit them. End of story.

This.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#28 - 2016-10-05 19:30:16 UTC
Wimzy Chent-Shi wrote:
Story goes "I knew there was a griffin, I took my chances, did not work, CCPLS change the game so I can win and they lose next time."
Cause making eccm scriptable in otherwise useful mod was not OP enough. Sebos are great. You fit them. End of story.



what I was thinking. Not even a case of cloaked falcon. That you might get some empathy from.

You know the drill. Rock writes CCP and says yeah scissors is balanced just right...you don't change a thing there. But CCP....we need to talk about paper, that mofo is op as hell.


Rest....sebo a wonderful thing really. 3 scripts, ECCM, res and range. CCP has made this mod about as appealing as you can get it.

Sig amp in lows also helps. That got 3 for the price of 1 too.
Goe Rilla
Quantum Force Inc.
DammFam
#29 - 2016-10-08 12:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Goe Rilla
Eriana Stenory wrote:
The only fact i MAY agree with, is that ECM range are, for some ships, just too big. But that's all and enough.
This is the only thing I don't like : being able to ECM while being almost safe, but it's part of the game currently (but in this case, you won't do anything solo / small gang against a decent tanking ship)

I really love flying my Grfffin Navy, I like to ECM but I also like to do some decent dps, but, i'm everything but "safe" when I ECM with an optimal ECM range at 5, you have plenty solutions dealing with it. (Drones, Smartbombs, AutoTargeting missiles...)

So no, still, ECM shouldn't be nerfed, I'm not "perma jamming everything", especially destroyers and bigger ships. It's always the difference between feeling being perma jammed, and never be able to jam someone. Just fit your ship taking ECM into account, or just don't cry about it.

Wimzy Chent-Shi wrote:
Story goes "I knew there was a griffin, I took my chances, did not work, CCPLS change the game so I can win and they lose next time."
Cause making eccm scriptable in otherwise useful mod was not OP enough. Sebos are great. You fit them. End of story.

This.


So basically on pretty much all gallente armor ships for ep, I'm screwed and have to sacrifice my capbooster and entire cap/tank just for one sebo as norm ? Or sacrifice a web ? On the offchance Im met with some jackass with ECM ?

Yea, just terrific idea guys.

Just face to the damn truth already, that ECM is just a plain **** game feature, a quickier, easier and no-effort way to e-warfare management than with Damps...

And unlikely CCP will ever see to this and remove it entirely of course, and so yes, you can keep on mashing over the i-win button sitting 100k away and have the nerve to come here, wave your little space noodles, serve us your morale, leave the thread with that self-indulgent pat on the back and calling yourselves the proud Big Boys of Eve.

Pathetic.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#30 - 2016-10-08 14:41:18 UTC
“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Goe Rilla
Quantum Force Inc.
DammFam
#31 - 2016-10-08 15:06:22 UTC
Yea keep sucking on stupid every day and fail to take on the point.
Valkin Mordirc
#32 - 2016-10-12 06:05:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I dunno, ECM is called cancer for a reason.


That reason being that it's currently fashionable to slap the "cancer" label on anything you don't like.



Orthrus Svip, and people dislike things for reasons. Which is listed and what you ignored above.


Regardless, I think RNG is **** game mechanic for a skill based MMO RPG.


Which oddly both of you completely ignored in favor of cherry picking.
#DeleteTheWeak
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#33 - 2016-10-12 11:33:34 UTC
Goe Rilla wrote:


So basically on pretty much all gallente armor ships for ep, I'm screwed and have to sacrifice my capbooster and entire cap/tank just for one sebo as norm ? Or sacrifice a web ? On the offchance Im met with some jackass with ECM ?

Yea, just terrific idea guys.

Just face to the damn truth already, that ECM is just a plain **** game feature, a quickier, easier and no-effort way to e-warfare management than with Damps...

And unlikely CCP will ever see to this and remove it entirely of course, and so yes, you can keep on mashing over the i-win button sitting 100k away and have the nerve to come here, wave your little space noodles, serve us your morale, leave the thread with that self-indulgent pat on the back and calling yourselves the proud Big Boys of Eve.

Pathetic.

Thanks for the laugh. You have to fit a counter for every type of ewar out there, but for some reason ECM is the exception? Ok. Brings me back to 2008, so there's that too.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#34 - 2016-10-12 21:29:36 UTC
Christopher Mabata wrote:

I can get average jams as high as 20.0 with a falcon heated from 70k and i haven't even upgraded my fit to use better jammers save for my dread guristas multispectral Jammer because their like 20m. Which is still somewhere around a what? 36% Chance to jam per jammer? that means if i fit 4 Magnetometric jammers i could in theory perma jam you despite your precautions BUT ONLY IF RNG says so, i could land in the 64% No jam chance every single time in theory.


Just a note on your probabilities.

Jam Successful is 36% (or 0.36) per ECM module
Jam Unsuccesful is 64% (or 0.64) per ECM module

Using all four jammers on a single target gives you a probability of no jam as follows:

0.64 x 0.64 x 0.64 x 0.64 = 0.1677 or 16.8% chance of all four jammers failing. So your 36% jammers used on one target have a 83.2% chance of success, each cycle. Only one has to be good.

This is the sweetspot people call "perma jamming".

This is why ECM when it is discussed is so very situational. ECM used as a force multiplier against multiple targets is far less effective than against a single target. The situations (scenario's) are very different.

Whilst I do not support the OP's suggestions, whilst I agree that ECM does not need a nerf, I am in support of a change to ECM mechanics. The Boom or Bust design along with the blanket effect of total neutralisation of the "victim" makes the mechanics poor imo.

When jammed you lose not only your ability to deal damage from the ECM aggressor, you lose all ability to deal damage to any target, you lose any ability you had to range control and therefore, most likely any ability to escape (not so in most cases against TD, TP or RSD).

I'd much prefer to see CCP re-work the ECM modules into a mechanism to attack ships via their electronics. A method of destroying the modules on the inside of the ship in order to neutralize the target.

My initial concept (without any major development of the idea) is to cause overheat damage to active modules. The target would lose modules effected by ECM attacks to heat damage, unless they deactivate them perhaps. It would be possible to repair deactivated modules using nanite paste (either slowing the damage or countering the damage).

ECCM could be redesigned to use nanite pastes charges to "cool" the modules or reduce the damage/ counter repair modules. This could even have a proactive, as well as a reactive, effect and reason for fitting (overheat it all for longer!!!)

Finally, the ECM modules could have an effect that once all active modules are broken or offline that the target capacitor begins to overcharge. The increase in charge rate rapidly fills up the capacitor to 100% and then to overload.... forcing the capsule to eject from the ship. "Forced Ejection".

Anyone for a new New Eden career in Ship hijacking?

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#35 - 2016-10-13 07:20:12 UTC
Let's try to do the math.

Assume "permajamming" is jamming 95% of the time. I don't think that's too high a bar but I'd be willing to run another number if you disagree (and decided to do so for the hell of it later).

A fully bonused ECM II has a strength of 9.9 on a Kitsune. A VNI has a base sensor strength of 24 fully skilled. Let's do the math on how many modules (and then ships) you would need to get a permajam.

P(J) = 1-P(~j)

P(J) = 1-P(~j)^n

P(J)-1 = -P(~j)^n

1-P(J) = P(~j)^n

ln(1-P(J)) = n ln(P(~j))

n = ln(1-P(J))/ln(P(~j))

J of course represents the ship being jammed, while j represents any single jammer landing.

j = 9.9/24 = 0.4125

~j = 0.5875

Chance of 95% jams:

0.95 = 1-(0.5875)^n

n = ln(0.05)/ln(.5875) = -2.9957/-0.5319 = 5.632

So you'd need 6 racial jammers to get 95% jams. That's effectively 1.5 Kitsunes.

Now let's add a sebo to the VNI. Now our chance of jamming is:

9.9/47 = 0.2106

Chance of not jamming: 0.7894

Chance of 95% jams:

0.95 = 1-(0.7894)^n

n = 12.665

So that's now 3 Kitsunes just to "permajam" one ship that actually took precautions.

Same thing with a 90% threshold? Sure.

No sebo: 4.329; 1 and change Kitsunes

Sebo: 9.735 jammers; 2 and change Kitsunes.

Drop that to 75%, which seems to be the standard people actually set for "permajam" these days?

No sebo: 2.606 jammers; over half a rack of racials on a Kitsune

Sebo: 5.861 jammers; more than a single Kitsune

Math says: if you expect to face ECM, fit ECCM and suddenly the problem dramatically decreases.

And because I have the spreadsheet open already, let's assume multispecs and see how that goes.

95% with sebo: 19.798 jammers; 5 Kitsunes

95% no sebo: 9.316 jammers; 3 Kitsunes

90% with sebo: 15.217 jammers; 4 Kitsunes

90% no sebo: 7.160 jammers; 2 Kitsunes

75% with sebo: 9.161 jammers; 3 Kitsunes

75% no sebo: 4.311 jammers; just about 1 Kitsune

50% with sebo: 4.581 multispec jammers or 2.930 racials

50% no sebo: 2.155 multis or 1.303 racials

So. What's the actual threshold for "permajam"? If one ship has you locked down then either you're only jammed 75% of the time on average and you didn't fit a sebo or you're only jammed half the time at best.

That doesn't seem all that overpowered -- let alone cancerous -- to me.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#36 - 2016-10-13 07:54:45 UTC
A couple more observations from the math.

First, chance to jam increases almost linearly with the number of jammers up to about 75%. After that, the number of jammers needed takes on a clear exponential increase.

Second, to keep your jam rate at 50%, you need a sensor strength twice the jam strength for one jammer, 3.5 times the jam strength for two jammers, 5 times the jam jam strength for three jammers, and 6.5 times the jam strength for four jammers. Reasonable minds could disagree as to whether that should be tweaked.

Third, ECM is painfully useless on unbonused hulls. So very painfully useless. As a result, if you get jammed, someone went out of their way to bring a jamming ship, and that ship is only good for one thing. If it can't do its job it has no place ever undocking.

Fourth, the relative paucity of ECM whine threads is interesting, and I suspect it has to do with how underpowered Minmitar weapon systems are right now (at the cruiser and frigate level). Minmatar ships still have the weakest sensors and I recall seeing way more complaint threads back when medium ACs were a real thing.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2016-10-13 18:06:45 UTC
You engaged a fleet of enemy ships, and then were angry when that fleet countered you so hard that you couldn't kill any of them?

What if you'd had a fleet of your own, perhaps someone with a scripted sebo?

If it was indeed a frigate fleet, you could easily have just set your drones to aggressive when you saw yourself getting jammed. They'd have ignored the Griffin as it was already aggressed, but I bet you'd definitely have picked up a few other frigates who were out of range or slow to aggress initially.

I haven't looked at your killboard, I don't know what you were facing. I do know that a fleet against a single ship isn't really a good matchup for the single ship. A fleet of anything against a vexor will always mean a very quickly dead vexor. Even with perfect dps application from a heavy drone flight you probably wouldn't have killed any regardless of the ECM.

There are counters to ECM. There are drawbacks to ECM.

ECM ships generally have lots of mid slots and very few low slots; this means they must split their mids between the essentials (prop, etc), tank, and ECM. Often the tank is foregone almost completely in favor of said ECM, as their lows are needed for distortion amps.

I'm not going to say ECM needs to be buffed. But I do think it needs to be reworked:
1) We shouldn't need low slots to increase jam strength, or RSD/TD/Webs should need low slots to increase their effects
2) We shouldn't need 5 different ECM modules. They should just be multispectral (and strong enough to work). Even scripted multispectrals would be a huge step up.

I'd be totally fine with losing a few slots on ECM boats if it meant having the same EWAR flexibility as every other kind of EWAR. Even weapon disruption, with it's turret/guidance disruptors, has a significant leg up. Imagine if they had projectile/hybrid/laser/missile disruptors instead.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#38 - 2016-10-18 22:16:30 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Let's try to do the math.

Assume "permajamming" is jamming 95% of the time. I don't think that's too high a bar but I'd be willing to run another number if you disagree (and decided to do so for the hell of it later).

A fully bonused ECM II has a strength of 9.9 on a Kitsune. A VNI has a base sensor strength of 24 fully skilled. Let's do the math on how many modules (and then ships) you would need to get a permajam.

P(J) = 1-P(~j)

P(J) = 1-P(~j)^n

P(J)-1 = -P(~j)^n

1-P(J) = P(~j)^n

ln(1-P(J)) = n ln(P(~j))

n = ln(1-P(J))/ln(P(~j))

J of course represents the ship being jammed, while j represents any single jammer landing.

j = 9.9/24 = 0.4125

~j = 0.5875

Chance of 95% jams:

0.95 = 1-(0.5875)^n

n = ln(0.05)/ln(.5875) = -2.9957/-0.5319 = 5.632

So you'd need 6 racial jammers to get 95% jams. That's effectively 1.5 Kitsunes.

Now let's add a sebo to the VNI. Now our chance of jamming is:

9.9/47 = 0.2106

Chance of not jamming: 0.7894

Chance of 95% jams:

0.95 = 1-(0.7894)^n

n = 12.665

So that's now 3 Kitsunes just to "permajam" one ship that actually took precautions.

Same thing with a 90% threshold? Sure.

No sebo: 4.329; 1 and change Kitsunes

Sebo: 9.735 jammers; 2 and change Kitsunes.

Drop that to 75%, which seems to be the standard people actually set for "permajam" these days?

No sebo: 2.606 jammers; over half a rack of racials on a Kitsune

Sebo: 5.861 jammers; more than a single Kitsune

Math says: if you expect to face ECM, fit ECCM and suddenly the problem dramatically decreases.

And because I have the spreadsheet open already, let's assume multispecs and see how that goes.

95% with sebo: 19.798 jammers; 5 Kitsunes

95% no sebo: 9.316 jammers; 3 Kitsunes

90% with sebo: 15.217 jammers; 4 Kitsunes

90% no sebo: 7.160 jammers; 2 Kitsunes

75% with sebo: 9.161 jammers; 3 Kitsunes

75% no sebo: 4.311 jammers; just about 1 Kitsune

50% with sebo: 4.581 multispec jammers or 2.930 racials

50% no sebo: 2.155 multis or 1.303 racials

So. What's the actual threshold for "permajam"? If one ship has you locked down then either you're only jammed 75% of the time on average and you didn't fit a sebo or you're only jammed half the time at best.


However, who flies an ECM ship without Signal Distortion Amplifiers? Who does not min / max? So you're probably talking about slightly better probabilities for each ECM module.

Falcon and Rook have higher still chance and would likely bring 5 ECM modules minimum.

14.2/47 = 0.302 so chance of fail is 70% per module. 5 ECM (assumes fit for faction I know) = 0.168 or 17% chance of fail per cycle of 5. So 5 have a 83% success rate.


Furthermore, whilst 75% does not sound like "permajamming", think about the implications in a combat situation for the target. Many will feel that was the effect.

In a fight lasting 200 seconds. The target is, on average, blocked from doing anything but changing direction for 140 seconds in that fight.

Try accomplishing much in a fight, under these circumstances.

Engagements are often in smaller hulls (dessies and frigs) where the average fight lasts up to 60s. Only need the first 3 cycles (7-8 from 10) to be successful and you have your "permajam" experience.

Zhilia Mann wrote:
That doesn't seem all that overpowered -- let alone cancerous -- to me


This is the problem with so many of the arguments that have gone back and forth before.

ECM is not overpowered. It is broken.

  • It is the effect of a successful jam (denial of all actions)
  • coupled with an increasing chance as you "stack" ECM modules (greater chance of more cycles of jam) on a single target
  • with diminishing returns against multiple targets
  • an exponential increased risk to loss of your ship against multiple targets
  • because you can only use ship hulls that have to be weaker, slower and have less dps than the peers from other factions
  • because of the outrageous impact of successful jams
  • Poor gameplay, poor design.


Why are Caldari EW ships forced into a niche whereas Gallente, Minmatar & Amarr have much wider use/roles?

Do you seriously believe that ECM would have been designed this way with hindsight? Time for a positive change. Give us a good ECM system.

As I have stated elsewhere, I support a complete remodelling:

  • A system based on heat damage of the target ships modules that cause them to break (nanite repair paste please).
  • ECCM could be redesigned to protect modules from heat damage for longer, resulting in an additional proactive application.
  • With a possible extra of capacitor overload to cause deliberate forced capsule eject and a new career based on ship hijacking.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2016-10-18 22:27:39 UTC
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:

ECCM could be redesigned to protect modules from heat damage for longer, resulting in an additional proactive application.

With a possible extra of capacitor overload to cause deliberate forced capsule eject and a new career based on ship hijacking.


Are you insane? That would take a broken mechanic and make it completely overpowered. I am 100% in favor of fixing ECM to make it a viable mechanic for fleet ops but that is just wrong.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#40 - 2016-10-18 22:31:21 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
snip...
Second, to keep your jam rate at 50%, you need a sensor strength twice the jam strength for one jammer, 3.5 times the jam strength for two jammers, 5 times the jam jam strength for three jammers, and 6.5 times the jam strength for four jammers. Reasonable minds could disagree as to whether that should be tweaked.


Not sure you can tweak probabilities on a RND system. Of course multiple ECCM scripts stack so if you double sebo with ECCM scripts you get a much higher gain, at the very expensive use of another med slot.

Zhilia Mann wrote:

Third, ECM is painfully useless on unbonused hulls. So very painfully useless. As a result, if you get jammed, someone went out of their way to bring a jamming ship, and that ship is only good for one thing. If it can't do its job it has no place ever undocking.

Again why are Caldari forced into a niche and the other factions not? Why do they have an EWAR system that cannot be used in the same way as a TD, TP or RSD?

Zhilia Mann wrote:

Fourth, the relative paucity of ECM whine threads is interesting, and I suspect it has to do with how underpowered Minmitar weapon systems are right now (at the cruiser and frigate level). Minmatar ships still have the weakest sensors and I recall seeing way more complaint threads back when medium ACs were a real thing.


That is as much to do with the huge number of overpowered/underpowered aimless arguments of the past. Situational examples can be spun by either side of the argument to apparently prove their argument.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Previous page123Next page