These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[ECM] Imagine an Arazu locking down 4+ ships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#81 - 2012-08-22 00:57:51 UTC
A wild Kitsune appears.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#82 - 2012-08-22 01:38:45 UTC
Garreth Vlox wrote:
Harlot Hohannson wrote:
It would seem overpowered to be able to interfere with the LOCK RANGE or 4+ ships in a single ship right?

Well how about the damn Falcon being able to almost completely remove 4+ ships from a fight whatsoever (notwithstanding smartbombs or drones that already have a target).

I am still amazed that this bullshit is allowed to go on.

ECM is so ubiquitous it's a joke. CCP really should do something about this pathetic 'chance based' (lol) mechanic.

In before all the cowards that can't handle risk come in defending overpowered mechanics. "I can't risk having someone actually fighting while I PVP".

OMG, really a "because of falcon" post in 2012? dude your late to the party just go cry in a corner somewhere.

Har har, I saw the top and was like

AWW yeah, the good times are ~back~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Randomize All
Doomheim
#83 - 2012-08-23 10:58:01 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
Randomize All wrote:
Most game developers think "Now you are not allowed to play" is a ridiculous game mechanic..


Of course you can play. When you are jammed, you are playing - if you are being jammed it means someone else is NOT being jammed. So take one for the team, it's only 20 seconds jeez. In the meantime you could be, I dunno, burning towards the falcon so the minute the lock breaks you are on top of him and he's in range, perhaps?


Ahh, you are sooooo cuuuuute!
You have decided to add in a scenario where there are other people, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
Then you decided I am in a ship that can burn to the falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
You deliberately made it so I'm not webbed at all, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
And you also decided that I am in a ship faster than a falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
Then you said it's only 20 seconds because again, it suits the point you are intending to win.
Then you said the minute the lock breaks because, well, it's a point you are strawmanning because it's the only way you know how to "win".

Firstly, you should have said the "second the lock breaks", it makes no sense to speak of minutes when you have setup the strawman to be an event lasting 20 seconds only.

Secondly, come back after 15-25 years of education and experience, then we can talk as adults and we can make an honest assessment of just how far you've come.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#84 - 2012-08-23 11:49:49 UTC
TraderJade wrote:
I feel your pain!

if only eve had modules to counter such ships, like a module which increases your sensor strength or boost your locking range. They could be called sensor booster and maybe ECCM... but i doubt ccp would ever introduce them into the game :(


We had our bait tempest fitted with TWO eccm in the mid slots.
It still got jammed by a falcon for two straight cycles.

This happened twice again, same effect - hostiles ran away.

INB4 RNG
Nex apparatu5
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#85 - 2012-08-23 11:53:13 UTC
Randomize All wrote:

You have decided to add in a scenario where there are other people, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
Then you decided I am in a ship that can burn to the falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
And you also decided that I am in a ship faster than a falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.


So based on this, you either don't have a prop mod or are flying a MWD battleship solo, based on the fact you can't "burn" and are slower than a falcon.

From this information, I can conclude it's not ECM's fault you're dying, it might be a case of PEBKAC.
Nex apparatu5
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#86 - 2012-08-23 11:54:11 UTC
Also, yes ECM is a ****** mechanic.
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#87 - 2012-08-23 11:59:54 UTC
not only is the effect borked of damps vs ecm, but look at the mods and rigs available to boost them.

(also bare in mind that a sensor booster messes with damps far more effectively than eccm effects ecm)

ECM gets huge bonuses to avoid them being used on random ships, works fine on a ecm thrashers however vs frigs and other dessys.

Bonuses to damps is 5% per level on ships with role bonuses.

Rigs are 5% on top of that and there are no low slot modules to enhance it.

Damps also are scripted dividing their focus.

Now look at ecm, 10% rigs, low slot modules that also do 10% but also throw in a very nice 10% range (no idea why).

And people only wonder why damps only 'work' against ships with very low lock range to begin with and are also useless against anything that targets over 50km, in normal/average pvp combat range.

Which is all crazy when you consider a jam cycle working means a ship is fully useless for 20 seconds, where as a weak damp even from a bonuses ship with rigs to boost it more will only ever half a lock range of a target ship every time a damp is applies - leaving the target ship free to close range re-lock and kill the damp ship.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2012-08-23 12:12:00 UTC
All of you should just die in a solar flare, really.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#89 - 2012-08-23 12:25:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Nex apparatu5 wrote:
Randomize All wrote:

You have decided to add in a scenario where there are other people, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
Then you decided I am in a ship that can burn to the falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.
And you also decided that I am in a ship faster than a falcon, because it suits a point you are intending to win.

So based on this, you either don't have a prop mod or are flying a MWD battleship solo, based on the fact you can't "burn" and are slower than a falcon.

From this information, I can conclude it's not ECM's fault you're dying, it might be a case of PEBKAC.

Ah, in the end, a resorting to the ol' "because of falcon/ECM" is never boring.

EVE Online: Tales of a Grey Bar
Or: A Tale of Two Bars (ECM & your hull going red)

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Roderick Grey
Koenigsbergers
#90 - 2012-08-23 12:57:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Roderick Grey
Garreth Vlox wrote:
Roderick Grey wrote:
Why not atleast remove perma-jamming, maybe have it capped at 30secs-1min then there's a 15 second cooldown of sorts before they can continue to stop you playing.

I think that the main reason people think Falcons are OP is how much they matter in small engagements, let's say there's two 5 man gangs facing off, one's a nano gang with 1 Vaga, 1 Cynabal, 2 Canes and a Scimitar The other's a mixed match gang of 4 t1 frigs and a Falcon. Providing the Falcon has the correct ECM and the pilot isn't suffering from a seizure or wife aggro the frig gang would win 9/10.

To only real way to counter the Falcon is with more Falcons or just blob it, which is ********, and doesn't mean that it isn't OP.


That fleet comp should OWN 4 frigs and a falcon becasue if he jams the DPS the scimmy should keep them alive and if he jams the scimmy the one unjammed DPS boat from that list should no problem at all killing frigs. there is no way a competent group of pilots in those ships should lose to four frigates because of one falcon. Also who flies a minny only gang? you are asking for some idiot to bring a jammer boat and **** you off because its easy against single race fleets.


Lol, you do understand the most people would jam the dps then attack the scimmy, then burn down through the other ships? You obviously need further schooling in small-scale warfare.

Also, even if they didn't kill the scimmy, they're not getting OWNED, it's a stalemate.

“We could learn a lot from crayons; some are sharp, some are pretty, some are dull, while others bright, some have weird names, but they all have learned to live together in the same box.” - Special needs division of Fcon.
Ginger Barbarella
#91 - 2012-08-23 15:27:32 UTC
Harlot Hohannson wrote:
It would seem overpowered to be able to interfere with the LOCK RANGE or 4+ ships in a single ship right?

Well how about the damn Falcon being able to almost completely remove 4+ ships from a fight whatsoever (notwithstanding smartbombs or drones that already have a target).

I am still amazed that this bullshit is allowed to go on.

ECM is so ubiquitous it's a joke. CCP really should do something about this pathetic 'chance based' (lol) mechanic.

In before all the cowards that can't handle risk come in defending overpowered mechanics. "I can't risk having someone actually fighting while I PVP".


Oooh, oooooh!! Does this mean the failmeme "Blame Falcon!" is back?!??!?!

Shweet... Cool

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Hicksimus
Torgue
#92 - 2012-08-23 17:34:00 UTC
The Falcon is the only ship that I have ever used that made 7 battlecruisers run from 2 drakes, the thing would be a steal at 500m isk.

If the Arazu becomes just as effective and maintains point range then it'll be a tough choice of which one I will use when I'm feeling like a ****.

Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#93 - 2012-08-23 18:34:54 UTC
Let's say they boosted the Lachesis' and Arazus bonuses to dampening, so a single Lachesis could put 4-5 ships down to 4-500m locking range simultaneously. Falcon pilots would scream nerf, and Arazu pilots would be all smug and say "bring sensor booster. Because yeah, the ECCM is sooooooo effective, just like a sensor booster would be if an Arazu had that kind of dampening power.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Jimmy Gunsmythe
Sebiestor Tribe
#94 - 2012-08-23 18:50:43 UTC
If it's so OP, why aren't you using it? I mean, this is Eve...the very meaning of the letters "PvP" is Player versus People...everything is overpowered at some point or another. Well, until it gets nerfed into vanilladom and no one wants to use it anymore, thus removing yet another valid mechanic from the game.

Keep whining, you guys will eventually get your wish...playing Bumper-pods.

John Hancock
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#95 - 2012-08-23 19:01:01 UTC
It should not get removed. It should be changed. Rumors are that's gonna happen, so we will see. But I hope u can see my point. People don't fit ECCM because it's fck all useless vs a Falcon, because you will be jammed either way, in addition to the module being useless for anything else. I also think Iam Widdershins concluded that ECCM has no effect vs ECM drones, so useless for that too.

If a Falcon have the effect that you can just leave the computer and take a shower when it decloaks on you, why cant the other races ships in the class do the same?

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
THE L0CK
Denying You Access
#96 - 2012-08-23 19:05:15 UTC
Harlot Hohannson wrote:


In before all the cowards that can't handle risk come in defending overpowered mechanics. "I can't risk having someone actually fighting while I PVP".



Sounds like you are the one who can't handle risk.

Do you smell what the Lock's cooking?
Garresh
Mackies Raiders
Wild Geese.
#97 - 2012-08-23 19:35:46 UTC
Sakura Kasenumi wrote:
ECM is a force multiplyer much teh same as logistics. Take away theese abilities and Eve is reduced EVEN MORE to a numbers game.

A small gang with ECM can fight a lrager force. A small gang with ECM and logistics can fight an even larger force. Send a small gang with neither against a larger force and it dies almost every time unless using such tactics as kiting.

A kiting force will destroy a larger force that can not hit it. Is that overpowered? If the defending force has ecm they can force teh kiting force to leave the field or render tehm inefective, is that overpowered?

In massive fleet fights, both sides often have ECM, taking people out of the combat, is that overpowered?

ECM seems overpowered in specific circumstances, if the enemy force has ECM adn a larger number, you will be overwhelmed fast, is that overpowered? They would probably have killed your force anyway. If teh smaller force had the ECM teh battlfield is levelled. Is that overpowered?


Think about what you are saying and look at it form other angles. If you are just but hurt because someone beat you down using ECM, that isnt a reason for it to be changed, it may be a reason for you to look at your own fleet compositions though.


Actually yes, by the example you gave it is overpowered. You identified 3 force multipliers. Long range fast kiting setups, logistics ships, and ECM. In your same post you said ECM counters both of them, AND that large fleets use ECM, which means that a smaller fleet with ECM will still lose to a larger fleet with ECM(or be forced to flee) regardless of personal skill. So yeah, by that definition it is overpowered. I reserve judgement cause I mostly fly solo where ECM isn't too big of a problem, but just wanted to point out the flaws in your argument. Twisted

This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#98 - 2012-08-23 19:55:08 UTC
Garresh wrote:
You identified 3 force multipliers. Long range fast kiting setups, logistics ships, and guns. In your same post you said gunscounters both of them, AND that large fleets use guns, which means that a smaller fleet with gunswill still lose to a larger fleet with guns (or be forced to flee) regardless of personal skill. I just wanted to point out the flaws in your argument. Twisted


Erm...?
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#99 - 2012-08-23 20:13:43 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Garresh wrote:
You identified 3 force multipliers. Long range fast kiting setups, logistics ships, and guns. In your same post you said gunscounters both of them, AND that large fleets use guns, which means that a smaller fleet with gunswill still lose to a larger fleet with guns (or be forced to flee) regardless of personal skill. I just wanted to point out the flaws in your argument. Twisted


Erm...?


No no. ECM

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Lord breathenstein
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#100 - 2012-08-23 21:44:38 UTC
A fair trade off would be falcons pilots either receiving a dose of herpes from their moms when they do that thing
with their tongue cleaning behind their foreskins or making arazus how they used to be.