These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Winter] Ewar Tweaks for Retribution

First post First post
Author
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#381 - 2012-11-07 22:10:16 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
That is a really dumb statement. If some one brings superior numbers you are screwed no matter if people are using ECM against you or not.

If you are fighting 2v1 and one of the two guys is flying a falcon, there is a "chance" you can win and there is an even better chance if you fit ECCM.

He is pissed off because bad players with falcon kill him when 10vs2 (there's a booster).

As I said, what he want is piloting to rule everything. EWAR prevent that, so he hate EWAR. It's dumb mechanic, you don't need to be a pilot expert to use it.

Though as someone said, I more often see smaller gang using EWAR to even the odds again a larger gang than a larger gang using EWAR. In fact, when you see a large gang with EWAR, you just avoid it the same way you would avoid a too large gang. Though, EWAR can really even the odds, and for same size with both EWAR gang, it's still the best team who win.
Bigpimping
Pimp Inc.
#382 - 2012-11-07 23:40:27 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:


  • Give Gallente a missile-disruption ewar (don't give that effect to tracking disruptors, they'd be fundamentally overpowered).



  • I kind of like the idea of a missile-disrupting module, but with a script which makes any missiles fired by the target ship act like friend-or-foe missiles.

    Could be kind of hilarious, and a possible anti-blob ewar mechanic?
    Grath Telkin
    Amok.
    Goonswarm Federation
    #383 - 2012-11-07 23:46:23 UTC
    Dearest CCP Fozzie, please make ECM drones as "useful" as Nos has been made..if you get what im saying.

    Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

    HELLBOUNDMAN
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #384 - 2012-11-08 03:12:24 UTC
    Target painters need their cycle time and cap usage split in half.

    Galphii
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #385 - 2012-11-08 06:58:53 UTC
    I like the idea of those sensor strength boosting skills. Don't forget to consider doing something about ECM drones too, particularly the light ones, even if it's just reducing the jam duration. They totally ruin solo hunting.

    "Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

    Weasel Leblanc
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #386 - 2012-11-08 07:11:44 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    Damps
    *Increase Optimal Range of all Remote Sensor Dampeners by 20%

    YES. Extending the range on RSDs is a great counter to the problem where they were less usable at ranges where they were useful.

    Well played, Fozzie, well played.
    Viribus
    Lords of the Lockerroom
    WE FORM YUG0SLAVIA
    #387 - 2012-11-08 07:28:29 UTC
    Rek Seven wrote:
    If you are fighting 2v1 and one of the two guys is flying a falcon, there is a "chance" you can win


    lol are we playing the same game?

    I'd rank soloing a falcon without the aid of recon/T3 sensor strength as being somewhere between winning the lottery and being struck by lightning
    marketjacker
    Mr. Clean Corp..
    #388 - 2012-11-08 08:29:20 UTC
    Sean Parisi wrote:
    Rek Seven wrote:
    In all honesty i think ECM is fine. The only people that cry about it are people who don't know how to fit their ships or people who think solo pvp is still a thing. Sure getting perma-jammed sucks but CCP could easily change them mechanic so that you can't be jammed by the same ship twice in a certain time.

    The only problem with ships like the falcon is that they do their job at range which a lot of fleets won't be set up for. If Falcons were forced closer to the fight, they would die instantly we when their jam fails.





    What I enjoy about ECM is the flexibility it provides to my sniper ship in FW. My main character and alt will be engaging a group of six or so. One will be split off and come burning at my sniper ship which has little to no tank. I over heat my jammers on my alt, jam him specifically - Load short range ammo and engage him face to face.

    It is a good feeling knowing I am capable of doing this and being flexible with my engagement range when I have another ship to assist my main one. It also allows me to go balls deep into engaging odds that do not favor me. Even if I still lose, it gives me a fighting chance and gives me more flexibility with how I can play the game.


    You enjoy a bad mechanic that allows you to use one character to neutralize 1-6 people. How unexpected.
    Rek Seven
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #389 - 2012-11-08 09:42:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
    Opinions are like arse holes I guess...

    All I'm saying is that there is no fit that can prepare you for every situation in eve as a solo player. And quite frankly, you are a fool if you're playing solo and expecting every encounter to be a fair one.

    I think the problem with ECM is exaggerated by the falcon as I stated earlier. I can tell you one thing from experience, my ECM tengu only has around a 30% jam success rate while also having to deal with incoming fire Shocked
    Pinky Denmark
    The Cursed Navy
    #390 - 2012-11-08 11:02:01 UTC
    Whatever you do just make sure to buff the tank on ecm ships in equal measures to the nerf they take on ecm
    Fon Revedhort
    Monks of War
    #391 - 2012-11-08 11:29:43 UTC
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    Whatever you do just make sure to buff the tank on ecm ships in equal measures to the nerf they take on ecm

    Most ecm ships already can fit quite considerable overtank, given how they have plenty of mids, some have tech2 resists and how OP ASB is. But since they don't want to compromise any of their precious jammers... they counter-attack and call US min-maxers for not wasting our (very few) mids on ECCM and then whine should their ecm once fail.

    "Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

    Morrigan LeSante
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #392 - 2012-11-08 12:56:25 UTC
    Fon Revedhort wrote:
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    Whatever you do just make sure to buff the tank on ecm ships in equal measures to the nerf they take on ecm

    Most ecm ships already can fit quite considerable overtank, given how they have plenty of mids, some have tech2 resists and how OP ASB is. But since they don't want to compromise any of their precious jammers... they counter-attack and call US min-maxers for not wasting our (very few) mids on ECCM and then whine should their ecm once fail.


    Keep in mind the binary outcome of ECM - they either work, or do not. If they do not work, you WILL die because you have n slots allocated to modules which might as well be offline. It's not hard to see why the ships stack it.

    Consider a Rook - 7 mids, to fit a rainbow it's down to 3...if the jams fail it's a 3 mid sporting **** poor failmobile. The jams take...it's a win-machine. There's not really space for a halfway decent tank without pretty much dropping the ECM altogether.

    That the problem with the dedicated ECM hulls - you either 100% commit to it, or you've got a terrible fit. This leads to no tank, leads to perma-jams, leads to everyone complaining about it.
    Fon Revedhort
    Monks of War
    #393 - 2012-11-08 13:21:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
    Morrigan LeSante wrote:
    Fon Revedhort wrote:
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    Whatever you do just make sure to buff the tank on ecm ships in equal measures to the nerf they take on ecm

    Most ecm ships already can fit quite considerable overtank, given how they have plenty of mids, some have tech2 resists and how OP ASB is. But since they don't want to compromise any of their precious jammers... they counter-attack and call US min-maxers for not wasting our (very few) mids on ECCM and then whine should their ecm once fail.


    Keep in mind the binary outcome of ECM - they either work, or do not. If they do not work, you WILL die because you have n slots allocated to modules which might as well be offline. It's not hard to see why the ships stack it.

    Consider a Rook - 7 mids, to fit a rainbow it's down to 3...if the jams fail it's a 3 mid sporting **** poor failmobile. The jams take...it's a win-machine. There's not really space for a halfway decent tank without pretty much dropping the ECM altogether.

    That the problem with the dedicated ECM hulls - you either 100% commit to it, or you've got a terrible fit. This leads to no tank, leads to perma-jams, leads to everyone complaining about it.

    Guess what? The same applies for combat ships - you either commit to being able to actually kill stuff by shooting, tanking and tackling it OR you try protecting yourself from all the e-war, which aside from ecm also inevitably includes RSDs and TDs and hence results in a failfit. I just hope you aren't among those saying that only combat ships are to make trade-offs.

    "Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

    Bouh Revetoile
    In Wreck we thrust
    #394 - 2012-11-08 14:10:53 UTC
    Fon Revedhort wrote:
    Guess what? The same applies for combat ships - you either commit to being able to actually kill stuff by shooting, tanking and tackling it OR you try protecting yourself from all the e-war, which aside from ecm also inevitably includes RSDs and TDs and hence results in a failfit. I just hope you aren't among those saying that only combat ships are to make trade-offs.

    There is no solution to your problem except completely removing EWAR from the game. You cannot make EWAR to have any effectiveness and at the same time make any combat ship able to completely ignore EWAR effect. Either EWAR have an effect and your combat ship have to protect against it to fight it, or EWAR don't have any effect on your ship.

    Screw you fit to protect against EWAR, and you can kill the said EWAR ship, though you are less effective against a standard combat ship, which itself is still vulnerable to EWAR.

    BTW, EWAR ships often sacrifice both tank and gank for their EWAR capabilities. If their EWAR don't work on your ship, they are moving wrecks. Isn't it some kind of trade-off ?
    Morrigan LeSante
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #395 - 2012-11-08 14:16:39 UTC
    ECM boat's CANT effectively trade though, that was my point. They HAVE to go balls out into ECM otherwise they may as well not bother undocking.

    If ECM was partially effective with a few mods then you'd probably see more boats with tanks/less ECM mods.

    Consider the effect difference between a single jammer or a single TD - the TD is FAR more powerful and reliable and doesnt need subsidiary mods/rigs to actually get a semi decent sucess rate out of. Hell I'd expect a rook with 2 TD's and a tank to be more effective than a rook with 2 jammers and a tank - that's pretty telling.

    Like I say - the problem is because ECM is really a very binary system. Fights are decided by the roll of a dice. When a jam fails the ECM boats die in a fire...again...any wonder its stacked to hell since they still cant fit a decent tank/gank so they go 100% into the only thing keeping them alive?
    Cartheron Crust
    The Tuskers
    The Tuskers Co.
    #396 - 2012-11-08 14:32:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Cartheron Crust
    Why not sensor strength rigs instead of skills. It seems most of the complaining is about the time sink etc.


    Gravimetric/Ladar/Magnetometric/Radar sensor strength amplifier I
    Requirements: Electronics Superiority Rigging I
    Calibration: 100
    +43% to sensor strength

    Gravimetric/Ladar/Magnetometric/Radar sensor strength amplifier II
    Requirements: Electronics Superiority Rigging IV
    Calibration: 150
    +63% to sensor strength


    Then there is no timesink and its in keeping with can boost something at the opportunity cost of not boosting something else. No idea for a drawback (maybe it doesn't need one), but iirc CCP were thinking of getting rid of the penalties for rigs anyway?
    Bouh Revetoile
    In Wreck we thrust
    #397 - 2012-11-08 14:38:13 UTC
    Morrigan LeSante wrote:
    Like I say - the problem is because ECM is really a very binary system. Fights are decided by the roll of a dice. When a jam fails the ECM boats die in a fire...again...any wonder its stacked to hell since they still cant fit a decent tank/gank so they go 100% into the only thing keeping them alive?

    The problem is not the binary thing but the RANDOM thing.
    Morrigan LeSante
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #398 - 2012-11-08 14:41:21 UTC
    Bouh Revetoile wrote:
    Morrigan LeSante wrote:
    Like I say - the problem is because ECM is really a very binary system. Fights are decided by the roll of a dice. When a jam fails the ECM boats die in a fire...again...any wonder its stacked to hell since they still cant fit a decent tank/gank so they go 100% into the only thing keeping them alive?

    The problem is not the binary thing but the RANDOM thing.


    I'm not sure I agree, if its effect changed, random wouldn't be so hurtful because people wouldn't be so crippled/reliant on it working.
    Bouh Revetoile
    In Wreck we thrust
    #399 - 2012-11-08 16:47:10 UTC
    Morrigan LeSante wrote:
    I'm not sure I agree, if its effect changed, random wouldn't be so hurtful because people wouldn't be so crippled/reliant on it working.

    Of course, the "almost completely shut down" effect is not innocent, but the random part force falcon bird to go full ECM to have their ECM as closer as possible from not random (which is permajam).

    In fact, with 20 seconds cycles, you cannot afford to miss the first two cycles, or your ECM modules were wasted. To be able to rely on your ECM, you need to have more than 50-60% chances to hit, and you would be more comfortable with more than 70%.
    Sean Parisi
    Blackrise Vanguard
    #400 - 2012-11-08 18:14:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Sean Parisi
    marketjacker wrote:
    Sean Parisi wrote:
    Rek Seven wrote:
    In all honesty i think ECM is fine. The only people that cry about it are people who don't know how to fit their ships or people who think solo pvp is still a thing. Sure getting perma-jammed sucks but CCP could easily change them mechanic so that you can't be jammed by the same ship twice in a certain time.

    The only problem with ships like the falcon is that they do their job at range which a lot of fleets won't be set up for. If Falcons were forced closer to the fight, they would die instantly we when their jam fails.





    What I enjoy about ECM is the flexibility it provides to my sniper ship in FW. My main character and alt will be engaging a group of six or so. One will be split off and come burning at my sniper ship which has little to no tank. I over heat my jammers on my alt, jam him specifically - Load short range ammo and engage him face to face.

    It is a good feeling knowing I am capable of doing this and being flexible with my engagement range when I have another ship to assist my main one. It also allows me to go balls deep into engaging odds that do not favor me. Even if I still lose, it gives me a fighting chance and gives me more flexibility with how I can play the game.


    You enjoy a bad mechanic that allows you to use one character to neutralize 1-6 people. How unexpected.


    Unfortunately your ECM fleet did not stop the loss of your corps freighter.... How unexpected... (http://caldari.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=12409316) - Kettle, meet pot.