These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

ECM Without Randomness

Author
Sigras
Conglomo
#1 - 2014-02-12 20:18:30 UTC
A long time ago ECM was not a random system, the server simply looked to see if you were being jammed by more than your sensor strength and if so you could not lock targets.

This was a horrible system and incredibly overpowered, so they changed it and we were left with the random mechanic that we have now. Of course I am not suggesting that we go back to that system, but I think it would be interesting to remove the random function and make it more of a battle of wits between the jammer and the person being jammed.

The problem is, I have no idea what that mechanic would look like and all of my ideas end up being insanely complicated, so im looking for suggestions.

How would you remove the RNG function from ECM?
Seliah
T.R.I.A.D
Ushra'Khan
#2 - 2014-02-12 20:23:29 UTC
Someone suggested in another thread that ECM would not break your locks but reduce the max. amount of targets you can lock, which I found to be a rather interesting mechanic. And I guess ECCM's would partially counter that.

It'd reduce the effectiveness of ECM in small engagements while allowing to completely shut down certain ships if the ECM is well focused.

Here's the post in the other thread about ECM :
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4205163#post4205163
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2014-02-12 20:25:30 UTC
You are confusing chance with randomness.
Mario Putzo
#4 - 2014-02-12 20:42:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Id rather see ECM function as an Anti Drone EWAR platform in the sense that successful Jams limit your drone control bandwidth. Still using the same coinflip mechanic you either lose control of drones, or you don't. Drones must be reconnected to and reassigned following a successful jam.

ECM still compared to ECCM of course.
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-02-12 22:20:06 UTC
Seliah wrote:
Someone suggested in another thread that ECM would not break your locks but reduce the max. amount of targets you can lock, which I found to be a rather interesting mechanic. And I guess ECCM's would partially counter that.

It'd reduce the effectiveness of ECM in small engagements while allowing to completely shut down certain ships if the ECM is well focused.

Here's the post in the other thread about ECM :
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4205163#post4205163



Its been suggested before, and will again. It does make sense

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4066015#post4066015

Take the RNG's out of eve

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#6 - 2014-02-12 23:05:52 UTC
My original idea for ECM, which I will repeat here since it keeps getting buried in time...

1) Increase the power of ECM overall. Before people pitch a fit, however...

2) Instead of a flat "all or nothing" roll of the dice for ECM have it operate on a per module basis on the target. Meaning turrets and anything that can be considered an "offensive" module (such as targeting computers, painting lasters, scramblers, disruptors, energy leeches, etc).

Meaning... let's say a Coercer is targeting you with it's 8 laser turrets. Under previous ECM rules, let's say your jammer had a 20% chance of working.

Under my idea, you fire your ECM at it, with a 30% chance of jamming. The game makes 8 rolls of the ECM dice, one for each turret, with each turret having a 30% chance of being jammed.

So odds are even lower than before that you will shut it down completely with just one jammer... but the odds are also very, very likely to shut down some of it's stuff with each cycle.

This would mean that every ECM ship could do some damage reliably, while reducing the odds of an ECM deciding a battle with a single lucky roll.

Balance!

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0

Sigras
Conglomo
#7 - 2014-02-13 00:32:23 UTC
Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Seliah wrote:
Someone suggested in another thread that ECM would not break your locks but reduce the max. amount of targets you can lock, which I found to be a rather interesting mechanic. And I guess ECCM's would partially counter that.

It'd reduce the effectiveness of ECM in small engagements while allowing to completely shut down certain ships if the ECM is well focused.

Here's the post in the other thread about ECM :
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4205163#post4205163



Its been suggested before, and will again. It does make sense

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4066015#post4066015

Take the RNG's out of eve

I read that thread, and I dont really know if that's a great solution.

I mean this would make it super effective against enemy logistics ships, especially cap chain trains, but the average person in a fleet or small gang only really needs one target, primary. Actually you may also be tackling someone else so 2. The problem is that this would have a great effect on logistics ships, but basically no effect on anyone else unless you reduce the number of locked targets to < 2
Seliah
T.R.I.A.D
Ushra'Khan
#8 - 2014-02-13 06:46:50 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Seliah wrote:
Someone suggested in another thread that ECM would not break your locks but reduce the max. amount of targets you can lock, which I found to be a rather interesting mechanic. And I guess ECCM's would partially counter that.

It'd reduce the effectiveness of ECM in small engagements while allowing to completely shut down certain ships if the ECM is well focused.

Here's the post in the other thread about ECM :
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4205163#post4205163



Its been suggested before, and will again. It does make sense

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4066015#post4066015

Take the RNG's out of eve

I read that thread, and I dont really know if that's a great solution.

I mean this would make it super effective against enemy logistics ships, especially cap chain trains, but the average person in a fleet or small gang only really needs one target, primary. Actually you may also be tackling someone else so 2. The problem is that this would have a great effect on logistics ships, but basically no effect on anyone else unless you reduce the number of locked targets to < 2


Well, a logistics has 10 max. locked targets, so you'd need to put some effort there to really gimp his ability to lock things. An inty, on the other hand, is only 5 max. locked, so that's much easier to put down to <2.

I think the idea is definitely worth looking into, it has a quite interesting mechanic imo.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-02-13 11:22:50 UTC
You do know that every gun shot does random damage as well ?

Just saying if you hate random shouldnt you start there being as theres about 1000 times more randomness ahppening with gun shots than with ECM.

Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
SONS of BANE
#10 - 2014-02-13 11:22:56 UTC
Changing ECM to a mechanic that reduces the max. amount of targets you can lock would render ECM-Boats obsolete. They are THE primary target anyways and would get volleyed of the field in the first seconds of the fight. One targetlock is enough to do that.

Dampeners can also reduce your target lock to a point where you are in the same positon as jammed by ECM-Modules. And they are 100% reliable.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#11 - 2014-02-13 12:16:47 UTC
How do you balance this whole target # reduction without either making it massively OP against some ships or completely useless in fleet fights?

So, taking solo combat, the only way to make ECM anything other than completely useless is to make it so it's possible to reduce the number of targets your opponent has to 0. Above 0 and you might as well not use it. So, you would need to field ~8 ECM modules to jam a BS. You can't so the only way to go with this is to make them reduce lockable targets by 2 per module. Great, now it's effective in solo combat. The only problem is it's always effective in solo combat. The issue is the all or nothing approach. It's either an "I WIN" button or an "I LOSE" button. So, in conclusion, this idea ruins ECM in solo combat no matter how you balance it.

Ok, taking small group combat. Lets say 5 ships per side with 1 ECM boat per side. Each ECM boat targets each other and jams. If 1 ECM mod = 1 less lockable target what you end up with is 2 ECM ships who aren't doing anything because they both have more lockable targets than the other can remove so neither has any real effect on the fight. It doesn't really matter who they target because everyone is likely to have more than 4 lockable targets making it rather pointless. If you make it 1 ECM = 2 less lockable targets they both jam each other or one jams the other but we're still talking about a stalemate. One jams the other but has to use all his ECM modules to do it so neither can do much else. Pointless. Or they both jam one ship on the other team and get primaried. This is entirely effective until the ECM boat dies. The enemy can do nothing whatsoever which, if I'm not mistaken, is what everyone compalains about with ECM at the moment. Still not much fun and a tad pointless.

Above this in fleet size and the ECM = 1 less lockable target becomes pretty much pointless. ECM = 2 could actually do something but I've already explained how this is game breaking for solo fights so balance wise, isn't.

This is why CCP went the way they did with ECM, I suspect. At least at the moment ECM is potentially useful when used on any ship, more so on specialist ECM ships. With this change to reducing lockable targets it becomes completely pointless on anything other than a specialist ECM ship and even then, only in very specific situations. It would completely ruin ECM.

-1
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-02-13 16:48:20 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
How do you balance this whole target # reduction without either making it massively OP against some ships or completely useless in fleet fights?

So, taking solo combat, the only way to make ECM anything other than completely useless is to make it so it's possible to reduce the number of targets your opponent has to 0. Above 0 and you might as well not use it. So, you would need to field ~8 ECM modules to jam a BS. You can't so the only way to go with this is to make them reduce lockable targets by 2 per module. Great, now it's effective in solo combat. The only problem is it's always effective in solo combat. The issue is the all or nothing approach. It's either an "I WIN" button or an "I LOSE" button. So, in conclusion, this idea ruins ECM in solo combat no matter how you balance it.

Ok, taking small group combat. Lets say 5 ships per side with 1 ECM boat per side. Each ECM boat targets each other and jams. If 1 ECM mod = 1 less lockable target what you end up with is 2 ECM ships who aren't doing anything because they both have more lockable targets than the other can remove so neither has any real effect on the fight. It doesn't really matter who they target because everyone is likely to have more than 4 lockable targets making it rather pointless. If you make it 1 ECM = 2 less lockable targets they both jam each other or one jams the other but we're still talking about a stalemate. One jams the other but has to use all his ECM modules to do it so neither can do much else. Pointless. Or they both jam one ship on the other team and get primaried. This is entirely effective until the ECM boat dies. The enemy can do nothing whatsoever which, if I'm not mistaken, is what everyone compalains about with ECM at the moment. Still not much fun and a tad pointless.

Above this in fleet size and the ECM = 1 less lockable target becomes pretty much pointless. ECM = 2 could actually do something but I've already explained how this is game breaking for solo fights so balance wise, isn't.

This is why CCP went the way they did with ECM, I suspect. At least at the moment ECM is potentially useful when used on any ship, more so on specialist ECM ships. With this change to reducing lockable targets it becomes completely pointless on anything other than a specialist ECM ship and even then, only in very specific situations. It would completely ruin ECM.

-1

Almost every argument you have made can be said of the current system, so you've wasted a wall of text. I believe there is a counter, ECCM, which you have not addressed at all.

In your scenario, the ecm ships only go for each other, instead of being actually useful and breaking the locks of the DPS. all the ECM boat needs is one target, so one eccm module, scripted, would make it pointless to try to break the ecm ships lock, making them focus on other more useful targets.

Ship choice is up to the pilot. if they want to fly a useless ship, that's their doing. Oh no, this idea my be both overpowered and useless! Much like guns when jammed. different ship have different everything, from lockable target #'s to range. You want a counter, well they're still there. Eccm, dampers if a person wants to guard against ecm, they just need a module slot, like everything else. Balance. do I want to be able to target anything, if the enemy brings ecm? will they bring it?

Your argument is that nothing is broken, but caldari are the only ones who's module is chance based for being useful, every other race has an impact with their ewar as soo as they activate it.
ECM is broken, and always has been.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Sigras
Conglomo
#13 - 2014-02-13 17:04:36 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:
You do know that every gun shot does random damage as well ?

Just saying if you hate random shouldnt you start there being as theres about 1000 times more randomness ahppening with gun shots than with ECM.

I realize that, however there are enough shots fired in a regular engagement that the law of large numbers makes it more or less even, but one lucky jam can be the end of the battle.

additionally, that gun damage is based on tracking which is something I can make better/worse with my piloting which is not the case with ECM.

BTW i hate the randomness inherent in guns too; they should do a static reduced amount of damage based on the range/tracking at the time the shot is fired.
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
#14 - 2014-02-13 17:12:15 UTC
My position is that ECM *feels* more overpowered than it is.

May I explain?

Spending 20 seconds unable to make any controls work feels like an eternity. The rapid light missile guys know all about this.

A solution might be to reduce the jam time from 20 seconds to 10. It wouldn't *feel* so bad. You wouldn't feel the fight was over and you're just killing time waiting to be killed.

In this case of course, the ECM cycle times would need to go down, and the probability of a jam per cycle would need to be reduced to compensate (because you get 2 jam chances in the same time frame and probability is additive in this case).

This would make ECM jams more of an annoyance that catch the unwary and less of a game-over affair (particularly for small scale warfare).

I also think, speaking as a heavy drone user, that drones should not be able to automatically retaliate against the jamming ship.

Why?

Because the drones are guided by your ship (why else is there a control range?) and if your ship's sensors are borked because of jamming, they should not be able to direct the drones to the jamming source.

ECCM

ECCM is currently simply a probability reducer.

What it should be is an active, directed module which you direct at the jamming ship. What it should do is apply HEAT to his jamming modules WHILE THEY ARE ACTIVATED.

When he turns off his ECM modules, your ECCM should also turn off so that you have to continually and actively attack his ECM modules when he re-activates them.

*that* would be a lot more fun.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Mario Putzo
#15 - 2014-02-13 17:19:01 UTC
The problem with ECM is that it doesn't ever lack utility. It is never not useful to have ECM around. Other EWAR has some limited use variable, Tracking Disruptors have their Missles and Drones, Target Painters limited by ship sizes, Damps by ship sizes and weapons systems, Nuets Missiles/Drones.

ECM because it doesn't have a specific function, does not have limitations. If it were say to target drone bandwidth, it would be useful against ships with drones, but not useful agaisnt ships without drones.

Because it is effective in every situation, it will always be seen as over powered. and in that extent it is, at least compared to other ewar. (i don't think its overpowered as a mechanic, just in comparison to like systems)
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
#16 - 2014-02-13 17:45:36 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
The problem with ECM is that it doesn't ever lack utility. It is never not useful to have ECM around. Other EWAR has some limited use variable, Tracking Disruptors have their Missles and Drones, Target Painters limited by ship sizes, Damps by ship sizes and weapons systems, Nuets Missiles/Drones.

ECM because it doesn't have a specific function, does not have limitations. If it were say to target drone bandwidth, it would be useful against ships with drones, but not useful agaisnt ships without drones.

Because it is effective in every situation, it will always be seen as over powered. and in that extent it is, at least compared to other ewar. (i don't think its overpowered as a mechanic, just in comparison to like systems)


You are correct. Here is a quick and dirty analysis of what is useful against what:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApJily1SXkKRdEVyc0tTbng0VDhEZXhKQll2TTk0cnc#gid=0

0 means 'not useful' whereas 1 means 'always useful'. 0.5 means 'sometimes useful'.

I have been generous with defender missiles and FoF since I am only considering EWAR effectiveness, not overall combat effectiveness.

Summary:
EWAR: ECM > TD > DAMPS = SMARTBOMB > NEUT = DEFENDER MISSILE

WEAPONS: Sentries > Combat drones > Autocannons = FoF missiles > blasters = howitzers = pulse lasers = short range missiles > railguns = beam lasers > long range missiles.


The analysis seems to suggest to me that every fleet should be made up of ishtars, dominix, navy vex, gila, armageddons, rooks, falcons and scorpions only.

If you can't fly any of that, take a hurricane with auto-cannons and FoF missiles :-)

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#17 - 2014-02-13 18:11:56 UTC
Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Almost every argument you have made can be said of the current system, so you've wasted a wall of text. I believe there is a counter, ECCM, which you have not addressed at all.

Rubbish. You've obviously never used ECM. It doesn't always work, irrespective of the statements to the contrary on the forum. With ECCM fitted it works even less, again irrespective of the statements to he contrary on the forum. What you're proposing is that when it works it works permanently with no chance of the ECM'd ship ever being able to do anything in that fight until the ECM ship dies. Well, that's what everyone is complaining about now and at the moment it's only chance based. In your scenario it's all or nothing. It either works and the ECM'd ship is out of the fight completely or it doesn't work because the ECM'd ship has fitted an ECCM and the ECM ship is pointless. That's pretty stupid considering the current set of complaints about ECM.

Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
In your scenario, the ecm ships only go for each other, instead of being actually useful and breaking the locks of the DPS. all the ECM boat needs is one target, so one eccm module, scripted, would make it pointless to try to break the ecm ships lock, making them focus on other more useful targets.

You obviously didn't read it properly. I also discussed them targetting other ships in the enemy fleet. Making ECCM a total counter to ECM is just daft. There are no absolute counters to other forms of EWAR, why should there be for ECM? So, you're saying that ECCM should be a total counter to ECM? So all logi ships become immune to ECM. In fact, everyone that matters just fits ECCM and ECM no longer has any purpose? That's pretty dumb, whatever you believe.

Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Ship choice is up to the pilot. if they want to fly a useless ship, that's their doing. Oh no, this idea my be both overpowered and useless! Much like guns when jammed. different ship have different everything, from lockable target #'s to range. You want a counter, well they're still there. Eccm, dampers if a person wants to guard against ecm, they just need a module slot, like everything else. Balance. do I want to be able to target anything, if the enemy brings ecm? will they bring it?

You're missing the point. The main complaint from people at the moment with current ECM mechanics are that once ECM'd they can't do anything. The truth about the current mechanics is that they can't do anything until a cycle fails. With this proposal that can't happen. If you're jammed you're perma-jammed with nothing you can do. It kills solo combat completely, making ECM boats an IWIN button which is utterly game breaking. It also not only doesn't address the current complaints about ECM it actually makes the situation worse.

Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Your argument is that nothing is broken, but caldari are the only ones who's module is chance based for being useful, every other race has an impact with their ewar as soo as they activate it.
ECM is broken, and always has been.

My arguement isn't that nothing is broken. My argument is that the concept of changing ECM to removing a number of locks is fecking stupid and utterly worse than what we have at the moment. I'm all for changing ECM if someone can come up with a sensible way of doing it. This isn't it.

If you want to debate this be my guest but making things up, like trying to accuse me of saying nothing is broken about ECM, really isn't the way to go. You might like to start by explaining how this "solution" addresses the concerns people have about how being ECM'd means they can't do anything and also you could explain how this doesn't totally screw solo pvp.
Dieterlin
Reckless-Endangerment
Manifesto.
#18 - 2014-02-13 18:18:15 UTC
If it were really necessary to remove the RNG from ECM, I'd make it function sort of like capacitor warfare. For each lock that a ship has, generate a number "maximum lock strength" based off of the ship's sensor strength and the signature radius of whatever it has locked. Lock strength increases from 0% to 100% of the maximum lock strength within the lock time for that target.

When a ship is hit with an ECM cycle, each lock has it's lock strength reduced by the ECM's jamming strength. If a lock reaches zero strength, that particular lock is broken. This includes attempts to lock - the locking process can be interrupted through the same mechanism. Well-timed ECM could make it very difficult for a ship to lock new targets even if it's current targets remain locked.

ECCM modules would both provide their current function (increased sensor strength) and also provide two additional benefits: an immediate boost to lock strength on all targets, and a weaker-than-sebo bonus to scan resolution*. ECM modules would have to have their cycle times and strength values changed to be balanced in the new system. Since lock strength regenerates at a rate related to lock time, a ship targeted with sensor damps scripted for scan res AND ECM would be extra screwed.

*The justification for this is that the module that counters most other forms of ewar (Neuts/cap boosters, damps/sensor boosters, TDs/Tracking Computers) is also useful when you're not being targeted by that type of ewar. ECCM was the exception, because increased sensor strength is not very useful when you're not being targeted by ECM, or in some niche near-unscannable fit.

That said, ECM is fairly balanced right now, so it isn't really necessary to change it. But if I had to design ECM with no RNG, I'd do it this way.
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2014-02-13 19:33:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dolorous Tremmens
Counter argument to be re-submitted, forums ate my post and the draft wasn't saved

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-02-13 20:15:44 UTC
Tchulen wrote:

Rubbish. You've obviously never used ECM. It doesn't always work, irrespective of the statements to the contrary on the forum. With ECCM fitted it works even less, again irrespective of the statements to he contrary on the forum. What you're proposing is that when it works it works permanently with no chance of the ECM'd ship ever being able to do anything in that fight until the ECM ship dies. Well, that's what everyone is complaining about now and at the moment it's only chance based. In your scenario it's all or nothing. It either works and the ECM'd ship is out of the fight completely or it doesn't work because the ECM'd ship has fitted an ECCM and the ECM ship is pointless. That's pretty stupid considering the current set of complaints about ECM.
You obviously didn't read it properly. I also discussed them targetting other ships in the enemy fleet. Making ECCM a total counter to ECM is just daft. There are no absolute counters to other forms of EWAR, why should there be for ECM? So, you're saying that ECCM should be a total counter to ECM? So all logi ships become immune to ECM. In fact, everyone that matters just fits ECCM and ECM no longer has any purpose? That's pretty dumb, whatever you believe.

You're missing the point. The main complaint from people at the moment with current ECM mechanics are that once ECM'd they can't do anything. The truth about the current mechanics is that they can't do anything until a cycle fails. With this proposal that can't happen. If you're jammed you're perma-jammed with nothing you can do. It kills solo combat completely, making ECM boats an IWIN button which is utterly game breaking. It also not only doesn't address the current complaints about ECM it actually makes the situation worse.

My arguement isn't that nothing is broken. My argument is that the concept of changing ECM to removing a number of locks is fecking stupid and utterly worse than what we have at the moment. I'm all for changing ECM if someone can come up with a sensible way of doing it. This isn't it.

If you want to debate this be my guest but making things up, like trying to accuse me of saying nothing is broken about ECM, really isn't the way to go. You might like to start by explaining how this "solution" addresses the concerns people have about how being ECM'd means they can't do anything and also you could explain how this doesn't totally screw solo pvp.



Rubbish you've obviously never flown logi, or in a fleet larger than 20. Now that ad-hominem attacks are done:

The proposal i made ( probably not original, others must have made it before) states that ECCM only gives you a base of 0 targets, and with scripts, 1 target. Where the idea gets a little op is that when taken below 0, you can't be locked by friends either, So the ECCM is not an absolute counter like you believe. All other counters in the game are not absolute either, they only mitigate the damage. Tracking enhancers don't completely negate the tracking disruptors, nor so sensor boosters negate the damping. the disrupting and damping are still happening, you've just put on enough of a counter that they're not as effective.

Same with the ECCM, you can get a maximum target count of 1, provided you fit scripted eccm, no matter how much ECM thrown at you, unless you have friends with projected ECCM. It still means they have to lock and support you.

Just because you have a single ECM used against you doesn't mean that you're screwed when its in effect. you will have less targets but still be able to target, even if you're not using ECCM. Its not an IWIN button as you accuse, like current ECM when it works. It has an active counter, that provides a real effect, not just a modifier to the roll of the die.

Soloists deserve the least say in anything, as eve is a MMO, and the game is designed around teamwork. Soloists will go solo no matter what, so i don't have to really cater to them, BUT solo PVP actually gets a benefit: provided you have you eccm, you can still get that one target. If no Eccm, you still have a chance, if they didn't bring more than one ECM mod. If they did, well, it should have been anticipated, and the loss is the fault of the unprepared and unlucky. Nothing is stopping you from doing the same.

I have, and do fly ECM ships, although i mostly fly logi. Logi pilots will hate me for this, because logi's lockable targets are the lifeblood of the fleet. Logi autolock 2-6 other logi, depending on fleet comp, and also autolock those in leadership roles.
one of the DPS gets redboxed, they're locked as soon as they're broadcast, and since switching primaries to find someone not being covered by logi is basic, logi are locking and unlocking constantly. any reduction in targeting capabilities means dead ships. ECM ships could be more effective spreading their ECM over logi then they are currently. They would no be looking to completely blot out that targeting of the logi, but to mess with their priorities.

So the proposed ECM is a little less powerful but people in fleets will feel it more and adjust doctrine. Eccm doesn't completely counter it, but provides a chance. Soloists may not like it, but they pick their battles and and are special snowflakes in any case.

You clearly didn't read the linked post "properly"

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

123Next page