These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Sensor and ECCM Module Merger/Tiericide

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#41 - 2016-02-11 22:07:26 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Ezekiel Marr wrote:
So... now there's one module to counter damps and ECM. Meanwhile damps and ECM are represented by two(or five, if you count racial ECM as different) modules.

How is this fair to ewar pilots?

Doesn't really change all that much tbh.

There's basically two cases where people complain about ecm. (1) When a falcon alt uncloaks and turns a 1v1 into a 2v1 and (2) When CFC/Horde/Brave run "**** you fleet" and bring ungodly amounts of damping/jamming/ewar frigates and cruisers.

For (1), nothing really changes. If you bring sebo's to a 1v1, you're either giving up tank (hardeners, shield boosters) or damage application (webs, tracking computers) putting you at a disadvantage. Further, even 3-4 sebos won't stop a falcon with 5-6 jams from keeping you locked out of half of a fight. In the small gang case, people "lose" to falcons because there's another ship in play that they didn't expect - not because ecm is "broken". It doesn't really matter whether that ship is a falcon or something like a pilgrim/curse/rapier/proteus/neutral logi.


For (2), the sheer number of griffins and maulus's in play is what makes ewar difficult to fight. The sebo change is a drop in the bucket.

Basically, nothing really changes for ewar pilots.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2016-02-11 22:26:42 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Good thing, but shouldn't ECM be tweaked, if not outright buffed due to this change?

Since it would be unreasonable to expect a complete remap of the ECM mecanic right now, even though that's what we really need, couldn't you like make ECM racially scriptables or something?

There's little to no point in making it scriptable or making it separate tbh. It's not like there is an interesting or niche use trade-off for fitting the wrong ECCM. Which starts to add needless complexity to the module.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#43 - 2016-02-11 22:28:06 UTC
scan res sebos / scan res rigs / sharpshooter t3ds ruin solo pvp so hard. would prefer some kind of scan res dampening resistance, or make it so you can't go above your base scan res or something idk
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#44 - 2016-02-11 22:28:26 UTC
Ezekiel Marr wrote:
So... now there's one module to counter damps and ECM. Meanwhile damps and ECM are represented by two(or five, if you count racial ECM as different) modules.

How is this fair to ewar pilots?

No, there was ever only 1 module that your ship could use to counter ECM. Use any other racial ECCM and you received literally no benefit. It has always been one module. Unless you ran into some poor newb who didn't realize he was fitting the wrong module.
Mr Hyde113
#45 - 2016-02-11 22:39:05 UTC
"THIS IS HUUUUUUUUUUUUGGEE" - Donald Trump
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2016-02-11 22:55:35 UTC
I suppose this makes ECCM near unprobable a thing of the past?
FT Cold
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#47 - 2016-02-11 22:57:49 UTC
This is a positive change. Good stuff.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#48 - 2016-02-11 23:03:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Suodemon wrote:
Doing the numbers on the T2 SEBO, and the scripted sensor strength comes out at 76.8 assuming 60% like the scan res and targeting range scripts. Current ECCM modules provide 96%. Did I just do the math wrong?

Aren't the scan res and targeting range scripts +100% primary stat -100% secondary stats? This means that the sebo should give 48% unscripted, 96% scripted ECCM and 0% scripted range/scan res. IIRC 96% is the same as current modules, but you can get half strength with 30% range and scan res on an unscripted.
xPredat0rz wrote:
Seems like a huge nerf to OGBs.


Most fits require at least 2 ECCMs to get where they need to be. With these proposed changes you might have to upgrade to high grade talons to deal with the nerf to Sensor strength.


1: shouldn't change anything if my numbers are right.
2: I don't think they care since they're still trying to get rid of OGBs.
Keo Makue
The Seven Shadows
Scotch And Tea.
#49 - 2016-02-11 23:03:16 UTC
What happens to our current stocks of our modules that are getting eliminated?...well besides being eliminated. Which modules magically turn into what exactly?
Wayne Caderu
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2016-02-11 23:09:47 UTC
This is cool and all, don't get me wrong, the new stuff looks great. That being said could we address how strong even an off-racial jammer is? like, just damn.
Avon Salinder
#51 - 2016-02-11 23:26:32 UTC
An excellent change, hitting two things at once. Love it.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#52 - 2016-02-11 23:37:40 UTC
Great stuff. Blends two modules that are rarely useful outside some very specific fits (compared to losing tackle or tank) into something that is really interesting to use. Will be interesting in an Alliance Tournament setting too.
Captain Campion
Campion Corp.
#53 - 2016-02-11 23:50:17 UTC
good change, thanks ccp
Mad Abbat
Talon Swarm
#54 - 2016-02-11 23:55:21 UTC
Well done Fozzie! That is a really welcome change.
Krevnos
Back Door Burglars
#55 - 2016-02-12 00:28:32 UTC
I am happy to see the rather redundant ECCM module being merged into a more useful combined module finally.

Would you be able to confirm whether these new modules will still take scripts and indeed whether there will be a script made available for sensor strength?
Sturmwolke
#56 - 2016-02-12 00:38:25 UTC
Buff one of the signal amplifiers for +3 targets please Smile
Atm, the only choice is high slot T2 Auto Targeter.
Alexis Nightwish
#57 - 2016-02-12 02:10:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
These changes are pretty huge, and include a complete merger of all ECCM into their respective Sensor Booster modules....

...we are adding Omni ECCM effects to Sensor Boosters, Remote Sensor Boosters and Signal Amplifier modules, and adding a new ECCM script for the active modules.
I'd ask for a refund of my ECM skills, but I'm sure you'd just tell me to give you money so I can extract them and re-inject at a significant loss. t( " t)

CCP Fozzie wrote:
As for the non-ECCM part of the Sensor Booster tiericide, we are increasing fitting costs a bit
A 60% increase is NOT "a bit"!

Also if the "all sensor strength bonus" is a raw number and not a percentage I'm gone as not only will that **** ECM to hell and back, it would have MASSIVE effects in WH space by making a LOT of ships unprobable.

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Sven Viko VIkolander
In space we are briefly free
#58 - 2016-02-12 02:18:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Sven Viko VIkolander
Oh yes. Oh hell yes! I and other solo PVPers have made this very suggestion in the past, and let's just say that this will probably be one of my favorite small changes CCP has made in recent years. One of my biggest complaints about ECCM modules is that they provide no real use unless you are facing ECM, and the use they provide when you do face ECM is purely chance based and is not worth the slot for the module. This change also makes signal amps slightly reasonable to fit on certain battleship setups for solo and small gang.

ECM is still terrible game design, there's no gameplay or skill involved in it, and the range at which ships worth less than 1m isk can perma-jam virtually any other ship in the game is absurd, but this is a small step in the right direction.

The only downside to this change is that it is a stealth buff to the arty svipul. Now it gets another buff, an extra resistance to ECM. To be honest, with the added functionality of sensor boosters, their CPU should probably be quite a bit higher. 16 CPU for a Tech 2 sebo is still insanely cheap given the added functionality it will be receiving. I would suggest more like 20 CPU and the other meta versions adjusted from there.
Zetakya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2016-02-12 02:35:43 UTC
The SEBO fitting reqs just doubled for the same effect on a given stat (as mostly a SEBO is fitted for one stat only). Old F90 was 30% boost, to get that now you need a Tech2, which with the increased fitting costs per module has pushed CPU need from 8 to 16. That's going to be a problem for some fits (thankfully, not mine).

I do like the merging of ECCM with these modules, it makes for a good tactical choice on the field of what to script, rather than a strategic choice before you leave dock.
Cyrek Ohaya
Blazing Sun Group
#60 - 2016-02-12 05:54:28 UTC
Fozzie you're basically applying a free ECCM bonus to Sensor Boosters, I can't simply agree to that, on live we will now have a solution to both ECM and Sensor Dampener modules, two birds with one stone, we can't have that.
Let's go over what we have now:

-ECCM (Racial) I - II = Low Slot, Local Active, 96%,Overheats for 30% bonus. The standard for some Logistic cruiser fits.

-ECCM Projector I - II = Medium Slot, Remote Active, 120%, Overheats for 30%. Less Range and Heavier CPU requirement than Sensor Boosters. Niche strongly lies in Logistic chains or for a Marauders immensely irrational weakness to ECM.

Your job should be to make the least interesting choice, the Signal Amplifier more appealing to your players rather than make a streamlined Sensor booster be able to deal with EWAR issues more effectively.

There is some inconsistency with your Remote Sensor Booster proposal is that you're adding the ECCM bonus from a module which takes 55 CPU to one that costs 22, 55 being a cost more suitable for Battleships and some Battlecruisers, 22 something passable for certain frigates and easily fitted on cruisers. Don't take me wrong but I like the remote assistance modules, you are just making them too easily accessible, and in turn splitting the odds against dedicated ECM pilots.