Assembly Hall

I know a lot has been said about this issue, however I've thought a bit about the mechanic and I believe (as many of you might agree) the chance based binary effect (you're either jammed or not) is not in line with other forms of Ewar. Therefore I came up with another way to normalize ECM. In case the whole idea's been mentioned before, I apologize in advance, as I had not heard about it.

For an explanation (and further discussion), I will use the following stats (as currently on TQ):

PDA rigged Falcon with a multi jammer T2: 8,967 ~ 9
PDA rigged Falcon with a racial jammer T2: 13,450 ~ 13,5
EC-300 Hornet: 1
EC-900 Wasp: 2
Nonbonused racial jammer T2: 4,5

Average Interceptor sensor strength (10,4), max targets (4)
Average Recon sensor strength (27,5), average max targets (8)
Average HAC sensor strength (15), avreage max targets (6)
Average Battlecruiser sensor strength (17,8), max targets (7)
Average Battleship sensor strength (21,3), max targets (7)
Average Carrier sensor strength (74), max targets (6)

The idea is to compare an ECM module jam strength to the target ship's sensor strength, multiply the ratio with max targets of the ship and subtract the result from it's max locked targets. For example, if you fly a Falcon and activate one RADAR T2 jammer on an Armageddon (17 sensor strength, 7 max locked targets), it would subtract 5 (or 5,558 rounded down) targets from his max locked count. Therefore the Armageddon would only be able to lock 2 targets.


[Current max locked targets] = Round up ( [Max locked targets] (1 - [ECM module jam strength] / [Ship sensor strength]) )


Using more than one ECM module on a ship should of course be subject to some diminishing returns. The reduction in jammer strength in falloff still applies.

The example with Falcon and Geddon is the top limit of the module's effectiveness (bar for Eos boosting). A nonbonused racial jammer would only remove 1 target from the Armageddon and a flight of EC-300 drones (without diminishing returns) 2 targets.

If this change would go through without any adjusting of ship and module stats, the following scenarios could happen:
- Only a flight of EC-900 Wasps would remove all 4 targets from a Claw, though not from the Malediction.
- A Falcon could in an ideal situation remove 6 Ruptures from combat (using 6 racial jammers).
- An ECCM module would permit each of those Ruptures to remain lock on 3 ships.
- A Rifter with an ECCM module and one Racial jammer on him still retains 1 lock.
- etc.

Pros:
- ECM mechanic no longer chance/luck based - no lucky breaks, no lucky permajams
- Extra use for Automated targeting systems (High slot module providing extra possible target locks) thus reviving a seldom used module

Cons:
- Can't think of any if the system was fine tuned

Discuss (and support if you like the idea).

P.S.: Inb4 people saying Falcons ruined mah game - nevah happened!

OK I like the idea of making ECM effect your max locked targets but I think your formula needs a bit of tweaking. Mainly because if you can't jam someone out under any circumstances it's kind of useless to fit ECM if you are flying solo, or even in a large fleet because FCs usually just call one primary after another.

The way I'd do it........

First tie max locked targets to your sensor strength. Max Locked Targets = Round Up( Sensor Strength - ECM )

So right now a hurricane has 6 max locked targets so give it a LADAR sensor strength of 6.

ECCM gives you sensor strength which in turn raises your max locked targets. This gives ECCM an extra purpose other than "In case you get Falconned bro" This puts it in line with sensor boosters and tracking enhancers which have uses on their own.

Also the amount of ships someone will have locked up is more often than not skill limited anyway so at most you're going to have 15 dudes locked if you are really pro... and use up all your mid slots on ECCM.

Get rid of the automated targeting system or just lump it in with ECCM.

Now all you have to do is calibrate the ECM module strength based on the max locked targets of most ships. So to perma jam a hurricane with no ECCM on it you'd need a total LADAR ECM strength of 6.


Then I'd also suggest giving ECM a short optimal range and a large falloff. That way you can tactically counter ECM by burning out a bit until you can lock someone up. So if you are a decent pilot you can still fight through the jamming, same as other ewar. Fighting against sensor dampeners you just need to get in close and stay there long enough to lock on. To fight against tracking disrupters you need to pull a good orbit on someone, or sit still and take a steady shot.

Also if the tactical counter to dampeners is getting close enough to lock and the counter to new and improved ECM is to get in close then you'd see Falcons and Arazus pairing up and having to work together.

Also you could have this odd dynamic where your max locked targets is based on your total sensor strength so a hurricane with it's natural LADAR of 6 and maybe some Gravometric ECCM fitted for an extra 2 points would lock 8 targets, but to jam it out you'd need to hit it with a bit of multispectral jamming in addition to just hitting it with LADAR.

And the first of these targets would be the Falcon, which then dies in seconds. Oh wait, not really: there would be no reason to kill the Falcon, because it's completely useless now.

Stupid idea.

You didn't read his proposal at all. You would still be able to reduce a target to 0 locked targets, it will just be more consistent and not based on chance.

Wolodymyr: My original example with the geddon and falcon only showed what happened when the latter was to use 1 jammer. If you placed a second jammer on the target, the combined jam strength of the modules on the target would be cumulative (although, as stated, subject to some diminishing returns). To illustrate further, if one racial jammer has a strength of 13,5, then two would have for example 24, while adding another would give an even smaller gain

Keep in mind, the actual ship and module stats on TQ are not designed around my proposed change (although if you think about it, the change isn't as drastic as some claim). All I proposed was a redesign of the mechanic and described what might happen with the current set of data. Fine tuning the formula, diminishing returns, ship and module stats etc. would of course still be up for tweaking

I don't think it would be as urgent to give ECCM modules more bonuses. What's broken is in my opinion ECM, not the counter to it, although I do understand your meaning

And of course, I totally like your low optimal, high falloff idea.

I think the ECM is fine, the ECCM should be need to change.

When the jamming unsuccesfull the ECCM would be drop back the jammer effects to jammers.