lol, fixes the frustration for the jammed player…but how frustrated can a jammed player be about jamming when nobody bothers to fly jam boats to jam him in the first place?
what other frustrations are you planning to ‘fix’ next? the list is looooong im sure 
3 Likes
ec 600 are already worse against smaller ships on account of them not being able to keep up and apply the jams
im only impacted by the slow decaying of the game. ecm changes will not directly effect my current or past playstyles at all. except that I have one less thing to worry about facing as a possible counter, cuz F ecm right? Im here to suggest to ccp that they stop listening to the likes of you, as your primary interest is NOT the OVERALL HEALTH of the game.
1 Like
you lose all of your own locks how much more feedback do you want? and some yellow/red squares on your overview disappear
Im aaaalmost tired of countering your poorly and repeatedly stated arguments. but then, its hard to get tired of dunking a duck. the only solution, per your logic to counter damps is the ‘agency’ of approaching the damper, or approaching your other target. but you kno this doesn’t work in situations where damps are in high use. your just deflecting, in order to support the ruining of ecm as a valid ewar method. akin to talking about FEELINGS, which you’ve repeatedly done.
ps: I AM TIRED of you repeating yourself also.
I always loved that argument because it shows people are just looking at the mods rather than speaking from experience
as you pointed out if people are using damps against you then their fleet is built for damps and you are never getting within that 2k lock range you now have.
damps are what ecm should be and that is the main balance issue.
we should not be breaking ECM further we should be looking for complete alternatives
I can see that we are never going to agree on this issue so let us agree to disagree.
However, I think there are indications that the backlash against the ECM change is greater than expected and on a personal note I can say that after the change I am probably never going to use ECM since the suggested change ensures that ECM offers no value to me whatsoever should the suggested change be implemented as is.
In the thread it seems that main factors for the suggested ECM change is the binary nature of ECM and the perception that there are no counters to it. Personally, I disagree on this, but for the sake of argument I will leave that out for now since these arguments have already been presented earlier.
Assuming that CCP decides to implement the suggested ECM change as is, I would like to see a secondary effect of the jam, that leaves the jammed party with some options without providing the jammed ship with some kind of defense. Several ideas have already been presented in this thread.
I just had a thought of a basic idea which may/may not have been suggested earlier (I have not checked). What I was thinking of is that the jammed party will still be able to target the jamming ship, but will not be able to activate any modules on the jamming ship until they are within in certain range - for the purpose of this example I would say 50% of optimal range of a given module (though this could be adjusted).
The main idea here is that the jamming would offer some kind of protection for the jamming ship, but the jammed would have the option to move closer and in terms of weapons use long-range ammo to affect the optimal range. This will of course mean that for some modules the jammed ship will have to move very close to the jamming ship whereas others could be activated further away. Fittings can also play a role. As you noted in the example of remote sensor dampeners you pointed out that one of the options is to move closer. This follows the same idea.
This is just a basic idea and may not be feasible. It is just an attempt to mitigate the effect of the suggested ECM change.
1 Like
disable any and all modules that require a target lock, and id be ok with the change. it would simply remove the requirement that the jammed ship RE-Lock the ships they already had locked, whichever targets those may be. this would be a minor nerf to ecm all things considered. it Would however, Not achieve the results the csm are seeking (but NOT STATING in an honest fasion), so its highly unlikely this change would be made.
if a successful ecm jam prevents all locks except to the jamming ship, AND imposed a 50% reduction in all offensive modules then it will effectively remove (or at least reduce) the use of dampeners/disruptors for that very same result.
im not saying your idea is bad, im just offering an improvement (mentioned above) and pointing out that if left as you suggest, it would be partially breaking the use of damps/disruptors as a serperate and independent ewar system; muddying the waters if you will, to put it another way.
1 Like
I didn’t see any of that - I tried one out on a bunch of mining barges in high sec and couldn’t tell if it was messing with them at all
how did you not see your own lock failing? also you need ~15+ ppl targeting you before they really start working
I see the error in my thinking - they have to be targeting ME
I thought it worked on everyone in range and by breaking locks it would upset the AFK’ers
Worth a try - the intention was honorable LOL
lol no that is the ecm burst and it will get you concorded in hs
can you confirm if this effects just the normal ecm or if things like the burst and TSB are also effected I don’t think anyone thinks these are broken and this change would make both pretty useless not simply worse like the normal ecm
Thanks… I’m smiling now … LOL
I’ve been playing this game for 6 years and I never knew that the spectrum breakers worked on people targeting me - I thought it was every one near who had a target locked
lol it sucks that it is such a niche mod because it has one of the coolest effects in the game
People get frustrated with ECM you get jammed and then you can’t do anything for the rest of the fight, perhaps this is because the cycle time is too long ?
shorter would be even worse
Some reasons to support that statement would be helpful
1 Like
lets say we cut it to 10s
now you have a chance to jam every 10s. many ships take ~3 seconds to lock their target. so if a jam misses you only have ~6 to 5 seconds with ticks to actually start doing something before the next one lands.
if we then add more jams lets go with 4 as it is a common number for a single ecm ship to have.
you can now attempt jam every 2.5 seconds against a cruiser using multispec your jam chance can often be as high as 50% so every 5 seconds on average a jam will land meaning you are now permanently jammed
1 Like
OK so lets say once a jam fails it cannot be reactivated something like a MJD