Two ECM modules would be enough then, if you have higher ECM strength than the opponents Sensor Strength, since that would be -6 locks, and that would completly lock out a lot of ships. For the rest you’d need your tank.
I typically use 1 (Rooks slow & the web helps with that) but I can boost its ecm strength with low slot modules at the cost of DPS
I fight mostly solo in WH-space where there is greater opportunity to use intel and fit racial for the ship I’m hunting. (fly off d-scan and drop a mobile depot - fit racial/ecm strength)
I have been reading this thread at work with interest for some time and will attempt to respond in such a way as to remain pragmatic and objective. Apologies if this response is too corporate but as I said, I am in “work” mode…
For context, I live in a low-class WH, have recently (as in days ago) finished training all the skills required to V a Falcon and enjoy small gang PVP coupled with walks on the beach at sunset… normally on my own 
Using the STAR model:
Situation: A large number of valuable players (say what you want about NS carebares etc, it is the NS fights that hit the headlines and generate potential revenue for CCP and likely where most of the money is spent on subs outside HS which doesn’t care about jams) have decidecd they don’t like a particular mechanic within the game and want to change it in their favour.
Task: To identify a solution that meets the criteria of those raising concerns while having as smaller adverse impact on those opposed to the change as possible.
Action( potential fix): As I said, I am interested in small gang cloaky stuff and for me, the Falcon is basically a ship-tank for the rest of the fleet now and having ships jammed able to maintain lock and destroy me defeats the point of the jam and I think that is what a lot of (not the population of EvE) the population of those adversely affected’s point is. It seems CCP want feedback on how the change is working but it already feels like this was the wrong change to make given those adversely impacted are making enough noise about it so, should the action not be to go back to the “Task” and identify a way that meets both criteria?
I do not know enough about coding, CCP’s intentions. the intentions of those requesting the change or maintaining a healthy relationship with a female (not relevant that last one) but it seems the action taken by CCP to met the reason the change was needed in the first place has swung the pendulum well and truly in the opposite direction. Further, I see little incentive to fly a 500m Falcon if it is now “broke” so feedback will be very one-sided.
As I said, I don’t know enough about stuff to presume to know the fix but would a happy medium not be something like the jams remaining exactly as they are now with the exception they have a cool-down, perhaps pilots only being able to fit a maximum number of jams on a ship and reducing the cycle time?
Result: Solo and small gang retain their ability to jam and not die straight away/escape while giving those jammed the knowledge that in a maximum of 30 seconds (if each jams for 10 seconds with a max of 3 being fitted for example) they will be able to start fighting back?
Not sure if the above is actually a waste of time but I have tried to be constructive in addressing both issues…
Edit: Clarification (I was rushed drafting this post) and spelling.
I appreciate you taking the time.
I think the issue, though, is that your situation explains the issue incorrectly - the issue isn’t that a certain group doesn’t like the mechanic and wants it changed in their favor. The situation is that jams, as they work right now, are essentially a roll of the dice that, if won, ensures that the target of the attack has no ability to impact the fight other than running away (if he can) or dying. Yes, that’s a blanket statement and not 100% accurate in every situation, but largely that’s the case. That’s the point of ECM, after all - stop the other guy from being able to attack you.
The task, then, would be to identify a way to provide some agency for the player who is jammed. This fix provides the ability for the jammed ship to hit the jammer but no other targets. That makes it like a taunt.
Thus, to me, it seems to indicate that the taunted ship needs buffs to it’s tank to allow it to handle the incoming DPS from the target while his companions burn the target down. So the action would be to provide buffs to the tank of the ECM ship.
In terms of solo PvP, these ships would be less viable than before, and we all know that’s the case, so they go from being a ship you see solo often to being a fleet support ship. Perhaps a DPS buff would help in this regard.
That’s kind of what I think they’re looking for.
1 Like
Reading the CSM notes the problem was the feeling of being helpless and unable to do anything - not the actual amount of jams or working of jams. (Tho being neuted out is close to feeling helpless).
We have a action that consists at its basic level:
- Attack: The ECM attempt
- Defense: Which is inherent from resists or an extraneous action like script in a sebo or adding distance
- Result A : No jam the defender has no problem when this happens
- Result B : Jammed and a problem because can’t do anything
There is lack of agency from having no repair system after a successful ECM hit.
Trouble is that no one wants to bite the bullet and say if you want an active jam breaker system which you could do with a sebo script then you have to fit a module.
This choice compared with a shield repair system:
- I want to wait for my shields to passive regen (wait til ECM fails to hit )
- I want to be able to actively repair my shields (Break ECM after it hits)
- BUT - I don’t want to fit a module for it
The perceived solution was to make the lock breaker defense inherent but this nullifies the first part of the combat action - it breaks the basic function of ECM which is to jam a ship.
1 Like
that’s kind of what I think YOU are looking for. because eve is not like other games, your reference to a ‘taunt’ ‘like other games’ is not welcome in eve, where a single shard and 1000’s of pilots on the same grid potentially, change things. dramatically.
when you say ‘impact a fight’ what you mean is ‘contribute to killing the primary’. so, what happens when you are jammed? you run away or die? since when do jammers affect your ship at all, beyond breaking a lock? oh! you mean in some scenario OTHER THAN solo? and if solo, you mean solo vs many! so your advocating a special case for ecm, where the more you bring to a fight, the more ‘agency’ you are granting your enemy. a.b.s.u.r.d.
and you know better; ‘fleet support ship’, lol. not when the logi starts fitting tp’s to direct fleet drones and sentries onto jammers.
the only questions to be answered: will fleets even bother fielding ecm, and If they do, will the other fleet even bother to primary them anymore? im leaning towards no, for both. that’s not balanced; its Broken!
1 Like
(I don’t know how to quote text… 
)
But I feel my proposal meets that criteria? If the task is to identify a way in which jammed ships can still lock then yes, I concede allowing them to lock the jammer resolves that issue but unfortunately a very large result of doing so is to basically stop making the jammer a jam? I mean, if a jam lands and the target can still lock (regardless of who or how many) then the module is no longer a jam.
I also think there should be a feeling of helplessness about being jammed in the same way there is being scrammed in a non-combat ship. So instead of making the jam a not-jam, how about introducing other effects such as the jam also reduces mass to the size of a pod (thus reducing potential damage) or breaks all warp disruption on the target ship allowing them to warp away?
I fully appreciate why this change is needed but can’t help but think this isn’t a compromise and there is a better way to meet in the middle.
If the objective is to truly give a pilot that is jammed agency scrap ECCM and create a single module, that requires little to zero fitting requirements that prevents any form of jamming EWAR from landing. This will mean pilots can absolutely fight back but make them sacrifice a mid slot for the privilege? Or even a rig?
I don’t want to be seen as someone not willing to engage in finding a solution but this “fix” breaks the use of a number of ships for many of the ways they are used with very little adverse impact on those benefiting from it… can a middle ground not be found?
well said sir. I could even get behind a sebo script that DID, Instantly, wipe ecm effects. just give it a comparable cycle time, mayb a few % points longer or shorter than a typical ecm mod. you get jammed, and don’t like it, fire off that sebo with ‘special script’ and you have instant lock ability. IF you get jammed again tho, well you have to wait til that first cycle elapses before trying again. although tbh, this would b quite powerful, so perhaps its own dedicated module would be better than a script for sebo. whatever, there was literally a Dozen + ways to address a person’s ‘feelings’ without also breaking 1/4 of the ewar systems and their hulls. so obvious from the start!
Parties Interested in large scale combat may (do) not want to commit a medium module to ECCM unless it’s a know counter on doctrine ships with available mid slots (multiple sebo on armor tanked logi).
I suspect the solution presented to the community had to be a non-module because of this.
Having a separate module (interesting) may be accepted if it took a utility high - The auto targeting module is a utility high used by many because of the +3 max targets - maybe a script for this, with the penalty of not having the +3 targets.
EDIT: The script sebo does have an interesting built-in usage penalty
When I am actively breaking ECM I am more vulnerable to ECM because the sebo sensor bonus is gone therefore it encourages me (rather than forcing me ) to lock the ECM ship as a combat target
I think this is the middle ground, and I think your argument that “if it doesn’t break all jams, it’s not a jam” ignores that in the vast majority of applications, the jam is still powerful and still has a use.
Jams on logi will still work - logi can’t rep the ships it’s supposed to when it’s jammed and can’t really fight back. Jams in small gang still work - yes, they can target the jamming ship (making it a taunt), but they can’t target any of the other ships attacking them or the drones on the jamming ship.
Jams in big fleet fights still work - can only target back one ship, not multiple, denying defenders the ability to spread tackle/damps/DPS.
In the end, only one vs. one scenarios are significantly negatively impacted. So, in that regard, this basically means that ECM is going to become a fleet support tactic, not a solo tactic. But to make it viable in case these ships get caught solo, what can we do? Improve the tanks, improve DPS, both, etc.
That’s what I’m talking about. Folks need to think in terms of the new meta as to what will make these ships better and we need to move forward operating under the assumption that the old way of playing these ships is gone.
The suggestion of a seperate mod is not to adversely impact those wanting the change but to make it an actual consideration people need to think about.
Point being, make it a utility high… in fact, by making it a utility high as opposed to a mid makes little/no difference to the small gang/solo meta so sure, all I am saying is there has to be a way to make a ship unjamable (pretty sure I made that word up) while still affording those that use it as intended the “luxury” of doing so.
Side A: We want to be able to negate jams.
Side B: We still want a jam to be a jam.
Solution: create a mod that prevents it. Those that want Side A can chose to have it. Those that don’t are a victim of “Side B”.
Edit: And it shall be called the “Ghost Anti-ECM” module 
1 Like
This would only be true if jammed ships (logi or otherwise) cannot have drone assigned to assist them - because target painters
tldr; how do can we twist and contort eve to be more like wow, or other mmorpg-hijklmNOP
1 Like
Maybe I’m being parochial in my experience here, but I have never seen logi being used as a drone trigger in a large fleet. And I’ve spent most of the last two years in large fleet fights.
I don’t play WOW (and never have) so am unsure of the reference?
What is the issue with creating a mod? We have stabs so it seems logical to me?
(Genuinely not trolling and interested to hear your point as the only way this will be resolved is to meet in the middle)
EDIT: Sorry, realised you were quoting someone else.
well you will now. you think guardians will bother with a sebo and eccm script with the new state of ecm?? it only has 2 mids! lol
When the need arrives - now - they will
no, for him and everyone else who is shedding salty ass tears, is to change it back to what it was… they won’t actually offer viable feedback.
1 Like
Interesting, So why would anyone in a fleet bother with a sebo - painters + assist for the win
sorry, I don’t play it either. but brisc plays lots of EA games, so he knows this ‘taunt’ crap better than he knows eve apparently. and he misses it soo much he wants it in eve. sry again, that guy really is trolling in here, even if some of his responses seem reasonable.
lets say this, they revert these ecm changes entirely. and they add a module, mid slot or hi slot (up to debate) that can break ecm effects immediately upon activation. it doesn’t prevent ecm effects, just breaks any current effects. this could supplement the current eccm script which obviously reduces jam chance overall. I think it needs to have a cycle time similar to the ecm module(s). if its too much faster, then in a 1v1 scenario, a jam boat will be dramatically disadvantaged. mayb a good thing, I dunno.
this ‘new mod’ could be more diverse in its application even, perhaps halting the effects of most or all ewar (like damps or painters, albeit briefly). it can b balanced via the cycle time. it doesn’t Have to be limited to 1 per hull, but mayb. im just slingshotting here. I mean ffs, they could’ve just added a rig that reduces the time jammed by a flat 5-10sec, or comparable.
when they do crap like this; taking things out of the game, its for the dummies. ie; dumbing it down. it creates less of what makes eve special, and more of the derp tactics prevalent in other games. I think we have plenty of derp tactics as it is. they do this out of laziness. I believe its that simple. csm just encouraged it. the responsibility lies squarely on ccp, to ADD to the game, NEW things, that enable us as players to better counter and interact with eachother. this ecm stuff isn’t an addition, its makeup on a pig, and 2x kneeshots to the very same pig.
1 Like