Or with the paired increase in reliability, you’d not be rainbow fitting your ships anymore. I’ll again point to the rook and widow. If you’ve got an intelligent fit on either, you’ll have at most 2 ECM modules.
Post-change, I’d expect a falcon, griffin, blackbird, etc, to be fitted the same. They’d have 2 or 3 modules tops. The rest would be more typical fitting.
Incidentally, we’ve been flying Muninns instead of cerbs. You get good range, and volley mechanics. I hate arty muninns. Almost as much as I hated 190km HML cerbs.
The cerb’s been replaced by muninns and ferox for a long time now. It’s handy when you need more mobility than the ferox, but on the whole, the BC’s still the best option for massed fire. Just like some of us said it would be when CCP announced the ‘nerf’ that required changing all of 1 module to completely neuter.
Well yes, rails or Muninn, the two hottest topics of this summer 
I suppose I mean mostly on the topic of a mainline T2 doctrine. Feroxes largely being replaced by either Muninns or Eagles
But guess what!!! Now we can’t even blops carriers anymore without taking heavy losses even if the pilot is a idiot and doesn’t know how to hit and dock with fighters.
Since we are worried about counterplay; how does the though process defend this ‘balance pass’ when viewed from the industrial that has an ecm module fit to ‘counter’ being tackled?
Not entirely.
A widow with a tank buff would be able to handle fighters for 20 seconds. At which point widow #2 could jam the fighters while logistics catches up. For that matter, with enough buffer to avoid the burst damage, a supported widow can easily tank a carrier.
I’ve not said it in about a week, but I’m of the opinion that everything needs support.
I’m not saying that this isn’t a HUGE stealth buff to carriers (becuase it is) and it certainly isn’t deserved… but options do exist. (edited because apparently engrish is herd).
Solo players are the ones getting shafted hard here. The bigger your gang gets, the more ECM will help.
So other than T3C as logi, can we now expect cov ops logi dessis???
I’ve long wanted an actual covert logi hull, another recon with logi bonuses. But tbh, T3Cs do fill the void.
No, they’re not. Muninns and Eagles are being used for the same roles, but they don’t give nearly the return on investment that Feroxes do, especially given the current state of T2 pricing. Additionally, they don’t scale up for numbers nearly as well. Believe me, I’d love it if they did. I’d like to be able to tell our FCs ‘yes, we’re giving you a HAC doctrine to replace Feroxes’. But I can’t. Because the options just don’t compare to what the battlecruiser offers.
Lovely half-assed fix on a year old problem that breaks something else. 10/10 for effort.
Leave our HICs alone.
You know what? I think you’re right. ECM isn’t broken at all. It merely breaks target lock while it indirectly deletes one or more opponents from the battlefield. Lots of things do that. Winning a battle, for example. Yes… defeating them turns off all their targeted modules too, you’re quite right.
And as you say; not being where the enemy is also does that. Marvelous deduction good sir!
By your very own words; ECM on its own takes the job of watching d-scan and using intel, while it gives you warp core stabilizers without their hefty penalty, and it delivers the same result as blowing your enemy up with entropic disintegrators (minus the loot and killmail ofc).
You sir, are a troll.
Judging by this, that’s an empty threat.
How about you only make material changes such as ECM, HICs and Combat Ceptors once you have figured out some form of counterbalance that will not render affected weapons/ships useless for some very key applications? It’s not like these are game breaking issues that appeared overnight. You are supposed to be good stewards of our game but you are behaving like some hyperactive pre-school retard that was put in charge of the school yard sandbox. You are better than this. Btw. I am not a wormholer, I do not fly combat Ceptors but I do use ECM, e.g. in risky BLOPS drops on carriers.
To me, this looks like a reason to reprocess the Griffins I kept around for a change of pace. Let’s make a frigate that really can’t be tanked well and make it so that it’s primary defense no longer IS a defense. Brilliant.
You, sir, are putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say ECM wasn’t broken. I asked you why it shouldn’t break target locks in addition to locking down all of those non-ECM high-slot modules. Your response was ‘but teh tackles!’.
Now you’re lumping in everything you can in there, including objecting to ECM locking down… let’s see…
Even though you originally proposed:
No. I’m not trolling. I’m asking you quite simply: why should ECM—the only tool a hauler has for breaking tackle and running like hell—no longer do this?
It is painfully obvious that these changes have been made to make nullsec ratting safer, especially from small gang hunters:
If the goal is not to make nullsec ratting safer, then I think the underlying problems can be approached in other ways; for example:
Anyway I’m interested to see how this plays out as it will give an interesting insight into the CSM/CCP/Nullbloc dynamics.
I am totally unconvinced by the ECM proposal. This is the best ECM proposal made in the history of EVE?
“As an ECM user the system doesn’t feel great either” I don’t care about the degree of positive “feel” my enemy has.
“[…] we feel it’s important to preserve and even improve the role ECM plays as one of few disruption tactics for logistics and other forms of support.” Who cares? What does that have to do with the proposal? Are Tracking/Guidance Disruptors going to affect Logi stuff now?
“we hope to be able to increase jam strength to make ECM more consistent across the board.” What?
I don’t get how the ECM mechanic change and strength buff mesh. I don’t get how those two themselves mesh with solo or fleet. Solo: literally useless vs. Fleet: buffed ECM strength. As I’m about to get into, I’m not saying good or bad, I’m saying I don’t get it and that is quite the contrast.
Let’s get real. Amarr Succession Trials. The CCP devs – the precise ones you think would know this, and I only have one word for this – were: SURPRISED ECM existed. Now, look, I only know the cheapest ships in a tiny part of EVE and CCP may patch up parts of the proposal with Role Bonuses and whatnot for seven hulls by October and maybe the end product won’t be worse than what we currently live with. But, I am unconvinced, and I’m gonna need a lot more words from CCP that proves at least someone is.