Get out of here with all that reason and making sense stuff. Don’t you understand this is pitchfork season!!!
It must be.
Fastest travel cepter is the Ares yet people are whining about the Crow.
ECM is only fun when your side is using it.
The HIC exploit hurts wormhole inhabitants yet I only see them used in null.
To the first part, I disagree. His point was, in essence, that there’s counters for everything, but you can’t fit them all, so let’s give special exemptions to this one thing and one thing only. To the second, the fact that you can’t fit counters to everything all the time is exactly the point. Tradeoffs, strategy, intel, and playing the odds are all integral parts of the game and game balance.
A bit of moving the goalposts and missing the point here. If your point is about in-combat refitting, there’s other threads and topics about that, and really has nothing to do with ECM or ECCM. Once the fight starts, ALL mechanics in play either work or don’t, and pointing out things you could have done differently is part of the process of learning, adapting, and enjoying the vast complexity of the game.
Also I can not and will not stop emphasizing this - a few years ago CCP rolled sensor boosters and ECCM into a single module specifically to buff them all-around. You don’t even need to script for it, just having that sensor booster unscripted gives you stronger sensor strength. That means that CCP already buffed the heck out of this counter by making it much more likely people will equip it because it now does other things like increasing lock speed and range. That’s huge. And I was supportive of that because it was generally a good idea specifically because it gave use to the module even when you weren’t being ECM’d.
I can and do expect ships that are not equipped to deal with the encounter they end up in to fare poorly in engagements. I’m mocking him (and by proxy, you) by missing the point of the game. I don’t expect every ship to have an ECCM because not all of them need it. But I do expect ships to utilize their ship slots (be it low or mid) to counter things they might encounter in a hostile fashion. That’s the entire point of the game. And that’s why you two are being mocked. Because the implication behind the question and it’s framing was staggeringly ignorant, not just the core literal thing he said.
Not every ship fits a tracking enhancer, but some do when they decide they need it. They don’t get special pleading or privileges if they encounter disruptors they weren’t prepared for.
Not every ship fits an explosive armor enhancer, but some do when they decide they need it. They don’t get special pleading or…you get the point.
These modules exist to be used. Their fitting requirements are low, in the case of ECCM the module has a multitude of other benefits as well beyond sensor hardening.
7 Likes
Except you have missed the key point.
If you damp me I move closer.
If you TD me I either move closer or minimise angular.
If you Jam me I ???
Out of all the standard Ewars only ECM doesn’t have any kind of physical action that counters it.
Therefore ECM already is a special exemption, so a special exemption to counter it isn’t inconsistent the way you think.
It’s not reason.
Nerf all the Interceptors, or none. Remove Interdiction Immunity Completely, or find a solution that applies equally across the board (Supression under specific circumstances, cough).
The HIC ‘explot’ that CCP has had a year to fix, being rushed through, breaking a promise that a solution will be in place for wormholers. How about find a proper solution?
ECM is only game breaking when you lose to it right? When you are properly prepared with enough Sensor Strength not to b jammed, when the enemy with ECM brings the wrong flavor of Jammer, and you win, it’s not game breaking at all. Your logical fallacy comes across as whining.
4 Likes
It’s not. Look at what he was replying to:
The person being jammed… no, they’re already being jammed, they can’t go back and fit a sebo and ECCM. That’s not moving the goalposts. That’s addressing the context of the comment that you chose to take out of context and mock. If you get sensor damped, there’s a counterplay once you’re damped: move closer. If you get tracking disrupted, there’s counterplay once you’re disrupted: web the other guy down or paint him. Everything but ECM already has counters once it is in effect, over and above the specific counter-modules you could have fit ahead of time.
If you are jammed, you can simply warp/MWD away.
3 Likes
Have you ever tried to get away from a keres damping you or even close the distance??
Have you ever tried to brake away or close the distance from a ship using WD/MGD???
The issue with a counter-play module (ECCM) in this case is that it’s only effective when ECM is used against you, and in every other case it’s useless, taking up valuable space where the same slot could be used for much more combat effective modules. Where on the flip side the ECM module is useful against all targets and has a valid argument to be fit at all times. In cases like these it makes more sense to simply fit your own ECM in a theoretical unused mid slot, because of the usability vs the counter play module.
Please make the mass mod before you change hic. It’s not a wise idea to do things that will cost you subs right now. Maybe you guys are just trying to kill wh gameplay… why bother letting us build and mine moon goo in the first place.
2 Likes
The HIC “exploit” that wormholers use is the fact that bubbles lower the ship mass and we use that to almost always collapse holes with us on the correct side. The 500MN HIC is a different thing altogether that really isn’t a big problem. Also ECM ships always die first because of low EHP/target priority so their not really a problem as is and people are mad about nullification removal for combat reasons not traveling speed reasons. That’s why people don’t like these changes. Cause the “fixes” are minor at best and completely ruin ECMs and wormholers ability to collapse holes safely.
2 Likes
Eh, that’s not quite true, either. Our default Guardian fit, for example, has a Sebo in the mids. The Scan Res script means locking faster. Locking faster means reps land sooner (very important for armor ships). The same ‘lock faster, apply effect faster’ holds true for outgoing EWAR, DPS, etc. So it’s not only effective vs ECM. In fact, even as a counter, the Sebo is effective against both ECM (ECCM script) and Sensor Damps (Scan Res and Targeting Range scripts).
2 Likes
I haven’t missed that point, I just don’t think that particular sticking point is relevant to this part of the discussion.
For the record, I know and understand that. But there’s already a special exemption baked into it…it sometimes just doesn’t work. In fact, if you’re prepared, it very often just doesn’t work. Other EWARs do not suffer from, “welp, just decided it’s not going to work”.
It also has a second special exemption baked into it. If I bring a tracking disruptor, it works against Amarr lasers and Caldari rails equally. Jams are racial before they even factor in the chance-based success.
And then the ships are super paper-thin because the ships bonused towards ECM are shield-based and the ECM has to fight for space with shield mods, prop, and other things up to and including their own ECCM. So you have to sacrifice slots to maybe not even bring a full rainbow just to shore up the odds you’ll survive.
So again I understand the frustration of what ECM does, but it’s already got a lot stacked against it. Anyone implying that it’s ludicrous to expect people to equip the readily-available and quite-useful SEBOs needs to be shown the door.
4 Likes
Wrong, while it is true that racial jammers can effect other racial ships. Unless you fit them on Caldari ships their effect is moot at best.
You’d be surprised. A ten man fleet all fitting an unbonused ECM is pretty effective at jamming. Low strength/change to jam doesn’t mean much when there’s a dozen modules trying the odds. I think is was Brave that tacked on an ECM to their Moa doctrine fleets at one point and dominated Logis for a while.
And anyone claiming that’s what was said when someone makes a statement regarding a specific claim about fitting a sebo being an available counter when you are being jammed is not arguing in good faith.
Third person much? I was replying to “you”, not “he”. Unless you’re doing that alt thing and forgot who you were posting as.
And second, yes it was moving the goalposts, because the implication behind “your” statement was things changing once battle starts. To go back to tracking enhancers, either I have them or I don’t when the battle begins, just the same as ECCM. ECCM is not special in that regard. Saying anything about “once the fight starts” implies a special case for ECM which is flatly untrue. So drop that statement from “your” argument and let’s proceed with the discussion from there.
Partly untrue, but this would be a disagreement of perception of game mechanics. ECM has a counter once in effect, it fails. Often. And the larger your ship, generally speaking, the more often it fails against you. And if it fails, targets are in no way inconvenienced by it.
If you are jammed, are you prevented from moving into the jams falloff to reduce the chances of a second cycle? Do your drones stop attacking the target? Does a jam prevent you from warping away?
I don’t disagree that there is no flow chart answer to react to jams, but don’t you think it fundamentally bad design to state “We would love to improve both sides of this coin by giving ECM more consistent behavior while also toning down the helplessness that comes with being jammed.” and then doing a 180 and presenting this ‘fix’?
If the game design is to turn existing ECM into a counter for Logi: “At the same time, 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.” I can get behind that. I can see the perspective this view is coming from, where in medium to large fleets you can ‘occupy’ a Logi via jamming it.
But temper that application with a solutiuon for every other circumstance where this change guts existing play: FW Rooks, Cloaky Falcons, solo Navy Griffins, blops Widows defanging carriers…
This entire dev blog is filled with doublespeak towards what they would like to do, vs what they are doing, and it is disturbing they are willing to damage so much of the game in the name of ‘balance’. If you want to change ECM, use this opportunity to develop another type of EWAR that caldari can use (to make them equal to the other factions with two ewar types), and then as it is implemented, change Jams to be an anti-logi platform, with the refocusing mechanic listed.
The entire October release, as listed, seems like a band-aid fix to something they cant be bothered to take the time to do correctly, to appease a vocal population.
6 Likes
But we’ve already established and you’ve agreed that ECM “ALREADY IS” a special case.
So of course any counter to ECM has to be a special case as well.
I have seen some people here mention “permajams” and I have to say… I know no such thing.
The ECM modules have a cycle duration and a chance for success. The way I understand it, every cycle, that chance is rolled and the jam succeeds or not. That chance is based on many things: ECM strength, sensor strength, distance…
warp or MWD/AB away…
3 Likes