ECM Balance Pass - November

(Archer en Tilavine) #201


So whoever has greater numbers can ECM spam the other team to the point of enabling them to do nothing?

What’s wrong with the fixed debuff, which is already pretty damn significant?

This would render drone-based ships and combat doctrines completely and totally useless. It’s already hard enough in nullsec when you’ve got bombs and smartbombs blowing up everywhere. Adding such a feature would cripple drones even more. Most players feel drones need enhancement, not nerfing (directly or indirectly)

This is the kind of critical thinking to enhance drone gameplay, not make it worse than it already is.


All EWAR as currently implemented is an incredulously massive tide turner. While Damps and ECM aren’t as valuable unless you are part of and/or facing a large enemy force, it takes only a single weapon disruptor or target painter to completely turn the tide of battle, providing greater contributions than even logi with regards to support.

Serious question: what is your PVP background? While not perfect, I have a hard time envisioning anyone looking to make such radical changes if they were currently fielding EWAR properly, especially after ECM has been reworked after years of being in an uncomfortable position. Some would go as far as to say EWAR is overpowered as it is (I make no comment on this), and more likely to require diminishing returns like logi rather than escalating effects (as if the enemy ships were adjusting to the affects and compensating). So my question is: What problem is being solved? On what objective basis is the gameplay being improved (before and after)?

(Cypr3ss Deteis) #202

Serious question, what’s your PvP background?

Because this sentence:

makes it seem like you do not know that of which you speak. ECM, after years of being in an acceptable position has been reworked making it effectively useless in anything but large scale engagements, especially when you can bring damps and have just as devastating effect as ECM used to have.

Also this:

ECM is no longer valuable, damps are still as strong as ever, in small gang/solo or anywhere else. Further, not sure who you’ve been talking to but anyone who thinks that any form of ewar on its own stands even close to:

simply does not have a clue.

It would be nice if CCP were to finish the job, or revert the ECM changes, but leaving an entire line of ships in the worse than useless category is just ■■■■■■■■.


1 Like
(Salt Foambreaker) #203

They can never revert what they did because of the totally fail amateur hour move of creating a 1v1 PvP instance.

Anything that gives advantage in 1v1 now has to be nerfed.

(Spugg Galdon) #204

I find it interesting that you completely ignored part of my post which talked about countermeasures against EWAR.

If the countermeasures are effective the system can work. Consider a sensor booster with an ECCM script “boosting” sensor strength back up to max a portion each cycle like a cap booster works. If it was fuelled in some way it would still create opportunities of vulnerability. Passive modules that either just resist the effect (think cap batteries vs neuts) or give a slow recharge of sensors (or both) it would create a more interesting EWAR environment which would work in solo, small gang and large scale.

Currently, RSD’s can be devastating and they have an instant effect. You can use them like old ECM worked in the past. TD’s GD’s are exceptionally powerful and also work instantly. Full effect as soon as they are activated and utterly devastating to weapon performance.

I just believe that an EWAR system that worked similar across the board but effected different attributes would be more effective and easier to use than the current system.

I rarely see anyone using EWAR effectively other than some ecm drones and the odd TD but I never see anyone flying with dedicated EWAR platforms

(elitatwo) #205

ECM drones now have an almost dangerous 5 second jam cycle - oh my. FC what do??

They basically became ecm-burst jammers with the cycle time of a cloak recalibration.

(Archer en Tilavine) #206

That is odd my join date is many years after I’ve been playing on this account

Anyway! You know, @Spugg_Galdon, I agree with the vast majority of what you are saying. The difference between you and me is not really a matter of disagreement, but perhaps how we are using ECM. We have found ECM incredulously effective (and perhaps even overpowered) in both theory and practice, and my crew has used it to great effect - not better or worse than remote sensor damps, but different, and we employ them both accordingly. I’m thinking where we differ is in our expectations or use patterns of ECM, and that is where we have different experiences and feelings toward ECM.

I’ve conducted combinatorial probabilistic analysis of ECM and found that, even after accounting for stacking penalties, and even moreso now that the strength of all ECM has increased by 20% (I believe it was; and range as well), that even a T1M0 Griffin can reliably cripple a heavily ECCMed ship with scattered ECMs over a long period of time (such as a T3C). We’ve put this into practice, and it works. And it works that much better when you’re using T2+ fits and Blackbirds, Kitsunes, Scorpions, etc. That CCP gave most ECM ships increased PG/CPU makes them that much more effective than they were before.

So you are not wrong at all. I do understand where you’re coming from. I just want you to understand where I’m coming from, too: we’ve found ECM, both before and after the changes, to be miraculous. It is not a substitute for damps, and is neither better or worse, just different. Sometimes we use one, sometimes the other, sometimes both - we have established use cases for ECM and when it’s appropriate to use it meets or exceeds our expectations consistently.

I respect your feedback and apologize if I came off as argumentative. I respect you and your viewpoints and feel we have more in common than not.

(Spugg Galdon) #207

Hey! A civilised conversation in a forum? Never!

What I’m trying to get at is that people complain about EWAR because of how devastating it is. And the devastation is instant. All other Mechanics in the game are an effect over time, except for tackle which makes sense (although you could argue that webs could have an effect build up too which would stop the “web align” exploit)

My point is that if EWAR had an effect over time then it could still be very powerful without being something that people struggle to counter. A draining effect would give people time to react and try to do something. This way ECM could still eventually completely lock you out of targeting but it wouldn’t be instant (my god, I’m old enough to remember the bad old days of Falcon Perma Jam from insane ranges. It wasn’t fun.) Also, it would mean that your ECM is having some effect instead of just rolling the dice each cycle and hoping you get lucky.

This would also make EWAR platforms REAL force multipliers and really really worth considering in all fleets as you can spread your EWAR out and wait for it to build the effect.

Also, electronic support platforms could become a thing and be the fleet version of countering EWAR. Think the opposite of an EWAR platform performing electronic “reps” like logistics to counter the effects.

So, why not entertain me and suggest how you think a sensor booster could work in relation to a “Drain Effect” ECM module and how sensor strength total and number of lockable targets can then have a relationship in order to calculate current number of lockable targets when getting drained an amount per ECM cycle. How some modules could cycle quickly but low strength and visa versa.