open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Hypothetical Question: If CCP Proposed Removing ECM....
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Tyber Zaan
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:31:00 - [31]
 

Yet another person has gone to the "I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG" argument.

ECM is FINE. Learn 2 ECCM.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:32:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Change it.

Current problem: ECM can completely lock down a player ship. Being completely locked down and helpless is not fun.




Dunno, i think i would rather be ecm jammed with the knowledge i will eventually get a lock (assuming i amn't flying a t1 frig and being jammed by a high skilled rook pilot, in which case i should be screwed anyway) than damped with no possibility of locking at all.

All of the things you suggest would result in no one flying ecm boats, thus remoning an entire level of tactical complexity in the game.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:43:00 - [33]
 

Argument against removing ECM?

ECM has a unique position in EVE as being a force multiplier. It adds a strategic element to fleet compositions. On the one hand, having ALL ECM boats is highly ineffective, as it becomes difficult to spread the ECM around equally and ECM boats generally have poor DPS, inability to tackle, are chance based (meaning that they can fail, as opposed to other forms of ECM) and don't tank well. On the otherhand, having no ECM at all puts you at a serious disadvantage. So thus the challenge to an FC is finding the correct amount of balance between number of DPS ships, and number of ECM ships.


IMO, if anything at all should be changed, it should be a change to ECCM to grant it a secondary beneficial effect. Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.

E.G. - sensor boosters counter remote sensor damps, but they ALSO increase your targeting speed/range. Tracking computers/enhancers counter tracking disruptors, but ALSO increase your turret range/tracking.

ECCM on the other hand, is only useful in two situations: situations where there is enemy ECM on the field, and when you are trying to make an unprobable ship.

Corporal Punishment08
NosWaffle
Nostradamus Effect
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:43:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08


lol I've made two completely legitimate points, and you didn't address them. And you wonder why noone takes you and your campaign seriously.


When you grow up and post a legitimate point without a personal attack at the bottom of your post, until then, you're a worthless 4chan reject like the rest of the community flaming me.


lol so eveyrone's wrong and you're right. And we're the 4chan rejects? You seem to know an awful lot about this 4chan thing.

Why is this thread not locked yet?

Aunty Nora
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:44:00 - [35]
 

All this over a vexor lol

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:44:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: De'Veldrin

No, but you can spam worthless tripe across the forums hoping for once in my life that someone will find me amusing and worthwhile, which is almost as good




And yet I'm not the one spamming the forums with a couple of dozen threads on the same topic despite the fact that every single one of them has garnered pretty much exactly the same response. Your threads are the forum equivalent of a four year old with his fingers in his ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you." You won't admit that any opinion on the matter but your own is correct, even through reasoned argument and discussion, so we as a community have decided that you, as individual, are no more worthy of serious attention than the aforementioned four year old.

Sorry, but you did this to yourself.

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:47:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Taedrin
Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.



Maybe they could make it so you become unprobable with enough eccm on your ship. That would be pretty cool wouldn't it.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:55:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Doddy
Originally by: Taedrin
Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.



Maybe they could make it so you become unprobable with enough eccm on your ship. That would be pretty cool wouldn't it.


Currently, this is only possible on certain ships which have the correct sensor strength:sig radius ratios. I think it's technically possible to make unprobable battlecruisers, but they aren't very effective fits. This is why the vast majority of unprobable ships are T3s.

Furthermore, a ship being unprobable gives no COMBAT performance enhancement. It does, however, help you to avoid combat. I suppose it all comes down to personal opinion. My opinion is that this isn't enough of a benefit for people to justify sacrificing a precious mid slot for an ECCM when it can be used for other mods which provide more benefits in more situations.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:57:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Doddy
Originally by: Taedrin
Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.
Maybe they could make it so you become unprobable with enough eccm on your ship. That would be pretty cool wouldn't it.
Yes, if they made it so that it was a universally available benefit, then maybe. Right now, it's a special-purpose kind of use that only works with some ships, and which does, in fact, not give you any combat improvements (quite the opposite: the whole point of it is not to be in combat)

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2010.12.07 16:58:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Taedrin

Furthermore, a ship being unprobable gives no COMBAT performance enhancement. It does, however, help you to avoid combat.


Thereby allowing you to engage in combat at your own discretion which, in effect is........a combat bonus.

Combat isn't just about how much dps you can pew pew.

C.


frog0ut
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:02:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: De'Veldrin


And yet I'm not the one spamming the forums with a couple of dozen threads on the same topic despite the fact that every single one of them has garnered pretty much exactly the same response. Your threads are the forum equivalent of a four year old with his fingers in his ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you." You won't admit that any opinion on the matter but your own is correct, even through reasoned argument and discussion, so we as a community have decided that you, as individual, are no more worthy of serious attention than the aforementioned four year old.

Sorry, but you did this to yourself.


You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.

Corporal Punishment08
NosWaffle
Nostradamus Effect
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:09:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: De'Veldrin


And yet I'm not the one spamming the forums with a couple of dozen threads on the same topic despite the fact that every single one of them has garnered pretty much exactly the same response. Your threads are the forum equivalent of a four year old with his fingers in his ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you." You won't admit that any opinion on the matter but your own is correct, even through reasoned argument and discussion, so we as a community have decided that you, as individual, are no more worthy of serious attention than the aforementioned four year old.

Sorry, but you did this to yourself.


You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.


lol just relentlessly stupid. Just when the conversation was going in a good direction, he comes in with this. Absolutely useless

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:12:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.

What a coincidence, this was exactly what I was thinking about you !

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:13:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Doddy
Originally by: Taedrin
Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.



Maybe they could make it so you become unprobable with enough eccm on your ship. That would be pretty cool wouldn't it.


Currently, this is only possible on certain ships which have the correct sensor strength:sig radius ratios. I think it's technically possible to make unprobable battlecruisers, but they aren't very effective fits. This is why the vast majority of unprobable ships are T3s.


This is wrong tbh, its possible on most ships with the right combination of implants/boosters/mods. Also on any ship it makes you harder to probe down so any shp gets a benefit, other than supercaps on which there is no point putting on eccm in the first place.

Your point on using eccm for a mid slot instead of other mods which are more useful just shows how small a problem ecm is. Its also a bit like saying em damage should be removed so you can fit more useful mods than em hardners, wtf?

frog0ut
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:18:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: frog0ut
You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.

What a coincidence, this was exactly what I was thinking about you !


Just get out of my thread already, there have been many constructive replies, and you're just created noise. 4chan.org is that way -->. If you're going to only post in this thread to spite me, then I suggest you read the forums rules and stop flaming me. Any further posts from you are probably not going to be on topic, tasteful, or constructive, so please read the forums rules and get out

Mr LaForge
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:24:00 - [46]
 

Does anyone have the link to his killmail so we can point and laugh?

Corporal Punishment08
NosWaffle
Nostradamus Effect
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:24:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Corporal Punishment08 on 07/12/2010 17:24:35
Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: frog0ut
You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.

What a coincidence, this was exactly what I was thinking about you !


Just get out of my thread already, there have been many constructive replies, and you're just created noise. 4chan.org is that way -->. If you're going to only post in this thread to spite me, then I suggest you read the forums rules and stop flaming me. Any further posts from you are probably not going to be on topic, tasteful, or constructive, so please read the forums rules and get out


Trolling comment removed - Adida

ECM works as intended. You're just trying to nerf Caldari some more.

Originally by: Mr LaForge
Does anyone have the link to his killmail so we can point and laugh?


We don't need a km to point and laugh ;)

Tyber Zaan
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:25:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: frog0ut
You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.

What a coincidence, this was exactly what I was thinking about you !


Just get out of my thread already, there have been many constructive replies, and you're just created noise. 4chan.org is that way -->. If you're going to only post in this thread to spite me, then I suggest you read the forums rules and stop flaming me. Any further posts from you are probably not going to be on topic, tasteful, or constructive, so please read the forums rules and get out


This is eve.


Adapt or die, stop complaining about ECM and going "NO U" to anyone who tries to help you and either:

A. Fit your pvp ships with ECCM
B. Bring some friends.


frog0ut
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:26:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Mr LaForge
Does anyone have the link to his killmail so we can point and laugh?


The haters cannot provide one, because it was fake, removed from eve-kill, and the poster got banned. They are mostly here for the attention that they didn't get during their rough childhoods, than to post anything constructive

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:29:00 - [50]
 

Edited by: Taedrin on 07/12/2010 17:31:03
Originally by: Doddy
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Doddy
Originally by: Taedrin
Currently, ECCM is the *ONLY* anti-ewar module which does not provide you with some sort of combat improvement.



Maybe they could make it so you become unprobable with enough eccm on your ship. That would be pretty cool wouldn't it.


Currently, this is only possible on certain ships which have the correct sensor strength:sig radius ratios. I think it's technically possible to make unprobable battlecruisers, but they aren't very effective fits. This is why the vast majority of unprobable ships are T3s.


This is wrong tbh, its possible on most ships with the right combination of implants/boosters/mods. Also on any ship it makes you harder to probe down so any shp gets a benefit, other than supercaps on which there is no point putting on eccm in the first place.

Your point on using eccm for a mid slot instead of other mods which are more useful just shows how small a problem ecm is. Its also a bit like saying em damage should be removed so you can fit more useful mods than em hardners, wtf?


Which I can completely understand.

That's actually why I originally said:
Quote:
IMO, if anything at all should be changed, it should be a change to ECCM


I just personally believe that ECCM isn't "attractive" enough as a generic combat module, compared to other anti-ewar modules. So I believe that a buff to ECCM would be more balanced - but it isn't necessary to the game. Just some food for thought.

I will also have to agree that the complaints about ECM are blowing things way out of proporation. In the event that you get permalocked by ECM, you are generally already in a few vs. many situation, in which case you were going to die anyways. or you were primaried, and you are going to die anyways also.

oldmanst4r
Minmatar
oldmanst4r's Corporation
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:31:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
What would you argue to keep it in the game? Assuming that they replaced the Caldari Recon ships with an equally effective EWAR, and that ECCM and Sensor Backup Arrays still gave a useful effect, what would you say to defend the ECM mechanic in the game.

Stuff like "I think it is one of the few counters to Spider-Tanking", "I think it is an interesting and challenging mechanic" etc.

I would like to hear your thoughts.



How about I answer that by asking you this, Why in Chribba's name do you want to get rid of ECM?

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:42:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: oldmanst4r
Originally by: frog0ut
What would you argue to keep it in the game? Assuming that they replaced the Caldari Recon ships with an equally effective EWAR, and that ECCM and Sensor Backup Arrays still gave a useful effect, what would you say to defend the ECM mechanic in the game.

Stuff like "I think it is one of the few counters to Spider-Tanking", "I think it is an interesting and challenging mechanic" etc.

I would like to hear your thoughts.



How about I answer that by asking you this, Why in Chribba's name do you want to get rid of ECM?


Do you even read these forums? Through out the history of EVE, there have been MANY arguments against ECM:

1) They can completely disable my ship entirely, with giving me NO chance at reprisal at all (this is why CCP changed ECM from ALWAYS being successful if ECM strength > sensor strength to being chance based).

2) ECM is just plain far too effective compared to other ewar options (this is why CCP introduced the first ECM nerf, because at this time a multispectral ECM was considered a MANDATORY module for ALL PvP ships. After this nerf, remote sensor damps became all the rage, and CCP introduced scripts to nerf remote sensor damps too)

3) ECM allows an enemy to be insanely effective at combat without having to sacrifice any tank at all (This is why CCP introduced the original Scorpion nerf, and introduced signal dispersion ampliers after nerfing the effectiveness of ECM - so that ECM boats would have to choose between tank and ECM effectiveness).

4) ECM allows an enemy to be insanely effective without ever having to be in danger of being engaged, due to their insane range (This is why CCP introduced the falcon nerf - because Falcons were able to permajam from 140+km, and could always warp out and warp back in if anyone tried to approach them)

IIRC, the *ONLY* thing that has been nerfed more than ECM in EVE Online have been nano-ships.

The remaining complaints against ECM are generally:

5) ECM simply removes my ship from combat, making me unable to play the game at all (untrue - you can still bump, scout, warp out and back in, etc...)

6) ECM is too mandatory in fleet compositions (I would argue: so are RR, tacklers and DPS)

VeniVidi Tyrannis
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:46:00 - [53]
 

I'd support any proposal to boost ECM because I love watching you squirm

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:47:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Originally by: De'Veldrin


And yet I'm not the one spamming the forums with a couple of dozen threads on the same topic despite the fact that every single one of them has garnered pretty much exactly the same response. Your threads are the forum equivalent of a four year old with his fingers in his ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you." You won't admit that any opinion on the matter but your own is correct, even through reasoned argument and discussion, so we as a community have decided that you, as individual, are no more worthy of serious attention than the aforementioned four year old.

Sorry, but you did this to yourself.


You've never provided anythign constructive. So please, don't flatter yourself by trying to justify being a douchebag.


You do realize I'm not the one they're all laughing at, right?

That aside, why should I attempt to provide anything constructive when you have, time and time again, proven that you don't want to hear things that are constructive, you want to hear people agreeing with you.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:48:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
I would like to hear your thoughts.

Only if they are in agreement with yours. amirite?

We know you're butt hurt Froggy, but we only care enough to laugh at you and post about it.
Let's hope, you get another forum ban over it.

Black Dranzer
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:48:00 - [56]
 

Oh look, it's this thread again.
Originally by: frog0ut
If CCP Proposed Removing ECM, what would you argue to keep it in the game?
That would depend on:
  1. Why they proposed its removal
  2. What they proposed as its replacement

price checkinho
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:50:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: ilikeboys
What would you argue to keep me in the game? Assuming that they replaced the Caldari Recon ships with an equally effective EWAR, and that ECCM and Sensor Backup Arrays still gave a useful effect, what would you say to defend the ECM mechanic in the game.

Stuff like "I think it is one of the few counters to Spider-Tanking", "I think it is an interesting and challenging mechanic" etc.

I would like to hear your thoughts.



ECM isnt broken and niether is ECCM, so why would CCP remove them from the game? Your question is assanine and trollish, and relates to several closed and moved threads on the matter.

Furhtermore hypothetical questions are so 7th grade its not funny.

What would YOU do if improbable variable x happened? I would obviously do improbable variable y to counter.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.12.07 17:58:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: frog0ut
Just get out of my thread already, there have been many constructive replies, and you're just created noise.

Me. Noise. Riiiiiight....
Because you have so eloquently dismantled all of my arguments so far or something. And you added a lot of non-noise to the discussion.
Projecting much ?

How about you answer to post #11 in this very thread first for a change ?

Black Dranzer
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.07 18:07:00 - [59]
 

Okay, somebody help me out here.

There are two frogouts: frog0ut and fr0gout. fr0gout is a year old character. frog0ut is only a couple of weeks old. Are they like.. the same person? Or is one just a troll alt? They both seem to have rampant issues with ECM but frog0ut may just be somebody trying to make fr0gout look bad.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2010.12.07 18:09:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Black Dranzer
Okay, somebody help me out here.

There are two frogouts: frog0ut and fr0gout. fr0gout is a year old character. frog0ut is only a couple of weeks old. Are they like.. the same person? Or is one just a troll alt? They both seem to have rampant issues with ECM but frog0ut may just be somebody trying to make fr0gout look bad.

fr0gout got a forum ban for spamming ECM threads. The other is his spamming more ECM threads alt.


Pages: 1 [2] 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only