open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked How can we keep ecm useful but make it slightly less 'i win'?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 15:53:00 - [61]
 

Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 15:55:49
Originally by: BlackPrince
One blackbird fitted with projected ECCM can nullify 2 Scorpions. On top of that, Projected ECCM is bugged in several ways which make it far superior (end user wise) than ECM. When my Corp goes up against other's using ECM we just have every battleship in the fleet fit one projected eccm and either 1) passive eccm unit or 1) active eccm unit. While not foolproof, it cuts the jam rates down to something manageable (~20%). A skill commander can then successfully use this to counter anyone ship being jammed if he so chooses or, using the ProjECCM ("Dirtybird") boat can completely nullify the enemy's EWAR capability. Btw, this took myself and 5 corpmates 15 minutes to figure out and an additional hour of testing to perfect.

EWAR is fine, the problem is uncreative people who really haven't dedicated even a minimal amount of thought and time on how to effectively counter it. It's one more dimension on the battlefield that commanders need to consider beyond what they currently do. It adds a depth to this game (tactically) lacking in most others. I think the biggest complain most folks have is that in order to counter it they have to use up one of their precious slots. Considering most on these boards are the min/maxxing ubar flavor of the week I want a pwnmobile type, this is of course unacceptable. To anyone familiar with combined arms operations and the employment of actual tactics and countermeasures, it's fairly straightforward.




Very true, and it seems that severl people are currently using this tatic, I will make sure it gets a mention.

However, you are still facing the problem of one battleship against many smaller ships being jammed to hell for the duration of the battle. Before you start to cry 'ECCM module!' know that I now have a tendancy to fit 60% ECCM modules on my bs, and I still run into the problem of being jammed by 2-3 t1 cruisers. This is a pity as I enjoy the solo aspect of the game as much as the gangs.

Edit: I do however object to the feeling you seem to have that anybody complaining about ECM is merely looking for a pwnmobile. I'm just trying to level the playing field in all situations, and it's currently tilted so far that i'm having trouble staying on it, let alone scoring.

sgb

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 15:58:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Rockadeus
Originally by: Gronsak

what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%


Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one.


no ****. but if u play with the smae numbers a million times, ur more likely to win at lest once than if u play one time!

Astrum Ludus
Amarr
StateCorp
Huzzah Federation
Posted - 2006.05.04 15:59:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: Astrum Ludus on 04/05/2006 16:04:42
I do think it's over powered but not very badly.

I'd say remove the random chance to jam all together, I don't really understand why this is possible anyway. Then all the 'I jammed a dread with a single unnamed T1 Multispec' problems would go away.

After that would it not be logical to make the chance to jam the same % as the Jamming points vs Sensor points, but perhaps cap it 90% change to jam or give diminishing returns over equal values so you're never 100% sure to jam.

It may be evident from what I've written by my experience of jamming is only of being jammed and the alarming ease with which it seems to be put on and kept on.

[Edit]
Just read what sgb said above about not being 100% jammed at all times by 2-3 cruisers. Would this problem be resolved if only the modules on a single ship stacked their jamming strength?

tbh, I think if you're facing overwhelming force be it ECM, Damage, whatever, you should lose the fight. I don't know how you balance a system where 1 v 1 and 1 v 3 are both meant to be fair fights.

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:04:00 - [64]
 

Ok - here's a new one.

Keep the random chance, however have any jammer that has less than say 15% of the strength of your ship automatically fail to work. This would make ships with over 40 sensor strength invulnerable to multispecs on random ships, but still allow ecm to work on those ships that have bonuses.

sgb

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:06:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: smallgreenblur
Ok - here's a new one.

Keep the random chance, however have any jammer that has less than say 15% of the strength of your ship automatically fail to work. This would make ships with over 40 sensor strength invulnerable to multispecs on random ships, but still allow ecm to work on those ships that have bonuses.

sgb


that basicly helps capital ships and no other ship in game!

Nafri
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:06:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: Rockadeus
Originally by: Gronsak

what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%


Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one.


no ****. but if u play with the smae numbers a million times, ur more likely to win at lest once than if u play one time!


yeah, but your chances wont get any better from time to time, you just have more roles Razz

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:07:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: Rockadeus
Originally by: Gronsak

what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%


Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one.


no ****. but if u play with the smae numbers a million times, ur more likely to win at lest once than if u play one time!


Yes, but your specified calculations are wrong. It's just a stats thing, don't worry about it, it's why people who study it are scary.

sgb

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:08:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: Rockadeus
Originally by: Gronsak

what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%


Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one.


no ****. but if u play with the smae numbers a million times, ur more likely to win at lest once than if u play one time!


yeah, but your chances wont get any better from time to time, you just have more roles Razz


i know all this, you chances dont get better THAT TIME , but the chance to jam at lest once in two cycles is higher than to jam once in one cycle

and you only need to jam a ship once to gatantee a win, twice and they got not chance.

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:09:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 16:09:40
Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: smallgreenblur
Ok - here's a new one.

Keep the random chance, however have any jammer that has less than say 15% of the strength of your ship automatically fail to work. This would make ships with over 40 sensor strength invulnerable to multispecs on random ships, but still allow ecm to work on those ships that have bonuses.

sgb


that basicly helps capital ships and no other ship in game!


one eccm on my domi puts it to 34 sensor strength. 2 should get it to about 50. So this means if you sacrifice 2 of your mids to get strength up there you become considerably harder to jam. Obviously the numbers need tweaking, but the idea is valid.

Edit - too many Gronsak posts... sgb overloading... *boom*

sgb

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:10:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: smallgreenblur


Yes, but your specified calculations are wrong. It's just a stats thing, don't worry about it, it's why people who study it are scary.

sgb


ill blody study stats, infact i have a stats exams on the 30th of this month

you guys are not wrong you are just talking about a completly differnt thing!!,

Nafri
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:11:00 - [71]
 

I think the best idea was giving ECMs a stacking penalty


So having dedicated EW pilots in your fleet is an huge advantage, and zerging with tons of tech1 frigs isnt that effective anymore Razz

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:12:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 16:13:12
Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 16:12:55
Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: smallgreenblur


Yes, but your specified calculations are wrong. It's just a stats thing, don't worry about it, it's why people who study it are scary.

sgb


ill blody study stats, infact i have a stats exams on the 30th of this month

you guys are not wrong you are just talking about a completly differnt thing!!,



Yes, we know. So stop arguing.

reference this post if there is any confusion:
Originally by: smallgreenblur

Combinations of one coin thrown twice:

HH
HT
TH
TT

So the chance of you having 2 heads in a row (unless you have a very obliging girlfriend) are 1/4. The chance of getting one head is significantly more, 3/4.

However, should you be throwing two coins at the same time (2 jammers) the combinations are as follows:

H1H2
H2H1
H1T2
T1H2
T1T2
T2T1

Where H1 = coin 1 is a head.

Ergo we have the follwing change: Chance of getting one head 4/6 or 66.6%, Chance of getting 2 heads 2/6 or 33%.



sgb

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:13:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Nafri
I think the best idea was giving ECMs a stacking penalty


So having dedicated EW pilots in your fleet is an huge advantage, and zerging with tons of tech1 frigs isnt that effective anymore Razz


no, then ill just place one ecm mod on each ship. just as effective if not more than jamming one guy constantly

introduce ECCM skills, +5% resistance to being damped. +5% resistance to being tracking desrupted. and +20% to ship sensors!


Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:16:00 - [74]
 

Just tweak ECCM modules if folks really feel that sensor strengths are an issue. If you want to counter ECM fine, but you need to give up someting else to do it.

It would be nice if low slot ECCM modules added a fixed amount (equiv to what a current BS backup would grant) so that ECCM on frigates and cruisers are actualy viable. Unnerf projected ECCM (why a stacking penalty and range limit were added in the last patch just makes me scrach my head, cause they were SOOO overpowered).

What's really overpowered in EVE is damage and speed. There needs to be more Ewar and less ganking in EVE, not the other way around.

Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:18:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Gronsak

introduce ECCM skills, +5% resistance to being damped. +5% resistance to being tracking desrupted. and +20% to ship sensors!



Sure, but make the skill MODULE based. If you have this skill and have ECCM module fitted you get benefit, if not you don't get any benefit. Otherwise this becomes a "must have skill" for everyone.

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:20:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Clavius XIV
Just tweak ECCM modules if folks really feel that sensor strengths are an issue. If you want to counter ECM fine, but you need to give up someting else to do it.


why?

when lasers where overpowered did people use the argument fine if lasers are such a problem then you need to fit another EM hardener [no becase its a ******ed argument!]

when misisles where overpowered did they say fine but to fix it you need to fit a missile sig factoring module!

no becase overpowerd stuff needs to get a nerf not FORCE people to defend against overpowered mods by taking up slots, or then the thing is still overpowered!

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:21:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Clavius XIV
Originally by: Gronsak

introduce ECCM skills, +5% resistance to being damped. +5% resistance to being tracking desrupted. and +20% to ship sensors!



Sure, but make the skill MODULE based. If you have this skill and have ECCM module fitted you get benefit, if not you don't get any benefit. Otherwise this becomes a "must have skill" for everyone.



why why why WHY WHY WHY

like i said, when lasers where overpoered they didnt introduce a mod that you can fit that only makes lasers do half as much damage to you, no they nerfed the lasers

ecm is overpowed, eccm isnt underpwoered

Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:22:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
I quite liked j0sephines idea of making mid-slot ECM modules more of a defensive module - only breaking the lock of a ship targeting you.

Could always then revert the Scorpion back to being more of a Tier-1 Railgun boat.

And/or make a high slot 'offensive ECM' module that takes up significant grid/cpu. That would certainly knock these Nosferatu+ ECM Dominixs down a peg Wink






Then I want my skillpoints back Razz
If there were 'defensive' ECM modules (current mid slot) and 'offensive' Jamming modules (high slot, beefier fitting requirements - i.e. replaces weapons/Nos e.t.c) then where would the problem be?

I hate using real life analogies, but it would be like the ‘offensive’ jamming pod on a dedicated aircraft (EA-6B), and ‘defensive’ ECM pod as on a strike aircraft (F15 e.t.c).

Just a thought.

Nafri
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:22:00 - [79]
 

calm down Shocked

Gronsak
Amarr
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:24:00 - [80]
 

Edited by: Gronsak on 04/05/2006 16:26:08
Originally by: Nafri
calm down Shocked


how can u tell if im not calm by reading black and white text i type

its an impression i want to give, i can assure you im very calm atm


and for everyones info, the devs see this as a prob look at the sticky at the top of ships and mods threds. the question is how to nerf it not if its gona get the nerf bat or not

iSpyWithMyLittleEye
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:25:00 - [81]
 


"what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%"



"Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one."


Sorry about the quotes not working, but nevermind :)

"Parrallel events stack etc....."
Hmmmm.....lets compare your lottery example with a dice. You have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 2 the first time you throw the dice. The next time you throw the dice you still have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 2.

The more times you throw the dice the more chances you have of getting it right. Yes, each time you throw the dice you only have a 1 in 6 chance, but you are throwing the dice again and again, and you only care about rolling the number 2 once, and once only.

To turn the example on its head, lets say there are 2 people. One has a chance to roll the dice 100 times, the other only once.

Who is more likely to roll a 2 at some point during the test? I'd be willing to place a bet that the person who can only roll once will not roll a 2. But you would be a brave person to bet that the person who has 100 chances will not get a 2 on one of them.

If you only play the lottery once, you only have one chance to win. If play lots of times, you will have lots of chances to win, so yes, your odds winning once from all of the times you have played will increase. However, the odds of winning a particular lottery always stay the same.

Hence 75% chance to jam someone with 2 attempts, with each attempt being at 50%.


Nafri
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:26:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
I quite liked j0sephines idea of making mid-slot ECM modules more of a defensive module - only breaking the lock of a ship targeting you.

Could always then revert the Scorpion back to being more of a Tier-1 Railgun boat.

And/or make a high slot 'offensive ECM' module that takes up significant grid/cpu. That would certainly knock these Nosferatu+ ECM Dominixs down a peg Wink






Then I want my skillpoints back Razz
If there were 'defensive' ECM modules (current mid slot) and 'offensive' Jamming modules (high slot, beefier fitting requirements - i.e. replaces weapons/Nos e.t.c) then where would the problem be?

I hate using real life analogies, but it would be like the ‘offensive’ jamming pod on a dedicated aircraft (EA-6B), and ‘defensive’ ECM pod as on a strike aircraft (F15 e.t.c).

Just a thought.



For once that EW ships have lots of midslots, and hardly any highslots.

Then there would be the problem that defensive EW wouldnt change the problem of the solopwnmachines like the Dominix

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:28:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Clavius XIV
Originally by: Gronsak

introduce ECCM skills, +5% resistance to being damped. +5% resistance to being tracking desrupted. and +20% to ship sensors!



Sure, but make the skill MODULE based. If you have this skill and have ECCM module fitted you get benefit, if not you don't get any benefit. Otherwise this becomes a "must have skill" for everyone.


I like this idea, stickied at the top.

As for high slot ecm, good idea apart from the above point, that ships with med slots are the ecm ones Razz

sgb

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:31:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: iSpyWithMyLittleEye

"what is the difference in useing 2 jammers at exactly the same time or the one for two cycles, its the same chance. 2 jammers if doing 50% each activeated at the same time gives a 75% chance of jamming. a single jammer put on once has 50% chance of jamming and then 50% again, so to jam at lest once in two goes again its 75%"



"Parallel events stack, consecutive do not. Your odds will never change in a consecutive event. Using your math, if I play the lotto with the same set of numbers 1000 times, my odds increase. They do not. My odds stay the same for each one, since the outcome is selected independantly on each one."


Sorry about the quotes not working, but nevermind :)

"Parrallel events stack etc....."
Hmmmm.....lets compare your lottery example with a dice. You have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 2 the first time you throw the dice. The next time you throw the dice you still have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 2.

The more times you throw the dice the more chances you have of getting it right. Yes, each time you throw the dice you only have a 1 in 6 chance, but you are throwing the dice again and again, and you only care about rolling the number 2 once, and once only.

To turn the example on its head, lets say there are 2 people. One has a chance to roll the dice 100 times, the other only once.

Who is more likely to roll a 2 at some point during the test? I'd be willing to place a bet that the person who can only roll once will not roll a 2. But you would be a brave person to bet that the person who has 100 chances will not get a 2 on one of them.

If you only play the lottery once, you only have one chance to win. If play lots of times, you will have lots of chances to win, so yes, your odds winning once from all of the times you have played will increase. However, the odds of winning a particular lottery always stay the same.

Hence 75% chance to jam someone with 2 attempts, with each attempt being at 50%.




Yes, we know. Please stop laboring this point, reference my above post if there is still any confusion.

The more chances you have, the more chance you have to jam. But there is a difference between having two jamming cycles in a row and having them both at the same time.

That's both sides of this particular derailment adressed, now please carry on with the original topic.

sgb

BlackPrince
Trinity Nova
Trinity Nova Alliance
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:42:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: smallgreenblur
Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 15:55:49
Originally by: BlackPrince
One blackbird fitted with projected ECCM can nullify 2 Scorpions. On top of that, Projected ECCM is bugged in several ways which make it far superior (end user wise) than ECM. When my Corp goes up against other's using ECM we just have every battleship in the fleet fit one projected eccm and either 1) passive eccm unit or 1) active eccm unit. While not foolproof, it cuts the jam rates down to something manageable (~20%). A skill commander can then successfully use this to counter anyone ship being jammed if he so chooses or, using the ProjECCM ("Dirtybird") boat can completely nullify the enemy's EWAR capability. Btw, this took myself and 5 corpmates 15 minutes to figure out and an additional hour of testing to perfect.

EWAR is fine, the problem is uncreative people who really haven't dedicated even a minimal amount of thought and time on how to effectively counter it. It's one more dimension on the battlefield that commanders need to consider beyond what they currently do. It adds a depth to this game (tactically) lacking in most others. I think the biggest complain most folks have is that in order to counter it they have to use up one of their precious slots. Considering most on these boards are the min/maxxing ubar flavor of the week I want a pwnmobile type, this is of course unacceptable. To anyone familiar with combined arms operations and the employment of actual tactics and countermeasures, it's fairly straightforward.




Very true, and it seems that severl people are currently using this tatic, I will make sure it gets a mention.

However, you are still facing the problem of one battleship against many smaller ships being jammed to hell for the duration of the battle. Before you start to cry 'ECCM module!' know that I now have a tendancy to fit 60% ECCM modules on my bs, and I still run into the problem of being jammed by 2-3 t1 cruisers. This is a pity as I enjoy the solo aspect of the game as much as the gangs.

Edit: I do however object to the feeling you seem to have that anybody complaining about ECM is merely looking for a pwnmobile. I'm just trying to level the playing field in all situations, and it's currently tilted so far that i'm having trouble staying on it, let alone scoring.

sgb



While it may not apply to you solely, it applies to the vast majority of posters on these forums, which is why I have hardly ever posted here since beta.

Why should your BS not be vulnerable to 3 smaller ships? Battleships in our day and age are mothballed for just that reason. Perhaps at this point then it has more to do with your ship choice and tactics than ECM being overpowered. Quantity has a quality all of its own, to quote an old Communist. Battleships, HACs, whatever are not the end-all/be-all of Combat. Want to know what happened in the 20th Century when a Battleship (or pair of battleships) sortied out and got attacked by smaller, "inferior" craft (Bombers at this time), read up on the HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse.

I'm sorry but I hardly find any reason to take your objection seriously, of course 3 smaller ships (Cruisers at least) are going to be able to take you out. Were it not for ECM they could use Sensor Damps, Tracking Disruptors, and NOS. As I said earlier, if I were you I'd reconsider my tactics and ship choice.

I do a lot of solo hunting myself but I typically use ships better suited to it than a Battleship.

Shamis Orzoz
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:49:00 - [86]
 

Edited by: Shamis Orzoz on 04/05/2006 16:51:37
They should just boost eccm's, backup arrays, and eccm projectors.

ECCM projectors are already fairly powerful but becuase CCP's locking system allows no safe way to lock gang mates in battle any remote mod is a waste of time (unless you're in a carrier).

Boosting eccm's and backup arrays would be a safe boost because they don't benefit your ship for any other activity other than not getting jammed.

Increasing the duration of jammers might also help a little bit. It would help prevent the "miracle" jams.

smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:52:00 - [87]
 

Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 16:53:20
Originally by: BlackPrince
Why should your BS not be vulnerable to 3 smaller ships? Battleships in our day and age are mothballed for just that reason. Perhaps at this point then it has more to do with your ship choice and tactics than ECM being overpowered. Quantity has a quality all of its own, to quote an old Communist. Battleships, HACs, whatever are not the end-all/be-all of Combat. Want to know what happened in the 20th Century when a Battleship (or pair of battleships) sortied out and got attacked by smaller, "inferior" craft (Bombers at this time), read up on the HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse.

I'm sorry but I hardly find any reason to take your objection seriously, of course 3 smaller ships (Cruisers at least) are going to be able to take you out. Were it not for ECM they could use Sensor Damps, Tracking Disruptors, and NOS. As I said earlier, if I were you I'd reconsider my tactics and ship choice.

I do a lot of solo hunting myself but I typically use ships better suited to it than a Battleship.


PLEASE do not use real life analogies in this game. It doesn't work.

There is no good reason a skilled player in a battleship, or any other ship, cannot take on multiple opponents. The only reason preventing this right now is ECM. Tracking disruptors etc can all be got around a large proportion of the time. 3 cruisers with one multispec each = dead bs right now, this is not right, in my opinion.

You appear to be more educated than the average eve player, which makes a nice change, however even a cursory look over the ins and outs of the game makes it obvious that real life analogies are impossible.

sgb

Dr Tetrahydrocannabinol
Mercenaries of Andosia
Veritas Immortalis
Posted - 2006.05.04 16:57:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: Gronsak
its overpowered no matter how u put it nafari

put one racial on a ship and your target had almost zero chance and you dont even need high skills!


you are wrong, don't over exaggerate.

BlackPrince
Trinity Nova
Trinity Nova Alliance
Posted - 2006.05.04 17:09:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: smallgreenblur
Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 16:53:20
Originally by: BlackPrince
Why should your BS not be vulnerable to 3 smaller ships? Battleships in our day and age are mothballed for just that reason. Perhaps at this point then it has more to do with your ship choice and tactics than ECM being overpowered. Quantity has a quality all of its own, to quote an old Communist. Battleships, HACs, whatever are not the end-all/be-all of Combat. Want to know what happened in the 20th Century when a Battleship (or pair of battleships) sortied out and got attacked by smaller, "inferior" craft (Bombers at this time), read up on the HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse.

I'm sorry but I hardly find any reason to take your objection seriously, of course 3 smaller ships (Cruisers at least) are going to be able to take you out. Were it not for ECM they could use Sensor Damps, Tracking Disruptors, and NOS. As I said earlier, if I were you I'd reconsider my tactics and ship choice.

I do a lot of solo hunting myself but I typically use ships better suited to it than a Battleship.


PLEASE do not use real life analogies in this game. It doesn't work.

There is no good reason a skilled player in a battleship, or any other ship, cannot take on multiple opponents. The only reason preventing this right now is ECM. Tracking disruptors etc can all be got around a large proportion of the time. 3 cruisers with one multispec each = dead bs right now, this is not right, in my opinion.

You appear to be more educated than the average eve player, which makes a nice change, however even a cursory look over the ins and outs of the game makes it obvious that real life analogies are impossible.

sgb



Bad argument, tactics and strategies are my bread and butter, in game and real life. tactics that work in the real world work very well in Eve, just take some creative modification. Repulse and P. of Wales died because they completely ignored their major vulnerability; that to smaller craft. I've watched 3 bombers pop a wide variety of battleships who committed this same sin, but you don't hear anyone screaming that bombers are overpowered, well, not really.

I regularily take on 3:1 odds in game in a battleship, but I know exactly what Im doing and exactly what the enemy is capable of doing more often than not. I've won more than most, and each time I lose it's a learning experience (more often than not it's when I get ****y and do something stupid).

For instance: My raven can knock out most any T1 cruiser in game in 2 salvos. If they're running ECM more than likely they're going to be closing on me (to keep me from jumping out) thats when I use ECM burst to take care of that. Meanwhile, my T2 drones are hammering on one of the other poor slobs. Thats assuming I actually fall to ECM, as I employ both active and passive ECCM for just such a contingency. If I dont fall to their ECM...well it's all over for them but the dying.

ECM may be slightly overpowered, but the ones who feel it the most are those who leave themselves vulnerable to it through poor employment of tactics and overal strategy. For me, its nothing more than an occasional nuisance.

What I would suggest though is making 2 forms of ECM burst. The current one with the range of 7.2 and 6,000m (though I would say up it to 10km). And then a second one with a lesser strength (say 5), 6km range, and a lingering effect (say...3-8 seconds) that affects target reacquisition time, call it sensor recalibration. This would remove the annoyance of close in fighters in small ships using one module to jam larger vessels, while allow the true specialist vessels (Scorps, Blackbirds, etc) to still maintain their overall effectiveness.


smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Irrepressible Mirth
Posted - 2006.05.04 17:16:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: smallgreenblur on 04/05/2006 17:16:39
Fair point, but the only similarity between battleships in eve and battleships in real life is the name. People have trouble getting their head around it, but any forum***** will back me up. Smile Just trust me on this one.

I'm glad you're a master of tatics, personally i'm a master of the '**** it, jump in guys' tatic that leads to a lot more fun (in my opinion at any rate) and lot more losses. As such I experience a considerably wider variety of battles than the average eve player, and can reliably testify to what is overpowered and what is not. I also regularly experiment with various wierd setups, including eccm and nanos and whatnot.

I am still of the opinion that ECM is overpowered and needs at the least a slight tap from the nerfbat.

sgb


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

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