I have seen this situation enough times to know what is coming. Alf has to make a change, due to the PLAYERS being unable to adapt or overcome the current combat style. This is under review because it has shown the average player cannot handle or counter this aspect of the game.

Alf do you need any info because its apparent you want to balance this around the lower end. What are we wanting to achieve with theses changes?

Stating 2x SA and 2x ECCM as the counter to e-war is the same as saying a full headslots of repair tunings counter a DPS fit.

If you payed as much attention to our fits and composition as hinted you would know that we still have the same number of RSA's for our bots as we did before. We just have less bots overall.

Hell, I assign my RSA roles and bots before I even start assigning e-war

Fairly confident this has more to do with the fact that only certain modules are allowed to be activated on non-primary targets. All of the in-direct abilities both offensive and defensive require no primary.

There are a lot of issues with the current locking mechanics if you want to open that can of worms.

ewar, locking, gamma, sparks..... so much debate yet so little to be developed

@Alf any update on what we need to discuss/test for you mate

I follow your logic but if I still bring 3-1 ratio of bots to DPS your in the same situation. I could bring 3 DPS bots and 9 iktus or 9 repairers and cause the same thing.

If You fail to bring the counter to my majority you will get overwhelmed once it is in place man. What I am doing is critical massing and forcing you to do 1 thing and 1 thing only to beat me. If you fail to do that then I win every time through attrition.

This is the same mentality behind what made Styxs' M2S gropho spam so strong.

I mean when you discuss anything below 20vs20 you have 10-15 players per side that can run ANY bot across their 4-8 accounts due to EP. You have cookie cutter fleets on demand of fully skilled max fit bots. We all have  a green pilot and miners and a e-war on top of our normal DPS.

EDIT: Changing e-war does not stop what is currently happening in PvP with one side being able to consistently win. This will modify what is used to win but the results will still be the same. You will only guarantee my new fleet compositions success by directly making e-war less effective. (This is the only true counter)

Lets keep the changes small and focused.

Really,

Can you give me a numbers example of this and we can go to the test server and do some scenario's.

I am very confident that as long as the fleets are reasonable close in numbers or beyond a dozen players to each size. Ewar's power all comes down to the fitting on a bot.

I spent months abusing a full head-slot of Repair tuners and a single demob before my enemies used e-war to slow me down.

I really am not in favor of doing much of anything outside of the tuner. There is a fine a balance that exists now and I am curious to what the whole issue is that needs to be solved.

The current extension is not only mandatory for PvP but also allows mechs to have higher EW strength than a suppresser. This alone breaks the  full ew that would stop you from targeting because suppression would fail and allow you to lock and  fire. A current ECCM does the same thing for every bot now.

I would like to know what we are trying to solve to help come up with ideas if we can get some definition.

I would be interested to see how this plays out.

As population expands the detectors will transition from being the all seeing eye in to being a radar for your group again.

Hai Alf,

I think there is far to much going on for how simple the e-war relation ship is. Lets start with some focused changes if they are even necessary. I feel most people have forgotten everything that goes in to e-war. (Scrap the extension)

After reviewing the numbers for all class's of robots and how effective pure and half fit e-war bots can be, also with none to full extensions I came to some easy conclusions.

TL:DR
E-war is balanced maybe evaluate tuners and their effect. If you include lock time in your equation of e-war balance things are quite easy(Lock time with Nexus).

I can equip 1 sensor amp and 1 ECCM to just a Heavy Mech with only 80 default sensor strength. This makes it near impossible for the Vagabond mk 2 to consistently prevent me from firing.  ( I would also fire and lock-718m beyond the ECM range)

I just used two modules to negate a entire dedicated e-war robots head-slot row from being effective in combat. Most other bots are better off than the above scenario due to their higher default sensor strength.

I can set my Iktus up to neut @ 1000m and itle neut enough AP to drain any e-war what then?

Am i doin it right

All of these arguments are quite moot because when was the last real fleet fight? years+?  Do not try and claim balance objections when you take roaming groups or none e-war counter fits out to play.

Lets all practice this over the weekend.

I want to PvP?> Yes
Who am I pvping? > Counter fit them
Undock and enjoy pvp win \o/

TL:DR I haz counters and you wont see it until you counter the current fleet composition. If you wait any longer everyone will have the EP on our side for that fleet soon(TM)

@Ozy

You reference the power of e-war and how its power only grows as you have synergy between fits and play.

This is just as powerful for a DPS bot, if you are have a enemy Demobed and then Fully neuted. Most DPS bots mech mk 2 and larger will 1-2 shot that unshielded bot.

As you build a more and more focused group around e-war, the enemy can go with the same for tank, dps, or range builds ext. Interference, Masking and Numbers as well as player skill all can easily flip this balance in any direction.

Everyone here keeps referencing pvp experience and time played but in my 4 years playing and all of the  100+ bot engagements I have been in. 1/4 of the fleet always does 3/4 of the damage, it is easier for a less skilled player to be effective at e-war than it is to be a effective DPS.

Edit: To expand on skill, numbers and effectiveness, Once a fleet is large enough to have to avoid its own interference then DPS outweighs e-war

For *** sake I compared the Cam mk 2 and Kain.

2.83s Lock time @ 887m. x6 Kains

Each Cam can run 2 ECM's stable so 80% chance every 10sx2.

Even if you cycled them you would be unable to prevent even half of those kains from firing on every chance their weapons were off cooldown. The cams would only have 3 DPS kains themselves and if the 3 extra enemy kains just got 1 volley off between them would win a flat our rush.

So.........

Edit:
The Kain fires on over a 5 second+ timer. so even holding your jams on a beat to maximize their effect would still be useless in a 1 to 1 fight.

The cam is faster and can engage the kain outside of its ~500m range but if that cam tries to tackle it will die to the Kains.

I guess Ill bite and give back some today. Based off the information you've given

Nova: Your going to be dealing with 400-700m Range fights. If your fleet cannot handle this you lose the fight. If you dont have the speed your dead entirely after you lost the fight.

MK 2 Mech's on the field means any of the mk 1's are obsolete in performance with out a numbers advantage or complementing fits. i.e. Mk 1 has worse tank, range, or damage to the mk 2 (assuming the enemy is running self sufficient fits and not symbiotic fits utilizing the mk2's)

So before the fight even begins one can call the victor based off of my own known fleet composition and the first sighting of the enemy fleet.

There are ways to break this cycle by using some unconventional play such as login drops, TP drops, Cheese fits ext.

It all comes down to being big enough to win or being fast enough to go home.

You will probably want to stick with a stronger Sativa strand, if your also looking to relax a bit more after a long days work sprinkle some indica in during grinding.