|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Akiba Penrose
   |
Posted - 2008.12.16 21:20:00 -
[1]
Even the devs know that the Falcon and ECM in general is bad for pvp.
The real reason why they wont nerf it, is because they enjoy reading the "Nerf the F****** Falcon!" -threads to much.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 21:15:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Drogher Forerunner
In fact a well kitted ship with enough ECCM can make 10 falcons almost usless.
Could you please post such a setup?
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 11:21:00 -
[3]
ECM is the condom of pvp, it should be removed or changed completely.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 12:21:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 23/12/2008 12:21:47
Originally by: Drogher Forerunner
You see its people like this with arguments like this that make this thread pointless.
You see discussing with people that dont have a clue what they are talking about is also pointless.
Hence i rather make a simple statement showing my opinion on the matter.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 12:59:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Drogher Forerunner
The fact ECM is such an issue for you or more accurately for people with arguments like the -
Originally by: Akiba Penrose
ECM is the condom of pvp, it should be removed or changed completely.
-to the point that you have to suggest a simple oppinion on the matter, kind of proves my point.
I was making a simple statement, not suggesting a simple opinion.
The fact that ECM is such an issue for me i becuase i pvp. Dont see how that is proving whatever point you where tryin to make.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 18:19:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Deviana Sevidon
A bit of the problem many have with ECM is, that countermeasures do not really work. A ship with high sensor strength and ECCM needs multiple ECCM to have a chance to resist a falcon. That is a fact.
This is very true.
The main problem is that even if you fit counter to ECM, you will still lose if the other side has a falcon and the numbers are fairly even.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 18:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: shamai
Sorry thats NOT true, trying fitting some sometime and testing it out
oh iv done that. Iv had 2 x ECCM on my tempest several times and it does not make much of a differense.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 18:43:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 23/12/2008 18:43:27
Originally by: GTC seller72
So you have discovered that a versatile gang with ewar is better at pvp/gang engagments than a gang without it?.
My point is that ECM counter doesent really work then,, does it?
Originally by: GTC seller72
Next lesson is about GIRLS...they aint just boys in skirts ya know!!!.
Wrong, next lesson is about growing a pair and try posting with your main.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 22:39:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Drogher Forerunner
If your 1 jammer had a 12% chance to jam something, adding more of the same jammers would not increase the chances of landing a jam, rather give you more attempts of trying to land within that 12% chance.
eg. 1 jammer = 1 in 8 chance of landing a jam. (or rolling one dice)
10 jammers = 1 in 8 chance of landing a jam.(or rolling 10 dice each with a one in 8 chance of landing jam)
If 1 jammer has 12% chance, then 10 jammers have; (1-(1-0.12)^10)100%= 72.15% chance of successfully jamming the target.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 13:14:00 -
[10]
Originally by: shamai
quite correct, but since nobdy can field 10 jammers its academic math.
Everything in this thread is just theory and academic math.
In game Falcons jamm the **** out of everything.
|
|
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 13:38:00 -
[11]
Originally by: maralt
Originally by: Akiba Penrose
In game Falcons jamm the **** out of everything.
Stop posting for gods sake, emo rage at being jammed is no use in this thread.
No emo rage here, just stating the sad fact.
If you can discuss without insulting maybe you should take a break from the forums
|
|
|
| |
|