Originally by: Amira Shadowsong

---

Originally by: daisy dook

---

Falcons and ECM can be countered with modules, ships and tactics.

---

No they can't.

---

Originally by: Amira Shadowsong

---

Originally by: SirMoric

---

What do we have to counter ECM?

Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity

Ship Equipment: Electronic Warfare: ECCM

Ship Equipment: Electronic Warfare: Projected ECCM

Ship Equipment: Electronic Warfare: Sensor Backup Arrays

The tools are there, use them before complaining.

rgds

---

Welcome to eve: Those do not work.

---

Originally by: Iva Soreass

---

Edited by: Iva Soreass on 10/01/2009 15:26:21

Originally by: Murina

---

---

Bull**** - ECM//Falcons ARE Overpowered and anyone who says they aint fly the FOTM peice of ****e, the last time a ship//mod was as OP as the falcon//ecm is it was nerf'd back to the stone age (Damps//Arazu).

I have tryed to stay away from these falcon whine threads as i dont fly them and nor will train my alt for them as they are a plague and a stupid OP FOTM ship.

---

Originally by: PsychoBones Jr

---

Just wanted to throw out there for the "Fit ECCM you noobs" crowd that this Falcon hit 75% of it's jams on my 101 sensor strength Curse

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

Um, yeah it should matter. It would change your chance of being jammed.

Most people don't understand chance very well at all.

Did you know that the chance of a dice rolling 10 6s in a row is exactly the same as it rolling 6.1.6.4.2.4.1.3.6.2? Most people don't, or if they "know" it, they don't really believe it.

Did you know that if you roll 10 6s in a row, that your chance of rolling another 6 is.... exactly the same as rolling any other number? Again, most people will "know" this if the question is asked in that way - but hardly any of them will act is if it were true.

You remember the 10 6s. You don't remember all the times the dice just rolled a bunch of different numbers. It's human psychology. It's also the reason casinos make so much money: people just don't believe in randomness. You're one of them as your "I had 101 Snsor strength ffs" comment demonstrates.

---

Originally by: daisy dook

---

Originally by: SirMoric

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

Um, yeah it should matter. It would change your chance of being jammed.

Most people don't understand chance very well at all.

Did you know that the chance of a dice rolling 10 6s in a row is exactly the same as it rolling 6.1.6.4.2.4.1.3.6.2? Most people don't, or if they "know" it, they don't really believe it.

Did you know that if you roll 10 6s in a row, that your chance of rolling another 6 is.... exactly the same as rolling any other number? Again, most people will "know" this if the question is asked in that way - but hardly any of them will act is if it were true.

You remember the 10 6s. You don't remember all the times the dice just rolled a bunch of different numbers. It's human psychology. It's also the reason casinos make so much money: people just don't believe in randomness. You're one of them as your "I had 101 Snsor strength ffs" comment demonstrates.

---

You're right, but the chance of rolling 11 6s in a row, is alot less than rolling a 6, after having rolled the first 10 6s.

Which means the chance of a succesfull jam, with 50% chance, is like flipping a coin, for each flip there's a 50% chance of succes, but for 4 jams in a row the probability is a lot less than the probability for a succesfull 4. jam, after 3 succesfull ones.

Get the drift?

rgds

---

I think you missed his point; each jam is an independent event.

In the sequence of jam, jam, jam and jam the chance of your next jam is 50%

In the sequence of fail, fail, fail and fail the chance of your next jam is 50%

In the sequence of jam, jam, fail, fail, fail and jam the chance of your next jam is still 50% because each event is independent of the preceeding event.

---

Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos

---

Originally by: SirMoric

---

the chance of getting 3 jams in a row is still 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 = 12.5%

If you want to get 10 jams in a row the chance of this is even less... As is 10 fails in a row.

So the chance of being jammed succesfully is 50% per jam, but the chance for being permajammed for, say, 2 minutes is only 1.5625%, if the cycle is 20 seconds.

Saying otherwise is only a demonstration of very poor math-skills.

So yes, permajams will occur, but, like in the case above only 1.5 times out of 100 will you be permanently jammed for 2 minutes.

The same goes for not being jammed, the chance to stay unjammed for 2 minutes is only going to happen 1.5 times out of 100 as well.

---

You're forgetting that in many situations of course that a falcon could have more than one jammer on you. Using the appropriate formula with your base 50% chance to jam but using three jammers rather than one:

(1-0.5^3)*100 = (1-0.125)*100 = 0.875*100 = 87.5% (chance over 20 seconds)

With that in mind, 3 jams in a row using 3 jammers cycled would be:

(0.875*0.875*0.875)*100 = 0.67*100 = 67% (chance over 60 seconds)

Is it just me, or is that pretty powerful? Maybe it's better if we only use two jammers. That way a Falcon could only jam three ships simultaneously rather than two:

(1-0.5^2)*100 = (1-0.25)*100 = 0.75*100 = 75% (chance over 20 seconds)
(0.75*0.75*0.75)*100% = 0.42*100 = 42% (chance over 60 seconds)

So that means one falcon has a 42% chance per ship to jam three ships... not quite the 12.5% you're quoting above!

---