Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:30:00 -
[331]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Murina
For starters its chance based unlike all the other ewar systems so you never know if your gonna get a jam cycle or not.
All other ewar is stacking nerfed. ECM is not BECAUSE it is not stacking nerfed. You seem to think that ECM being chance based is something bad when in fact it is something good because you can with enough ecm power do your job just fine and better because it is not stacking nerfed. It is actually better to have a chance based ew without stacking penalty then a non chance based one with a stacking penalty.
So falcon deliberately fight at close range cos their ewar system is chance based and so better at those ranges than those that work 100% guaranteed?.........hey wait....
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong You really need more understanding of eve game mechanics, your arguments are total bogus tbh.
I suggest you take your own advise tbh...
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:31:00 -
[332]
Edited by: Murina on 14/01/2009 23:32:00
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Murina your arguments are non existant and getting more absurd as you go on.
Anyone else see the irony in this?
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong "You count 4 legs on an animal and say: Well a horse has 4 legs so every time I count 4 legs on something it is a horse" or like saying "Person A is not angry, therefor he must be happy" when in fact he could be in a 3rd of 4th mood like tired or excited.
IM SURE THEIRS SOMEBODY OUT THEIR THAT LOVES HORSES WHO THINKS SO.....
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:32:00 -
[333]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 14/01/2009 23:32:14
Originally by: SLIM Nice try, but it's still the most EFFECTIVE counter, and therefore still broken. If someone talks about damp arazus at 200k, they are going to go sit in a goddamn corner.
No it is not the most effective counter, I am sorry to inform you.
Quote:
Difference being vs two opponents non ecm there are ways and fits around this. Falcon + dmg dealer can handle more opponents than any other two man combo.
False again. Falcon + dmg dealer is definitely not better than Curse + Damage dealer for example. Falcon + damage dealer can be tanked forever by some fittings for example. Additionally the damage dealer can be killed by non targetable weapons, and its tackle can be broken in several ways.
Quote:
No, try again. If it's aligned it will get out. And of course it's aligned, it will be when it's uncloaking.
You said shot, as in receiving a volley from a full rack of 1400mm. Sorry, but that means dead falcon.
Quote:
Just because you say it doesn't make it so. Falcons are so goddamn predictable its sad. If I have 3 falcons I know I'll win my medium sized gang engagement.
It goes both ways. Just because you said the opposite it does not make it truth either. If you have 3 falcons in addition to WHAT and against WHAT? If you are saying that in addition to anything and against anything, you are insane.
Quote:
You fail at fitting. Throw a backup array on a zealot and let me know how it goes for you. Throw an eccm on a muninn while you're at it. Remember, individual slots are more precious on smaller ships. You need to pvp more and post less.
If you decide that you can't throw a slot for ECCM it certainly is not important enough for you, thus ECM must be severily UNDERPOWERED. See when there is a counter to something and people DON'T USE it, it means that this thing is not that dangerous at all OR it means the people in question are very very stupid.
Quote:
I hardly see how this helps your argument.
Basically it proves falcons help to prevent people from disengaging as well, and not only help them to do so, which pretty much invalidades your argument. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:32:00 -
[334]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
All other ewar is stacking nerfed. ECM is not BECAUSE it is not stacking nerfed.
ECM is actually naturally stacking nerfed. Do the math and you'll see.
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:33:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Murina
IM SURE THERE'S (=THERE IS) SOMEBODY OUT THEIR THAT LOVES HORSES WHO THINKS SO.....
I'm so nice so I will fix your post.
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:34:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
All other ewar is stacking nerfed. ECM is not BECAUSE it is not stacking nerfed.
ECM is actually naturally stacking nerfed. Do the math and you'll see.
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:35:00 -
[337]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Murina
IM SURE THERE'S (=THERE IS) SOMEBODY OUT THEIR THAT LOVES HORSES WHO THINKS SO.....
I'm so nice so I will fix your post.
That hard up and desperate to get summat right are you?.
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:37:00 -
[338]
Originally by: Murina
That hard up and desperate to get summat right are you?.
What does summat mean? I can't find that in an english dictionary. |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:37:00 -
[339]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 14/01/2009 23:37:19
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
It is more stacking nerfed than anything else. Once a single one takes effect all others are rendered useless, they don't add anything. Now if each ECM that succeeded added + 20s of jam, THEN they wouldn't be. |
Jonas Barcal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:37:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
All other ewar is stacking nerfed. ECM is not BECAUSE it is not stacking nerfed.
ECM is actually naturally stacking nerfed. Do the math and you'll see.
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
Well it kind of is if we're talking probability, what's the chance of me rolling a 6 on a die 20 times in a row.
Gief stacking nerfing on guns tbh.. first gun full damange then down hill from there |
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:39:00 -
[341]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 14/01/2009 23:37:19
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
It is more stacking nerfed than anything else. Once a single one takes effect all others are rendered useless, they don't add anything. Now if each ECM that succeeded added + 20s of jam, THEN they wouldn't be.
Haha, no you're wrong. ECM has no stacking nerf.
Besides your example is moot. You dont just activate all your ecm modules on the target. You activate one and one and therefor you dont get overlapping successes. But I can see why you would think that when looking at the other non sense you have written here. |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:40:00 -
[342]
Edited by: Murina on 14/01/2009 23:41:17
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Murina
That hard up and desperate to get summat right are you?.
What does summat mean? I can't find that in an english dictionary.
You must have put t with your eve tech manual......"perma" jamming ships with high sig str indeed... |
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.01.14 23:40:00 -
[343]
Quote: ECM is actually naturally stacking nerfed. Do the math and you'll see.
Only as much as a lottery draw is "stacking nerfed". The chances of the same numbers coming up in the lottery two weeks in a row are astronomical when viewed one way, but in reality the chances of the same numbers coming up are exactly the same in both draws. |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 00:02:00 -
[344]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 15/01/2009 00:03:13
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Haha, no you're wrong. ECM has no stacking nerf.
They are in several ways. If you consider the effectiveness of it the time it will keep you jammed, then they are by the nature of probabilities themselves, as Jonas pointed. The more ECMs you put in a target the less will be the additional average jam time you will get.
Quote:
Besides your example is moot. You dont just activate all your ecm modules on the target. You activate one and one and therefor you dont get overlapping successes. But I can see why you would think that when looking at the other non sense you have written here.
My example was perfect, IF you have a LOT of targets you can do it. If you don't, oh well, you just got yourselfs a full rack of non useable ECMs the moment one of them hits. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
SirMoric
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 00:16:00 -
[345]
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!
I wasn't really making any statements about the effectiveness of the Falcon, only showing the math behind how to calculate permanent jamming.
The 50% chance is just a number actually, just like flipping a coin, there are two sides, hence 50%.
But you're quite right in your calculations, if 50 is in fact the number.
rgds |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 00:19:00 -
[346]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 15/01/2009 00:23:15 Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 15/01/2009 00:22:47 Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 15/01/2009 00:19:28
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Besides your example is moot. You dont just activate all your ecm modules on the target. You activate one and one and therefor you dont get overlapping successes. But I can see why you would think that when looking at the other non sense you have written here.
This demonstrates you dont know how ecm even works.
In other words, no you cant fool probability by turning them on one by one, the same laws apply
The reason why falcon pilots cycle their jammers one by one is you can actually see which one is the lucky one, and if it happens to be the first one you saved a few jammers. |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 00:29:00 -
[347]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Etho Demerzel Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 14/01/2009 23:37:19
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
It is more stacking nerfed than anything else. Once a single one takes effect all others are rendered useless, they don't add anything. Now if each ECM that succeeded added + 20s of jam, THEN they wouldn't be.
Haha, no you're wrong. ECM has no stacking nerf.
Besides your example is moot. You dont just activate all your ecm modules on the target. You activate one and one and therefor you dont get overlapping successes. But I can see why you would think that when looking at the other non sense you have written here.
Please prove it (in an actual formula to compute chances with independent attempts) that there is no "stacking mode" in the chance based mechanic of ECM. I'm just curious if you really know it or if you know someone who knows someone who knows how to...
Proud member of RZR - Decadence. |
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 00:29:00 -
[348]
Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 15/01/2009 00:32:41
Quote: The reason why falcon pilots cycle their jammers one by one is you can actually see which one is the lucky one, and if it happens to be the first one you saved a few jammers.
That and assuming you're using the 5 second rule and even if you miss the fact that the first jam worked, the 20 second effect will override the 15 seconds remaining on the previous jammer, freeing up the first one 5 seconds before the second is due to expire.
It's a very elegant combat style compared to most ships really
Quote: Please prove it (in an actual formula to compute chances with independent attempts) that there is no "stacking mode" in the chance based mechanic of ECM. I'm just curious if you really know it or if you know someone who knows someone who knows how to...
Given that I and I assume many others have demonstrated that formula and the equation for combined jam attempts as well in both active threads, doing so would really be an exercise in seeing how well they listened in math class - ECM Balancing Proposal - 50% increase in effectiveness! |
Dasalt Istgut
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 01:38:00 -
[349]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong ECM is overpowered. You have to real stupid to not understand that. Just to put it out there.
You got soloed by a stabber. Just to put that out there. |
Dasalt Istgut
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 01:44:00 -
[350]
Originally by: SLIM It's funny how you hear the ecm apologists spouting the exact same type of arguments that the nano apologists had.
At least the curse is still a good ship without being nano'd. Remove Caldari ECM and they've got like, what? The Rokh, Onyx and Blarpy, amirite? |
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 04:55:00 -
[351]
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 15/01/2009 04:58:18 Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 15/01/2009 04:56:06
Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos
Given that I and I assume many others have demonstrated that formula and the equation for combined jam attempts as well in both active threads, doing so would really be an exercise in seeing how well they listened in math class
Yeah, math that is faulty. Someof us went to something better then community college (I'm even being generous with that statement by the looks of the posts in this thread) my friend, read and weep:
Originally by: chrisss0r Edited by: chrisss0r on 15/01/2009 01:01:04 Edited by: chrisss0r on 15/01/2009 01:00:29 What people always miss out and what really makes the computing of permajamchances difficult (and no i don't mean difficult in like people cannot compute chances....) is the fact that you can try a single jammer and if you don't succeed you can add another.
This has 2 major effects: 1. If the falcon misses a cycle on you you don' get a full cycle of not beeing jamed. You earn the second of not beeing jammed till more jammers are applied which is why there are many more "permajams" experienced than on paper.
2. To compute the jamming chances for every single jammer u add you need the bayesian probability calculus. it's a bit complicated to explain it to such fools as you are but i'll try:
The moment you put a jammer on a ship and get a success or a fail u have gathered information. This results in not adding a second jammer in the moment of success or adding a second jammer in the moment of fail. The fact that you don't add your space jammers in a moment of success leads to the higher propabilities of permajamming This game has as many stages as a falcon has jammers free and together with (1) it is why so many more permajams occur than the (1-jamchance)^number of jammers fumula returns The formula is still true but only after you have all your jammers applied. So to speak the chance of jamming someone if highly biased into the beginning of a fight, and most of eves fights don't last long enough
So please shut the **** up if you have no clue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability
Oh and I dare you to refute this tbh, you'll just make a fool out of yourself. You know why? Many of us have studied maths on college level here, we kow when you are putting up bull**** maths.
2nd. Let me put this short and clear: 3 Sbs can fend off 100 damps on any ship. Why? Because damps are stacking nerfed. 3 ECCM do not fend off 100 ECM. Why? Because ECM is not stacking nerfed. Can you get this into your skull?
It's been fun having you in this thread but it is time for you to go troll somewhere else. |
Spaztick
Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 05:28:00 -
[352]
1 > .999999.... discuss ...but on a serious note, more people should have some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post.
|
Major Celine
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 06:02:00 -
[353]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong 2nd. Let me put this short and clear: 3 Sbs can fend off 100 damps on any ship. Why? Because damps are stacking nerfed. 3 ECCM do not fend off 100 ECM. Why? Because ECM is not stacking nerfed. Can you get this into your skull?
Let's say 3 ECM-racials make 45% chance each. And now you are telling me that using those at the same time or in a row makes 135% chance in total? Or a 100% at least because it's not kinda stacked?
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Many of us have studied maths on college level here, we kow when you are putting up bull**** maths.
Quoted for future reference. |
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 07:38:00 -
[354]
Originally by: Major Celine
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong 2nd. Let me put this short and clear: 3 Sbs can fend off 100 damps on any ship. Why? Because damps are stacking nerfed. 3 ECCM do not fend off 100 ECM. Why? Because ECM is not stacking nerfed. Can you get this into your skull?
Let's say 3 ECM-racials make 45% chance each. And now you are telling me that using those at the same time or in a row makes 135% chance in total? Or a 100% at least because it's not kinda stacked?
No, let's not "say".
It is really really really simple:
3 SBs can fend off 100 damps, because damps ARE STACKING NERFED. 3 ECCM CANT fend off 100 ECMs, because ECM is NOT STACKING NERFED.
Comprende?
|
Major Celine
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 07:44:00 -
[355]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong It is really really really simple:
3 SBs can fend off 100 damps, because damps ARE STACKING NERFED. 3 ECCM CANT fend off 100 ECMs, because ECM is NOT STACKING NERFED.
Comprende?
Hmm, you compare apples and pies. It's like comparing missile mechanics and turret mechanics. No argument.
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 08:09:00 -
[356]
Originally by: Major Celine
Hmm, you compare apples and pies.
BINGO!
A break through! Yes, it is like comparing apples and pies because ECM is not stacking nerfed unlike other EW like damps.
|
Major Celine
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 08:47:00 -
[357]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Major Celine
Hmm, you compare apples and pies.
BINGO!
A break through! Yes, it is like comparing apples and pies because ECM is not stacking nerfed unlike other EW like damps.
And it works in a completely different mechanic that doesn't need stacking penalty but has the similar effect. Not hard to understand, is it?
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 08:52:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Etho Demerzel Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 14/01/2009 23:37:19
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Hahaha, ECM is stacking nerfed? Hahahaha, no it's not. Please go away.
It is more stacking nerfed than anything else. Once a single one takes effect all others are rendered useless, they don't add anything. Now if each ECM that succeeded added + 20s of jam, THEN they wouldn't be.
Haha, no you're wrong. ECM has no stacking nerf.
That's correct, but on the other hand, a target isn't "more jammed" if multiple jamming attempts succeed either. Whereas if you put 3 damps or TDs or TPs, the target is much more damped, tracking-disrupted or painted.
|
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 11:15:00 -
[359]
Quote: Oh and I dare you to refute this tbh, you'll just make a fool out of yourself. You know why? Many of us have studied maths on college level here, we kow when you are putting up bull**** maths.
I don't refute the mathematical principles behind the bayesian method at all, but until we have data to do the calculations with there is simply no argument. You've also managed to get your knickers into so much of a twist that you've started arguing with everyone in the thread, be they for or against changes to ECM.
I do hope sleeping has managed to calm you down. - ECM Balancing Proposal - 50% increase in effectiveness! |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.15 11:31:00 -
[360]
Edited by: Murina on 15/01/2009 11:32:13
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: chrisss0r
What people always miss out and what really makes the computing of permajamchances difficult (and no i don't mean difficult in like people cannot compute chances....) is the fact that you can try a single jammer and if you don't succeed you can add another.
This has 2 major effects: 1. If the falcon misses a cycle on you you don' get a full cycle of not being jamed. You earn the second of not beeing jammed till more jammers are applied which is why there are many more "permajams" experienced than on paper.
2. To compute the jamming chances for every single jammer u add you need the bayesian probability calculus. it's a bit complicated to explain it to such fools as you are but i'll try:
The moment you put a jammer on a ship and get a success or a fail u have gathered information. This results in not adding a second jammer in the moment of success or adding a second jammer in the moment of fail. The fact that you don't add your space jammers in a moment of success leads to the higher propabilities of permajamming This game has as many stages as a falcon has jammers free and together with (1) it is why so many more permajams occur than the (1-jamchance)^number of jammers fumula returns The formula is still true but only after you have all your jammers applied. So to speak the chance of jamming someone if highly biased into the beginning of a fight, and most of eves fights don't last long enough
So please shut the **** up if you have no clue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability
Oh and I dare you to refute this tbh, you'll just make a fool out of yourself. You know why? Many of us have studied maths on college level here, we kow when you are putting up bull**** maths.
So you studied maths at college, and what you gained from it is the ability to figure out that if a ECM ship fits a full rack of a single race of jammers (say gallente) that he will have a better chance of jamming gallente ships than a player who's ECM ship fitted 1 jammer of each race.......
WOW...did they also show you this amazing invention called the wheel while you were at college?.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |