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 - 2009.01.16 09:33:00 -
[451]
Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 09:34:22
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Murina
No solo is math and fitting for a specific target/ship type...here listen to somebody who claims to be a expert...
My records are in the open for everyone to see. Unlike your leet skills that we only "hear" about. You fail troll.
Oh oh...your posting is open to others as well pal...you are the one that needs specific "i-win vs X" fits to get kills, and you call that skill?.
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
This is a cruiser killer fit and it has a fighting chance against ceptors aswell.
I know how to ****ing fit a pure anti inty crusader.
Problem is that the anti inty fit is absolutely crap against cruisers and AFs.
|
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 09:41:00 -
[452]
Originally by: CCP Mitnal Cleaned.
Please stay on-topic, discussing other players' posting style is not on-topic.
Please just kill this topic. No good can come of it now, as it's long since decended past every form of fallacial argument and the only remaining debaters are completely entrenched with no real desire to discuss the mechanics of ECM and ECM ships at all. There are surely enough rule breaking posts within this thread to justify it, and you'd be doing the rest of us a favour by closing it.
Please, end it now. ECM is far to polarized an issue for some people to discuss. |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 10:15:00 -
[453]
I doubt that any further value will be obtained from this thread.
Please close it. |
Irida Mershkov
Gallente Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 10:35:00 -
[454]
O Mitnal! Purge this thread! |
Jonas Barcal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 10:37:00 -
[455]
Agreed time for a close..
|
mcnuggetlol
Amarr Cold Blooded Killers
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 10:38:00 -
[456]
Let's take as much variety and tactical thinking out of PVP as possible dammit! I WANNA BE ABLE TO CIRCLE AT MY OPTIMAL, PRESS F1 AND NOT HAVE TO THINK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL I'VE WON |
Joe Martin
Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 17:38:00 -
[457]
Edited by: Joe Martin on 16/01/2009 17:47:11 ECM just makes it that much more thoughtless; I don't even get to press F1 anymore because I can't get a lock on anything.
I have several problems with falcons that have probably been beaten to death, but what the hell. Toss me the bat, I'm going at this horse.
1) The totality of the effect. Every other method of Ewar (which we'll generalize into non-damaging combat abilities) is manageable to a greater or lesser degree through basic game mechanics. ECM removes you from the fight COMPLETELY. Not only is there no active counter for it, but the ONLY counter (ECCM) has no predictable chance to actually work. When jammed there is quite literally NOTHING you can do, aside from watching yourself die while being unable to even attempt to maneuver yourself out of the situation.
1.A) This is not fun. At all. How the idea for a game mechanic that completely and entirely removes people from the fight (other than the ability to die) even got added to the game in the first place is beyond me.
2) ECCM as it stands is NOT an effective counter. ECM is, in and of itself, a benign combat ability (not damaging, as we already went over); a gang of falcons won't be able to do much besides jam targets and then stare at them. The problem is there's no such thing as a gang of falcons. Ships that actually shoot at you are more of a primary concern. People like to suggest, however, that we sacrifice combat effectiveness (and in ships smaller than a battlecruiser hull, a LOT of combat effectiveness via limited slots and lower base sensor strength) on the offchance that an opposing gang may or may not have a falcon. And even then, all that combat effectiveness you gave up doesn't ensure that you won't ever get jammed, and since it is purely a matter of probability, no amount of piloting skill will assist in preventing jams either. What a horrible solution.
3) Risk vs. Reward. Understanding that ECM is too deeply rooted for a lot of people to let go of, I realize that it will probably never be removed from the game in its current incarnation (a shame, really). But EVE at its heart has always been about risk vs reward. Want to fly expensive T2 ships for that extra combat edge? Fine, you'll pay for it AND not get insurance. The problem with the falcon is that there is almost ZERO risk for the monumental impact it has on fights. Again, dead horse here, but they just warp on grid cloaked, uncloak 200km away, align, start jamming. If anything gets too close for comfort, warp off. Even if other ships get a warp in on it he can warp off as soon as they land. Even assuming that someone does get a tackle, they'll just drop all their other targets and jam that guy THEN warp off. Any falcon pilot that's at all paying attention is NOT going to die.
3.A) The low risk we already covered. The reward is also part of the problem. Any given falcon pilot will likely be able effectively remove 3 pilots from the fight. Not only will they be removed from the fight, unable to act or fight back, but they'll get the pleasure of dying along with the rest of their gang. Another problem is that this effect scales massively the less people there are in the gang. The smaller the opposing gang the more effective the falcon is, and a LOT of people have falcons today.
4) "Without ECM the game would be 'whoever has the better tank wins.'" Take a vacation from the forums, delete EFT, and actually PVP for a change. If I really need to explain to you how utterly garbage this argument is then you have no right to be in any PVP mechanics related discussion period.
5) This is not a whine. Play to win, I know; I read all of Sirlin's blogs too. Falcons are always welcome in any gang I fly in. They are a HUGE combat advantage. But that doesn't mean I have to like or necessarily agree with the way they work. I play games, this game in particular, for two reasons: A) To have fun B) To compete. Falcons as they stand are a detriment to both
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 17:55:00 -
[458]
Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 18:04:09
Originally by: Joe Martin
1) The totality of the effect. Every other method of Ewar (which we'll generalize into non-damaging combat abilities) is manageable to a greater or lesser degree through basic game mechanics. ECM removes you from the fight COMPLETELY.
FOF, drones, non-static/stationary combat tactics or variable range fittings/setups.......
Originally by: Joe Martin 2) ECCM as it stands is NOT an effective counter.
Its a buffer against ecm and very effective when used on certain ships it is not a 100% guaranteed counter nor should it be.
Originally by: Joe Martin 3) Risk vs. Reward.
Ships that operate at long range all share a certain amount of invulnerability to getting hit (by ppl with limited range fits) or caught. The effect of ECM is very frustrating but it is also something that if relied on can lose a fight as well as it can help win it with a simple missed jam.
Also ECM ships are highly ineffective in large numbers as well as the fact that ECM modules are virtually worthless on non bonused ships while other ewar systems work rather well on any ship. |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 18:12:00 -
[459]
Originally by: Murina
Also ECM ships are highly ineffective in large numbers as well as the fact that ECM modules are virtually worthless on non bonused ships while other ewar systems work rather well on any ship.
Exactly, compare with TDs and then talk about overpowered |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 18:21:00 -
[460]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: Murina
Also ECM ships are highly ineffective in large numbers as well as the fact that ECM modules are virtually worthless on non bonused ships while other ewar systems work rather well on any ship.
Exactly, compare with TDs and then talk about overpowered
Fitted on a non bonused or solo ship?....sure..
TD's are better by far. |
|
Joe Martin
Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 18:32:00 -
[461]
Edited by: Joe Martin on 16/01/2009 18:32:29
Originally by: Murina FOF, drones, non-static/stationary combat tactics or variable range fittings/setups.......
Assuming you're in a ship with drones/missiles, sure. I'm also not quite sure what not being stationary has to do with not being able to lock anything. Though adding tracking to ECM modules would be a comical (if not slightly effective?) fix.
Originally by: Murina Its a buffer against ecm and very effective when used on certain ships it is not a 100% guaranteed counter nor should it be.
I wasn't suggesting that it should be. The point was that too much combat viability must be sacrificed (especially on ships smaller than a battlecruiser hull) to really make ECCM worth its role. Re(actually)read my post about that if you want clarification on this point.
Originally by: Murina Ships that operate at long range all share a certain amount of invulnerability to getting hit (by ppl with limited range fits) or caught.
Yes all ships that operate at range share a certain degree of invulnerability. But what the falcon does not share with them is that other ships must also sacrifice a load of effectiveness to get that range. Why should the falcon be any different?
What I'd like to see is a falcon that has an outstanding jam strength from 30km and but also has a rough time keeping a rifter jammed from 200km. Risk vs. reward.
Originally by: Murina The effect of ECM is very frustrating but it is also something that if relied on can lose a fight as well as it can help win it with a simple missed jam.
The "putting all your eggs in one basket" syndrome. If a game mechanic relying purely on chance will make or break your gang and you know this going into a fight then I'd say that the problem is your FC, not ECM.
Originally by: Murina Also ECM ships are highly ineffective in large numbers as well as the fact that ECM modules are virtually worthless on non bonused ships while other ewar systems work rather well on any ship.
ECM is effective all the way up to fleet fights. Neutralized DPS is neutralized DPS. However you're correct in that it's curve of effectiveness gets exponentially larger as the number of targets decreases. What other ship can render a small gang dead in the water from 200km?
Perhaps having ECM be effective on non-bonused ships would bring the much needed changes more quickly.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 19:02:00 -
[462]
Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 19:06:42 Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 19:02:49
Originally by: Joe Martin
Assuming you're in a ship with drones/missiles, sure. I'm also not quite sure what not being stationary has to do with not being able to lock anything. Though adding tracking to ECM modules would be a comical (if not slightly effective?) fix.
Mobility is the most effective counter to ewar heavy gangs.
Originally by: Joe Martin Yes all ships that operate at range share a certain degree of invulnerability. But what the falcon does not share with them is that other ships must also sacrifice a load of effectiveness to get that range. Why should the falcon be any different?
Because unlike the other systems that operate and get more effective at close range, ECM gets less effective due to its chance based mechanic.
Originally by: Joe Martin The "putting all your eggs in one basket" syndrome. If a game mechanic relying purely on chance will make or break your gang and you know this going into a fight then I'd say that the problem is your FC, not ECM.
Exactly..the close range gankers and tankers in this thread and others are claiming that ECM (a chance based system) is causing them to lose..and you are also right it is their FC's not ecm.
Originally by: Joe Martin ECM is effective all the way up to fleet fights.
High numbers of ecm ships in large fleet ops are ineffective as target assignment is imposable.
Originally by: Joe Martin What other ship can render a small gang dead in the water from 200km?
No ship can do it not even the falcon, a gang always has the option to reposition and use hit and run tactics. PPL really need to be mobile in combat as lock target f5 is not skill.
|
Joe Martin
Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 19:33:00 -
[463]
Edited by: Joe Martin on 16/01/2009 19:33:12
Originally by: Murina Mobility is the most effective counter to ewar heavy gangs.
If by mobility you mean to move out of the effective range of the falcon, I see several problems with that argument. Namely that the falcon's range is dictated by its own gang. If you want to move out of range of the falcon then you're likely going to move out of the range of the people you're shooting at in tandem.
Falcon pilots also have this nasty habit of having tactical warps just about everywhere, which further removes your ability to move completely out of range of a falcon. A lot of ships are just too slow, at that.
Originally by: Murina Because unlike the other systems that operate and get more effective at close range, ECM gets less effective due to its chance based mechanic.
Buh? Are you saying that ECM gets less effective the closer you are? I was unaware.
Originally by: Murina Exactly..the close range gankers and tankers in this thread and others are claiming that ECM (a chance based system) is causing them to lose..and you are also right it is their FC's and skills not ecm that is the problem.
I think you misunderstood me, or rather missed the "make or break" part of my comment. If the falcon is your veritable ace in the hole, the crux of your gang to the point that perma-jams are required for victory then yes, you have a bad FC. A gang engaging not having previously seen falcons, when 2 of them then decloak after aggro has been established, its just ends up as one of those "welp" scenarios as you watch your gang get executed with its hands tied.
And don't suggest that we can just burn after the falcon everytime it shows up on grid. It takes a LONG time for even a ceptor to make it 200km to a falcon. God help anything else that tries to boat after one.
Originally by: Murina High numbers of ecm ships in large fleet ops are ineffective as target assignment is imposable.
Or, if you instead take full advantage of everything vent has to offer, all the ECM can sit in a different channel and talk targets amongst themselves while still being able to hear the FC from another channel.
Plus ECM in fleet fights isn't so much concerned with who in particular is jammed, just that DPS is jammed.
Originally by: Murina No ship can do it not even the falcon, a gang always has the option to reposition and use hit and run tactics. PPL really need to be mobile in combat as lock target f5 is not skill.
Hit and run only really works if your targets decide to engage back, and as soon as aggression has been established on both sides (unless you're ganking t1 frigs) an opposing gang's falcon will have ample time to uncloak and jam.
And if you're suggesting that you "get mobile" on a falcon, well, I think we already went over how even a half awake falcon pilot can very easily avoid death.
And stop associating the word "skill" with activating modules. The actual combat mechanics in EVE are not complicated. 95% of the time once both sides have aggressed the fight is already decided. The hard part, the fun part of EVE, is maneuvering your enemy into a position such that they're on the losing end of the deal while still getting them to stick around for a fight. That's what takes skill.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 20:00:00 -
[464]
Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 20:06:05
Originally by: Joe Martin
If by mobility you mean to move out of the effective range of the falcon, I see several problems with that argument. Namely that the falcon's range is dictated by its own gang. If you want to move out of range of the falcon then you're likely going to move out of the range of the people you're shooting at in tandem.
EVE is a 3d game and as such you can be in a position outside the range of a falcon while also within range of his buddies, also warpins and out in hit and run attacks are very useful against larger numbers no matter how many falcons they have.
Originally by: Joe Martin Falcon pilots also have this nasty habit of having tactical warps just about everywhere, which further removes your ability to move completely out of range of a falcon.
Tactical warp points around gates or stations ect ect are available for everybody to make, just because the falcon pilot was smart enough and industrious enough to have some is to that pilots credit and if another player does not that is hardly a ship issue.
Originally by: Joe Martin Buh? Are you saying that ECM gets less effective the closer you are? I was unaware.
YUP, at close range all other systems work 100% and you know what to expect from them, but because ecm is chance based it cannot be predicted and as such at close range if you miss a jam you are dead.
Originally by: Joe Martin I think you misunderstood me, or rather missed the "make or break" part of my comment. If the falcon is your veritable ace in the hole, the crux of your gang to the point that perma-jams are required for victory then yes, you have a bad FC.
I understood the "make or break" comment perfectly (although i disagree with it tbh) but it is a two edged sword that cuts both ways as the falcon is a chance based mechanic.
Originally by: Joe Martin Or, if you instead take full advantage of everything vent has to offer, all the ECM can sit in a different channel and talk targets amongst themselves while still being able to hear the FC from another channel.
In a fleet fight and i will be generous and say its only 100 vs 100 assigning that many individual jams to so many individual jam ships each with a rack of jammers over vent is imposable, the fight would be over before you got half way down the list.
The tactic i developed for using high numbers of falcons in fleet ops had falcon pilots fitted for a specific race each and then i gave then instruction to use the overview to select their own targets, IE: I told them to set overview by race then 5 with amarr jammers fitted i told to start jamming amarr ships at certain parts of the overview so pilot number 1 started at the top number 2 started 6 ships down ect ect and i did this per race.
And even that was not perfectly effective as missed jams and forced warpouts left holes and the bigger the holes the more warp outs, the bigger the holes and on and on ect ect....
Originally by: Joe Martin The hard part, the fun part of EVE, is maneuvering your enemy into a position such that they're on the losing end of the deal while still getting them to stick around for a fight. That's what takes skill.
So picking a spot that falcons have a bunch of 200km BM's is the FC's rather silly idea?.
Originally by: Joe Martin The actual combat mechanics in EVE are not complicated. 95% of the time once both sides have aggressed the fight is already decided
Maybe and maybe not, things change in a fight and any gang (or even individual player in the gang) that is not prepared to disengage and re-engage if they are caught flat footed or out maneuvered is a poorly skilled player/gang. |
Joe Martin
Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 20:18:00 -
[465]
Edited by: Joe Martin on 16/01/2009 20:18:35
Originally by: Murina stuff.
Well I really didn't come in with the intention of arguing with a straw man troll, so I won't.
"Progress is impossible without change; those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything." - George Bernard Shaw
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 20:24:00 -
[466]
Edited by: Murina on 16/01/2009 20:26:17
Originally by: Joe Martin
Well I really didn't come in arguing as i am a straw man troll, so I won't.
Fixed.
Now go away or add content troll.
PS: are you another of lyria's (the i-win ship vs X uber ganker) alts or just a pet?
|
Joe Martin
Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 21:22:00 -
[467]
Originally by: Murina Fixed.
Now go away or add content troll.
PS: are you another of lyria's (the i-win ship vs X uber ganker) alts or just a pet?
Confirming that I am Lyria.
Lyria and I are in the same corp (if you hadn't noticed already), but we rarely play together due to timezone differences.
@ the pet comment, sounds like someone's been reading CAOD a little too much, eh?
I believe I had enough content in my OP to substantiate my points, as well as the posts following. People can take it for what they want, but like I said, I'm not here to argue with trolls.
"Discontent is the first necessity of progress" - Thomas Edison
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 21:28:00 -
[468]
Originally by: Joe Martin
Confirming that I am Lyria.
Originally by: Joe Martin Lyria and I are in the same corp (if you hadn't noticed already), but we rarely play together due to timezone differences.
Yup, contradicting yourself and looking kinda stupid....its confirmed your definatly who you say you are.....and say you are not as well....
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Solo is all about skill not ship fits
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong The anti inty fit is absolutely crap against cruisers and AFs.
|
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 21:32:00 -
[469]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Joe Martin
Confirming that I am Lyria.
Originally by: Joe Martin Lyria and I are in the same corp (if you hadn't noticed already), but we rarely play together due to timezone differences.
Yup, contradicting yourself and looking kinda stupid....its confirmed your definatly who you say you are.....and say you are not as well....
Just seeing whether it's possible to get the last word in a thread that should've died a long, long time ago?
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 21:59:00 -
[470]
|
|
|
CCP Mitnal
C C P CCP
|
Posted - 2009.01.16 23:00:00 -
[471]
Removed off-topic posts.
Please note that discussing anything to do with other posters or their style of posting is not on-topic, is subject to removal and potentially forum warnings/bans issued.
Mitnal Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Email |
|
Ione Hunt
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.18 06:16:00 -
[472]
Originally by: Joe Martin Edited by: Joe Martin on 16/01/2009 17:47:11 ECM just makes it that much more thoughtless; I don't even get to press F1 anymore because I can't get a lock on anything.
I have several problems with falcons that have probably been beaten to death, but what the hell. Toss me the bat, I'm going at this horse.
1) The totality of the effect. Every other method of Ewar (which we'll generalize into non-damaging combat abilities) is manageable to a greater or lesser degree through basic game mechanics. ECM removes you from the fight COMPLETELY. Not only is there no active counter for it, but the ONLY counter (ECCM) has no predictable chance to actually work. When jammed there is quite literally NOTHING you can do, aside from watching yourself die while being unable to even attempt to maneuver yourself out of the situation.
1.A) This is not fun. At all. How the idea for a game mechanic that completely and entirely removes people from the fight (other than the ability to die) even got added to the game in the first place is beyond me.
2) ECCM as it stands is NOT an effective counter. ECM is, in and of itself, a benign combat ability (not damaging, as we already went over); a gang of falcons won't be able to do much besides jam targets and then stare at them. The problem is there's no such thing as a gang of falcons. Ships that actually shoot at you are more of a primary concern. People like to suggest, however, that we sacrifice combat effectiveness (and in ships smaller than a battlecruiser hull, a LOT of combat effectiveness via limited slots and lower base sensor strength) on the offchance that an opposing gang may or may not have a falcon. And even then, all that combat effectiveness you gave up doesn't ensure that you won't ever get jammed, and since it is purely a matter of probability, no amount of piloting skill will assist in preventing jams either. What a horrible solution.
3) Risk vs. Reward. Understanding that ECM is too deeply rooted for a lot of people to let go of, I realize that it will probably never be removed from the game in its current incarnation (a shame, really). But EVE at its heart has always been about risk vs reward. Want to fly expensive T2 ships for that extra combat edge? Fine, you'll pay for it AND not get insurance. The problem with the falcon is that there is almost ZERO risk for the monumental impact it has on fights. Again, dead horse here, but they just warp on grid cloaked, uncloak 200km away, align, start jamming. If anything gets too close for comfort, warp off. Even if other ships get a warp in on it he can warp off as soon as they land. Even assuming that someone does get a tackle, they'll just drop all their other targets and jam that guy THEN warp off. Any falcon pilot that's at all paying attention is NOT going to die.
3.A) The low risk we already covered. The reward is also part of the problem. Any given falcon pilot will likely be able effectively remove 3 pilots from the fight. Not only will they be removed from the fight, unable to act or fight back, but they'll get the pleasure of dying along with the rest of their gang. Another problem is that this effect scales massively the less people there are in the gang. The smaller the opposing gang the more effective the falcon is, and a LOT of people have falcons today.
Quote worthy. I took a 1 year break from EVE, and spent the past 2 days flying around looking for fights. I like fighting outnumbered, and like taking risks, but EVERY BLOODY GANG I run into has a falcon. You can still find 1on1 fights, but forget about engaging a gang solo, if they have more than 3ppl in gang, they'll have at least 1 falcon and you can watch yourself die a slow death while not being able to counter it at all. Speed was nerfed, fine, I can deal with that, even if it makes roaming solo harder...but this ECM crap, and lack of counters kills all the fun.
ECCM does NOT work as intended...pls fix CCP _______________
My nerfed sig showed Angelina Jolie's lips with blood running out of her mouth |
Chacha Aha
|
Posted - 2009.01.18 06:42:00 -
[473]
i dont understand your argument murina. youre predicting that an unpredictable, chance based system loses effectiveness as range decreases? how are you able to know so well that it does lose its effectiveness if its chance based? the whole idea of "chance" just boggles the mind.
how does a chance based system lose effectiveness as range decreases? the chance to jam stays the same. the only things that change are the danger to the falcon and the range itself. if greater danger = loss in effectiveness, then yes, indeed falcons lose effectiveness as they close in. but in fact shouldnt it be the other way around? as range increases, shouldnt ECM lose effectiveness? like every other module in the game?
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.01.18 06:57:00 -
[474]
Originally by: Chacha Aha
how does a chance based system lose effectiveness as range decreases? the chance to jam stays the same. the only things that change are the danger to the falcon and the range itself. if greater danger = loss in effectiveness, then yes, indeed falcons lose effectiveness as they close in. but in fact shouldnt it be the other way around? as range increases, shouldnt ECM lose effectiveness? like every other module in the game?
Look at what happened to the arazu/lachesis after the rsd nerf, they lost their range up to a crucial point as dampner efficiency got reduced and thus targets can lock further out, and suddenly changed from solopwnmobile to virtually extinct.
There is more to range in electronic warfare than you might think, look at TDs for example and how their optimal range is suspiciously close to where you are safe from the bulk of turrets after 1-2 mods are applied.
|
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:51:00 -
[475]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Malcanis
Whereas not knowing if you're going to disrupt them at all is just fine...?
You know as soon as you activate the module if its worked or not with ALL ewar as it is and you know the exact effect they have.
Well ECM is gonna be nerfed, since CCP have low resists to whining. So you can have uncertain and weak or certain and weak.
Link to the announcement pls?.
I have seen a lot of threads started (by the same ppl over and over again) but all those threads would have died if it had not been for ppl saying ECM was fine.
Your argument and idea has failed try not to be so bitter about it.
I'd just like to say: nyah nyah I was right and you were wrong. Instead of being an arrogant, argumentative git, you could have made useful and constructive contributions, but no, you chose to just be totally negative.
And now look what you've got. The Falcon is still a crappy ship AND ECM has been nerfed. Nice one.
|
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:01:00 -
[476]
Originally by: Malcanis And now look what you've got. The Falcon is still a crappy ship AND ECM has been nerfed. Nice one.
ECM still jams people, people still won't fit ECCM. Whine posts will go on every now and then. Nothing changes.
Proud member of RZR - Decadence. |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:10:00 -
[477]
Originally by: Colonel Xaven
Originally by: Malcanis And now look what you've got. The Falcon is still a crappy ship AND ECM has been nerfed. Nice one.
ECM still jams people, people still won't fit ECCM. Whine posts will go on every now and then. Nothing changes.
Who cares - I won an argument on the internet!
|
Cletus Graeme
Caldari Duty.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:16:00 -
[478]
What's the problem with ECM ships?
|
|
|
|
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 |