if you think i or anyone else should take whatever you say on board you are literally the type or person that calls a plumber to fix your fusebox.
ReallyâŚbecause I was hunting abyss runners not too long ago and killing them. I guess the abyss was released 2? 3? years ago?
So your assumption is wrong. It is dreams from make believe land because you want a reason to argue with someones opinion you donât like.
I donât. I donât care if someone takes my opinion and runs with it or doesnât like it. That is my opinion.
overpowered?
post on your main bro but grats on hunting people not fitted for pvp and not using ecm⌠i sure it gives you a really good grasp of actual pvp⌠smh
Oddly enough youâre not asking people with zero actual experience to post with their main.
Your bias is showing. Since others agree with you itâs okay they are not proving â â â â and are using alts with zero kills.
Donât like my opinion? Donât read it.
1 Like
Overpowered my ass
1 Like
Scroll up and read my posts.
Please quote my use of the word âoverpoweredâ.
Still looking?
semantics.
if its not overpowered its balanced.
if its balanced it does not need change.
that is a pragmatic way to come to a logical conclusion.
But feel free to have an opinion that is clearly wrong.
Facts are semantics when you donât like them.
Cool story.
âŚAttempt at redirectingâŚ
FAILED.
gg glhf
o7
opinions cant really be âwrongâ. just by definition.
the âfactsâ one basis their opinion Can be incorrect however. ala, fake news.
rng was cited as the primary basis for the ecm change, oh and how it affects a personâs FEELINGS. well, lots of games have rng mechanics, just like lots of games have âtauntâ mechanics. so they Want to rid themselves of the rng, but at the same time mimic what other games use as a taunt. they called this a balance pass, but it Doesnât balance anything. instead it creates further imbalance in key aspects of combat, AND it crashes a whole class of ewar and its ship bonused hulls.
as ive said many times, if you just Read the original dev blog, its literally one contradicting statement after another. there are soo many contradictions in fact, that you could read it and almost think its a joke. if you add briscâs commentary to the mix, then it MUST be a jokeâŚexcept it wasnât and isnât, and is now live. I would like to know what ccp metrics on ecm usage show, even in just the early days. also I would like to see some mention of incursions into ns to kill ratters and other things. is it more now? or less? common ccp, show us how Effective your recent âBalance Passâ was! did you effectively kill the ships you wanted to?? did you get buffs to the playstyles you wanted?? stop asking US to TELL YOU, and instead TELL US wtf you Really expect from trash heaps like this!
well my solo kills against ecm ships got deleted. If i was a conspiracy theorist id say they were trying to hide the truth!!
Im not though, someone just doesnt like the facts proving them wrong so they reported it as spam .
And this space feinds is why people dont generally bother with the forumsâŚ
2 Likes
they donât like ppl showing fits, especially fail fits. it puts the cards on the table. and snowflakes call it bullying. lol
facts are secondary anyways, per the dev blog. we are here to balance a persons feelings 
1 Like
Or maybe it was because you spammed a half dozen replies with one link each instead of once with several links.
Someone just doesnât want to admit spamming like that is dumb.
First, thanks for taking the time to answer questions and interact here. With so many folks here unable to form cogent arguments without resorting to ad homs, or simply regurgitating the same points, I suspect it is rather difficult to stay civil.
In that spirit, Iâm not going to rehash the ECM issues - of which I am decidedly not in favor of the new mechanics. If, on the one hand, the concern is that players feel neutered when jammed, this change has done very little to change that. The resultant use of ECM will be as it was back in 2008 - Falcons 150KM away, jamming whatever they like. The jammed party is hardly going to feel better now since they can re-direct their drones or start burning at the Falcon, knowing it can just hop off grid and return cloaked.
The ârealâ justification for this nerf seems to be 1:1 PVP. If thatâs the case, it is a rather inelegant solution.
I would suggest that if folks are generally unhappy with ECM (and I concur that it is a common complaint) that you re-think the entire system and try and figure out what is acceptable. And then implement it. Because the current âfixâ will hamper quite severely the use of ECM boats in anything other than long-range jamming, from 1:1 to small gangs and up. While ECM pilots have gotten used to being primaried, in the past, they had some ability to control that by jamming who is in range, prioritizing, taking advantage of numbers and disorganization by the opponent. That is all gone. You simply canât fly a boat whose tank is ECM within range anymore because the other side no longer needs to coordinate primarying you - the system has made it so that it is the ONLY thing they can do.
One other constructive comment: Iâve seen you post here a few times that youâre concerned about the long-term viability of ISK faucets in terms of ratting and mining, etc. You understand that in a player-based economy (as here) that this is misplaced, correct? Basic rules of supply and demand will correct. If ISK faucets are âtoo largeâ in terms of flooding the market, you will see prices rise as a counter, ultimately keeping it all in check. Cut back on the ability to âmake ISKâ and you will see prices on the high-end items drop. Simple supply/demand.
Thanks again for your time. o/
I think the issue isnât a question of supply and demand but one of inflation. The amount of money entering an economy needs to be controlled to keep inflation to a minimum. Weâve already seen this in the game over the last fifteen years, but the spike in isk entering the economy in bounties from stuff like super ratting has spiked in the last few years and I think itâs not sustainable.
CCP has to be like the Federal Reserve in the US or the central banks in Europe and tweak the money supply to keep inflation down.
1 Like
You know, it is a little frustrating as an outsider to see you, me and almost everyone you ask acknowledge that the amount of ISK and other resources entering the economy is unsustainable. CCP has repeatedly agreed, yet apparently has doing nothing for years now.
I know their inaction isnât your fault, or maybe the problem is intractable now and the fallout inevitable, but if the CSM can all at least agree on this, perhaps you can present it as one of your âunanimous top priorityâ issues in February?
I recently saw the âShip and Modules balance presentationâ from EVE Vegas with @CCP_Rise and I noted something that I find quite funny/ironic depending on how you look at it.
On the ECM change he said that it was introduced to avoid frustration and bad feelings of being jammed and then went on to say something like: â[âŚ] Obviously, ECM pilots are not feeling good about the strength of this module [âŚ] and that is fine [âŚ]â.
I know it may not be fair since the above line is taken out of a context, but I think the irony is that it is ok to make some feel bad if you make others feel fine! And that he is using those words.
Overall, I just do not think that the buffs he is talking about will help that much (especially ECM solo pilots), but we will have to wait and see. As one note in another thread, it would have been quite fun to see the stats of the usage of ECM ships before and after the patch.
I think the problem is that while we all acknowledge itâs an issue, itâs not a top priority compared with other stuff thatâs actively causing problems in the game - things that make playing less fun, or make folks log off. Inflation doesnât really do that, itâs just unhealthy for the game long term. Itâs something we know needs to get done, but itâs not front of mind compared to other more immediate things.
So itâs on my list, but I donât think I could get the guys to all agree that it needs to be like top 5.