

Ecm
#1
Posted 12 August 2013 - 12:20 PM
I'm a casual player of MWO - I play a few times a month when I get a chance. It's a fun game and definitely a worthy successor to previous MW titles. Yesterday I played in a 12-man organized drop against an ECM-heavy team. Everyone has an opinion about ECM, but I would just like to make a few suggestions based on what I observed from playing this ECM-heavy team that might help move it more into balanced gameplay.
1) Remove the "umbrella" protection of ECM. One annoying thing I've noticed is that shooting a PPC at a mech under the umbrella of an ECM-carrying mech does not put that mech on radar - you need to shoot the ECM-carrying mech. This seems a little unbalanced, as ECM mechs could stay behind cover, providing ECM protection to mechs regardless of whether they are PPC'd.
2) Make ECM jamming and countering effective to only a targeted mech, provided that mech is within some range of the ECM. Jamming is definitely cool, functionally and visually, but the omnidirectional jamming and stacking capability seems a little unbalanced, given some teams run with very ECM heavy setups.
3) Reduce the radar range of ECM-carrying mechs. I'm not sure whether this is as practical as the other suggestions, but I think light mechs with ECM are definitely preferred scouts. By reducing radar range, other light mechs might be more favored for scouting.
Thanks for reading!
#2
Posted 13 August 2013 - 11:01 AM
Point 2: The ECM umbrella is a sphere centered on the ECM mech which is why it will shelter surrounding mechs. Maybe just make it so that the ECM doesn't stack. It is all just a single power no matter how many you have in your team.
Point 3: That is a good idea. If a mech is running an ECM then reduce it's radar range by 25% due to having to work through the ECM umbrella and support it.
#3
Posted 13 August 2013 - 11:30 AM
Edited by Bront, 13 August 2013 - 11:30 AM.
#4
Posted 14 August 2013 - 05:32 AM
#5
Posted 15 August 2013 - 03:46 PM
Thanks!
#6
Posted 24 May 2014 - 01:23 PM
#7
Posted 26 May 2014 - 04:37 PM
#8
Posted 27 May 2014 - 06:55 AM
Seems to be something wrong with the bridge.
#9
Posted 27 May 2014 - 03:56 PM
It needs to be reworked from the ground up to match something more like it's intended role in the lore.
#10
Posted 27 May 2014 - 06:21 PM
EDIT: Fixed old link
Edited by Rasc4l, 30 May 2014 - 04:04 PM.
#11
Posted 27 May 2014 - 09:15 PM
losing 1 ton to completely counter 1.5 tons is perfectly reasonable
#12
Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:54 AM
TAG require giving up an energy hardpoint, ECM has its own hardpoint.
TAG is not a reasonable counter for the current OP of ECM. If ECM was better balanced, then TAG would be a reasonable counter.
#13
Posted 28 May 2014 - 01:56 PM
Adamski, on 28 May 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:
TAG require giving up an energy hardpoint, ECM has its own hardpoint.
TAG is not a reasonable counter for the current OP of ECM. If ECM was better balanced, then TAG would be a reasonable counter.
spotting - you need to look at your target to fire at it, right? if your weapons and TAG fire down the same crosshair i don't see what the big difference is
steady hand - really? that answer makes it very obvious you'v never even used TAG so you'r not in the position to bash something you don't know
let me simplify: you point TAG anywhere on a target (can be an arm, leg, CT - wherever you feel like pointing it at) that has ECM or is under the ECM umbrella, and it is immediately targetable and thereby nullifying ECM's effects on that target
there's a hard solution to the ''ECM problem'' - the hardpoint cost is nothing if it solves the problem
#14
Posted 22 December 2018 - 10:22 AM
#15
Posted 14 May 2019 - 06:52 PM
#16
Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:01 AM
Thread Start year, 2013.
Necrod once in 2018.
A lot of this mechanic has changed in the 6 years since the original post, and ECM is not nearly as powerful as it once was. The mentioned suggestions in the OP are now fairly obsolete, so please just let this thread rest in peace...
#17
Posted 15 May 2019 - 07:25 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users