15 replies to this topic

[Fotracul]

At least in the next patch make the matchmaking pick at least one ECM equipped mech for each team, i am really sick of having no ECM mechs in my team and in the other team there are like 4 ECM mechs, that is not balanced game, you are not offering a balanced game to us, and some of us actually pay for your game, so please show some respect at least to those who pay for your game!

[Syllogy]

Garth confirmed yesterday that no ECM changes are on the books for now.

His reasoning behind this was sound:

Despite the extremely vocal posts on the forums, ECM is still only averages 1-2 per team in PUG matches, and only 3-4 per team in 8v8 matches, with declining numbers every week.

If ECM was truly overpowered, those numbers would be at least doubled.

[Bobzilla]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Garth confirmed yesterday that no ECM changes are on the books for now.

His reasoning behind this was sound:

Despite the extremely vocal posts on the forums, ECM is still only averages 1-2 per team in PUG matches, and only 3-4 per team in 8v8 matches, with declining numbers every week.

If ECM was truly overpowered, those numbers would be at least doubled.

Yeah i can see why the numbers are going down, like me for example, it took me a bit to master my atlas's so now im gonna be using my D-DC all the the time now tho. I'm guessing when ECM came out people bought that chasis and then moved to master them.

The fact that people aren't using them as much as befor doesn't change how they work or what they do so it really is a stupid thing to say all the points people are making are moot because they are being used less. Its like saying 'people are telling us something is broken, but less people are using it so it can't be broken'.

Edited by Bobzilla, 10 January 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[Syllogy]

Bobzilla, on 10 January 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

Yeah i can see why the numbers are going down, like me for example, it took me a bit to master my atlas's so now im gonna be using my D-DC all the the time now tho. I'm guessing when ECM came out people bought that chasis and then moved to master them.

The fact that people aren't using them as much as befor doesn't change how they work or what they do so it really is a stupid thing to say all the points people are making are moot because they are being used less. Its like saying 'people are telling us something is broken, but less people are using it so it can't be broken'.

It has nothing to do with being broken. It has everything to do with being Overpowered. Those opinions aren't moot, but they also contradict the actual, quantifiable data that is gathered from the servers.

Like I said, if it were overpowered, it would be used more.

However, mastering a chassis can be done in just a few hours of play time, so I have to discount that point as moot though.

If ECM were broke, then it needs to be buffed, right?

Edited by Syllogy, 10 January 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[Hotthedd]

The numbers could very well be going down due to the simple fact that people are playing the non-ECM variants in an effort to ultimately level up their ECM variant.

It could also be that playing the ECM variant gets a bit boring after a bit.

Even with an average of 4 ECM 'mechs per PUG match, there is no system in place to ensure that the ECM distribution is even.

[Bobzilla]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

It has nothing to do with being broken. It has everything to do with being Overpowered. Those opinions aren't moot, but they also contradict the actual, quantifiable data that is gathered from the servers.

Like I said, if it were overpowered, it would be used more.

However, mastering a chassis can be done in just a few hours of play time, so I have to discount that point as moot though.

If ECM were broke, then it needs to be buffed, right?

The numbers of uses not being high has nothing to do with it's op ness. They introduced a new chasis that doesn't have ECM so people probably moved to that, also people stratigies have changed. I rarely see people using long range weapons. Its mostly close range builds.

Look at it this way, there are basically 4 mechs out of 40+ types, that means less than 10% can have ECM but if your 1-2 per team in pugs thats 12.5-25% or 37.5-50% in teams. That doesn't count the newer player that can't afford a mech. So if ECM was not a determing factor in chasis selecting, it would not be double or more than what % it is. Yes they aren't every mech on the battlefield but their percentage is high givin only 4 mechs can use it. He would have to show what percentage of meches with ecm are being used comparied to other individual mechs, not compaired to all other mechs. I would guess the most used chasis that doesn't have ECM is the K2 and ill bet it doesn't make up for 25% of the mechs used in pugs.

[HighTest]

Regardless of whether ECM is overpowered or not, I think the OP is suggesting that the matchmaker be modified to try and ensure a more even distribution of ECM mechs on both teams. As opposed to having 4 on one side and 0 on the other.

I agree with this 100%. Whether or not you think ECM is OK or not, what can it hurt to ensure both sides have roughly the same amount?

+1.

[Jetfire]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Garth confirmed yesterday that no ECM changes are on the books for now.

His reasoning behind this was sound:

Despite the extremely vocal posts on the forums, ECM is still only averages 1-2 per team in PUG matches, and only 3-4 per team in 8v8 matches, with declining numbers every week.

If ECM was truly overpowered, those numbers would be at least doubled.

This is essentially what I would expect from what I have seen. Once PPC EMP is in I would expect it stabilize right about there, possibly lower for 8 mans.

[steelblueskies]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Garth confirmed yesterday that no ECM changes are on the books for now.

His reasoning behind this was sound:

Despite the extremely vocal posts on the forums, ECM is still only averages 1-2 per team in PUG matches, and only 3-4 per team in 8v8 matches, with declining numbers every week.

If ECM was truly overpowered, those numbers would be at least doubled.

he said this on the 9th where? his post content history contains no such posting, and the last ngng up doesn't reference it as you indicate, nor happen to be from yesterday.

twitter? some other non forum place? or confusing garth with someone else? no i'm serious, where?

[Lupus Aurelius]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

Garth confirmed yesterday that no ECM changes are on the books for now.

His reasoning behind this was sound:

Despite the extremely vocal posts on the forums, ECM is still only averages 1-2 per team in PUG matches, and only 3-4 per team in 8v8 matches, with declining numbers every week.

If ECM was truly overpowered, those numbers would be at least doubled.

Just did a review of all the posts by Garth that I could find on the forums. There is no such statement.

Please provide an actual link to the actual statement.

Otherwise, we call bull...

[WarlordShea]

All weapons should be usable at all times, but effectiveness should change.

non-sequitir - I think he's made a case that has nothing to do with the case.

If I have 2 ECM mechs on my team that is enough to render LRMs and SRMs worthless or nearly so. That doesn't mean it is "not overpowered". It means enough people are running them now to saturate the team.

No system should completely nerf a weapon category - if you want to make lockon times longer, fine, but to make NO lock-on? I think that's weak and poor game design.

All weapons should be usable at all times, but effectiveness should change.

[Hauser]

steelblueskies, on 10 January 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

he said this on the 9th where? his post content history contains no such posting, and the last ngng up doesn't reference it as you indicate, nor happen to be from yesterday.

twitter? some other non forum place? or confusing garth with someone else? no i'm serious, where?

I'd like to see this source too.

[Gremlich Johns]

ECM, as implemented, should not act as:

1) cloak for the main force or any mechs crowding around the ECM mech's electronic field,
2) the ECM should affect EVERYBODY, friendlies and enemies alike,
2) ECM is most often (supposed to be) used by scouts for battlefield survivability and intelligence gathering. That is not what people are using it for, but the game allows it.

Even in sarna, which most everybody runs to for canon:

"It could seek targets like a Beagle Active Probe, or hide the unit mounting it like a Guardian."

This indicates that the PGI ECM is cloaking/protecting/enhancing everybody covered by the ECM field except for the enemy AND without any respect or resemblance to canon.

BAP, a different issue, is able finds targets quicker, get lock-on quicker but, conversely, permits mechs using radar to find it (a BAP mech) quicker as well. It does not negate ECM, but it punches through like there was no ECM suite active, so normal detection rates should apply.

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 10 January 2013 - 03:59 PM.

[Kristina Sarah McEvedy]

Gremlich Johns, on 10 January 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

ECM, as implemented, should not act as:

1) cloak for the main force or any mechs crowding around the ECM mech's electronic field,
2) the ECM should affect EVERYBODY, friendlies and enemies alike,
2) ECM is most often (supposed to be) used by scouts for battlefield survivability and intelligence gathering. That is not what people are using it for, but the game allows it.

Even in sarna, which most everybody runs to for canon:

"It could seek targets like a Beagle Active Probe, or hide the unit mounting it like a Guardian."

This indicates that the PGI ECM is cloaking/protecting/enhancing everybody covered by the ECM field except for the enemy AND without any respect or resemblance to canon.

BAP, a different issue, is able finds targets quicker, get lock-on quicker but, conversely, permits mechs using radar to find it (a BAP mech) quicker as well. It does not negate ECM, but it punches through like there was no ECM suite active, so normal detection rates should apply.

This.

[Mad Pig]

...

[StalaggtIKE]

Syllogy, on 10 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

It has nothing to do with being broken. It has everything to do with being Overpowered. Those opinions aren't moot, but they also contradict the actual, quantifiable data that is gathered from the servers.

Like I said, if it were overpowered, it would be used more.

However, mastering a chassis can be done in just a few hours of play time, so I have to discount that point as moot though.

If ECM were broke, then it needs to be buffed, right?

Or they're just grown bored of using the same chassis every game. Winning can only be so much fun, when it's not challenging. It's not like we have to pay for R&R, we can afford to lose sometimes.

WarlordShea, on 10 January 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

All weapons should be usable at all times, but effectiveness should change.

non-sequitir - I think he's made a case that has nothing to do with the case.

If I have 2 ECM mechs on my team that is enough to render LRMs and SRMs worthless or nearly so. That doesn't mean it is "not overpowered". It means enough people are running them now to saturate the team.

No system should completely nerf a weapon category - if you want to make lockon times longer, fine, but to make NO lock-on? I think that's weak and poor game design.

All weapons should be usable at all times, but effectiveness should change.

In b4 someone says something about TAG. Really if you're going through the effort to use TAG:

• to hopefully get a lock,
  
• to hopefully fire your LRM,
  
• to hopefully score some hits,

...then you might as well don't bother.



Edit: And if you're so pro that you're able to use TAG and score big with your LRMs; there are better, more reliable options for you. Stop holding yourself back!

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 10 January 2013 - 07:47 PM.