134 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

You didn't answer me at all.

You didn't even read the posts in the thread that said Streak missiles need their damage lowered to make up for the fact that they are one of few weapons that gained a damage buff from table top statistics -- most other weapons are dealing the same as their board game counterparts in a game where there is twice the armor, yet Streak missiles do more and are completely guided.

I don't use streaks, ever. So keep telling me I'm bad at this game and use ECM as a crutch.

I think players QQing about how ECM needs to stay need to learn to play and shoot light 'Mechs better, and learn to deal with LRM's with effective use of cover and concealment.

Oh, and by the way, if you did read the suggestions you'd see that they give the electronic warfare items beyond ECM some use and utility, while still keeping ECM's ability to screen against LRM's with a new Ghost Target mode that doesn't instantly defeat LRM's but is balanced by itself and with other EW items like Beagle.

Edited by DocBach, 25 February 2013 - 11:46 PM.

[Lykaon]

I've said it before and I will say it again.

The current ECM features are a direct result of a lack of features in the other support electronics.

When we first got ECM added to the game we had TAG that had 450m range and it tightened up LRM volley spread concentrating damage.TAG was useful enough to be used but was not a big enough concern that a team with TAG was looked upon as having a significant advantage.As such TAG was not viewed as being a big enough threat to have to counter with ECM.

We also had NARC.And NARC essentially did nothing or more precisely it did very little for a very short time.Essentially NARC was (and still is) a waste of it's tonnage and hardpoint allotment.NARC is not seen in widespread use because it's basicaly junk.And since it's junk it is of no concern as a threat to the enemy that the enemy need not concern themselves with countering this nonthreat.

We had Beagle Active Probe well BAP was only widely used by streakcat pilots to use it as a means of countering the counter to being streaked into oblivion.Can't lock onto shut down mechs,unless you have a BAP equiped.
BAP allowed shut down mechs to be detected and locked onto and provided a slight boost to sensor range.Not a big enough concern for players to put any thought towards countering BAP effects because BAP's effects were bearly worth notice.

Artemis augmentation was still in it's infancy when ECM was introduced so it's a tad difficult to truley determine how much Artemis does most of the time if... A) no one is using LRMs because of ECM or Artemis is not functioning because of ECM.

So if BAP,TAG,NARC and Artemis were all suppose to be countered by ECM yet most of these support electronics didn't even do enough to merit their use never mind countering their use ECM needed more features above and beyond a simple support electronics counter measure.

That is why we got this monsterous Square Peg ECM feature.

ECM is a Square Peg that the developer will not round out.They just keep trying to hammer it into the round hole of mechwarrior online.

I fail to see the wisdom in altering the entirety of a game to make one feature fit when simply altering the out of place feature would be a more elegant solution.

Yet ECM has already caused alterations on several aspects of Mechwarrior Online.

First the Developers were concerned ECM was to powerful for use on any and every chassis.The Developers altered the mechlab to allow only specific chassis to select ECM as an option.Now mech chassis selection is influenced by ECM.

Next they changed TAG into a means of countering the sensor jamming of the heavy handed ECM feature.

After they tried that it was determined that TAG needed it's range exstended to 750m from 450m.So rather than alter ECM's effects we had TAG altered...TWICE.

It was later determined that ECM was still very potent and somewhat unpopular with many of the players.The developerd did not alter ECM.Instead the Developers added in Modules to diminish ECM's sensor jamming range effects.So now we have ECM causing Mechlab,TAG and module development and use to be effected and still no fundamental changes to ECM that apparently needed to be made less effective since it merited all of those changes in the first place.

So now after altering mechlab,TAG (twice) and adding in modules specificly designed to limit ECM effects the developers apparently noticed that all of this was still not enough to curb ECM so PPCs were granted additional effcts to scramble ECM.
So again rather than review and redesign the features of ECM to suit the game another feature of the game was bent to serve the overly bloated ECM features.

Now we have an ECM feature that infects nearly every aspect of MWo.

What chassis? ECM has an influence on this choice.

What configuration do I put in my chassis? LRM,Streak,TAG and PPCs use are all influenced by ECM.

How do I manuver my mech? ECM effects how and where we pilot.Do we stick close to ECM to keep within it's bubble? If we are the ECM how do I manuver to maximize my teams benifits?The use of ECM has limited inovation in tactical manuvering.We must be mindful of ECM and if we are benifiting or suffering under it's effects and where to move to gain the benifits or remove the detriment of ECM.

Even what we shoot at is influenced by ECM.Do we make ECM mechs a priority or do we select targets based on other criteria? ECM impacts what we shoot as well as where we manuver.

The strategic meta game is influenced by ECM.Group composition is heavily infuenced by ECM.When building a competative team we need to think,Do we have enough ECm? Do we have enough to counter enemy ECM? do we need more ECM or more TAG/PPCs?

ECM has deffinatley contributed to the ponderously high probability that each and every match you play in will included a Splatercat or two or three or four.ECM has deminished the disadvantages of using a specialized mech like the 6XSRM6 Cat because it can be sensor cloaked by ECM vastly improving it's chances of closing in to it's ideal range.While simultaniously vastly reducing the strong counter to short range Monsters the LRM.

Most players do not even consider these far reaching effects of ECM when they debate for or against it's current implimentation.

ECM has way to much influence.Developers seem to be bent on hammering the entirety of mechwarrior online to suit ECM instead of shaping ECM to fit the game.

[DocBach]

Lykaon, on 26 February 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

Incredibly well thought out perspective post

It's a shame that posts like this are going to be unread and ignored by people telling you to just adapt and learn to play.

[ReguIus]

Lykaon, on 26 February 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

ECM has way to much influence.Developers seem to be bent on hammering the entirety of mechwarrior online to suit ECM instead of shaping ECM to fit the game.

Hear, hear.

OP felt like a breeze of fresh air. Glad to see someone was finally able to rationally criticize ECM and offer a well thought solution in return.

[Abivard]

That long post boiled down to , 'ECM adds a depth to the game I am not prepared nor desire to have to cope with'

You can go to great efforts to avoid dealing with it by trying to eliminate it from the game, or you could really just learn to expand your mind outside that narrow children's game mentality of round hole and square peg, rock paper scissors, peek-a-boo and tic-tac-toe.

[DocBach]

Abivard, on 26 February 2013 - 01:27 AM, said:

That long post boiled down to , 'ECM adds a depth to the game I am not prepared nor desire to have to cope with'

Actually, it's quite the opposite. ECM removes the depth of a true electronic WARFARE system, where other components have a role and they counter each other.

All of these suggestions would add much more depth to the electronic warfare endgame.

Nobody is trying to eliminate it.

If you can't understand that, maybe you are the one who needs to expand his mind, because it seems your comprehension really sucks.

[Abivard]

EW Endgame?

Y'all are too funny

[DocBach]

Yes, the electronic warfare in this game is just ECM.

Changes to ECM would make it a niche roll that provides advantages

WITHOUT BEING THE ENTIRE MECHANIC THE REST OF THE GAME REVOLVES AROUND.

I'm using caps because you seem to have a hard time reading things.

[Abivard]

you have no idea what end game is do you? guess your a tic-tac-toe player

[DocBach]

I'm not using the term endgame to describe the high-level tier of this game, I'm using it to describe specifically how interaction between electronic items should work in conjunction with and against each other in ELECTRONIC WARFARE. ie the ELECTRONIC WARFARE ENDGAME

Right now the Electronic Warfare in this game isn't decided by electronic warfare at all, beyond ECM. Countering the electronic warfare isn't even done by the electronics that are suppose to do it, it's countered by PPC's. This thread is about making changes to where other equipment would be viable to use, and become effective on the battlefield and be worth taking ECM to jam out.

Your focus on Streak missile systems leads me to believe that it is not the people in here who have made well thought out suggestions, but you who has the problem learning to play and adapting. Specifically in an environment where people can use missiles to target you.

What takes more skill, having to hold a reticule on target to achieve a lock, maintaining lock for the entire flight time, and trying to do it again without exposing yourself to enemy fire, or equipping a 1.5 ton piece of equipment that provides you missile immunity?

Edited by DocBach, 26 February 2013 - 02:36 AM.

[Solis Obscuri]

Lykaon, on 26 February 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

very well considered post

Hit it on the head bro.

Overnight we went from "Mechwarrior Online" to "ECMwarrior OnRaven", and since then everything has been about figuring out how best to counter enemy ECM.

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 26 February 2013 - 02:29 AM.

[Livewyr]

Good god, I leave for a night, and come back to text walls. (not unwelcome input.. but I sobbed a tiny bit when I realized I'd have to read it in order to actually take it into account...)

Ok, responding: (will do so in Bold Italics to be distinguishable)

General Taskeen, on 25 February 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

I agree with some of this.

Please consider adding the 'canon' function of what NARC does to that list idea. Currently it makes no sense on any Mech, but a Light. For instance, the Stalker-5M, Trebuchet-7M, and later the Orion-1M. A lot of people probably wonder why a Narc appears on larger Mechs, and even Assaults. The simple reason is that it is supposed to function with SRMs (not SSRMS) and LRMs (SRMs and LRMs are made to home in on NARC beacons, but they are double in cost, in other words you have to have SRM/LRM missiles upgraded to be 'narc homing' capable).

Tech Manual (page 232)

"...These [NARC] pods contain powerful homing beacons capable of cutting through most standard forms of ECM—at least until the Guardian suite came along—and are used to attract friendly missiles equipped with properly attenuated sensors."

"...An attached beacon remains fixed to its target, calling in missiles upon itself until its unwilling “host” is destroyed."

"...Moreover, the effect of a single unit equipped with a Narc launcher can enhance the targeting of every
friendly missile support unit using Narc-compatible missiles,..."

(This information was generalized on sarna.net to read as: "The Narc Missile Beacon is a missile homing utility that can be planted on enemy targets, causing friendly SRMs and LRM missiles (even those that do not traditionally have homing capabilities) to lock on to them)...."

Adding NARC-Cap SRMS would be an improvement and more of a reason to bring missiles.
NARC-Cap LRMS would be nice too, at least in current "pay for it once" economy. Although I think in this current implementation it might need to be similar to Artemis where all the missiles you have are NARC-Cap.. either that or have to separate ammo counts (regular and NARC-Cap)

My only concern with that is- would NARC-Cap missiles be able to be used in non-NARC situations? (regular targets)
If so, great, I don't think any NARC-Cap ammo would be left at home in favor of regular, but if not, NARC isn't used enough and really requires a scout and a lot of dance to get that NARC set up.



It should have the fun, multi-purpose function that is missing from it, which would make more sense for ECM to be its counter. It is missing this fun feature that Mech Warrior 3 captured perfectly imo. TAG technically gains this feature as well in 3057 when Semi-Guided LRM missiles are introduced, which make the Semi-Guided LRM track towards where ever the laser points.




Other ideas:

C3 equipment really needs to brought into the game to really have true 'shared-info,' rather than the freebies we get. What should happen is this. This is stuff I brought up a while ago in the suggestion forum:

* Mechs can share targets, but not the Mech Readout of what they are targeting (this changes only partially from what it is now). Only by being in LOS, can someone see the Mech Readout information. (otherwise '??' should placed over the paper doll or HTOL)
* ECM stops someone from sharing the target.
* C3 Master/Slave units -> A C3 Master can share target and Mech readout information. A C3 Master also acts as TAG when locked onto target. Slave units detect nearest C3 Master, or another slave near by, to create a shared network. If an ECM cuts off a Master, the whole network is disrupted. If a slave unit is cut off by an ECM, only that unit is cut off from the enhanced share targeting. Any networked C3 unit does not need to have LOS for full target sharing.

C3 just gets introduced this year in BT Lore (Drac Combine) I think we should ask PGI about it in the Ask the Devs- 33 and see if they have that planned.

As for BAP, I think what you have outlined is doing too much for it, imo (the first 4 outlined ideas are fine, but the being targeted and incoming missiles should be active on any mech regardless of using BAP or not). And I'm not sure you touched on it, but ECM should simply reduce detection time by specific distance a little longer than normal detection (what I mean is 0-400m; 1.5 seconds longer, 401m-799m; 2.5 seconds longer; 800m+ 3.5 seconds longer). It also should not cause lock-outs when using missile launchers.

I guess the question I raise with missile/target warning is this: If missiles get put back in their place as far as damage, why should a normal mech get a warning about it? (Then they would still be nerfed by mechanic.) I think it would be perfectly acceptable to have that be a BAP function- perhaps we could extend that function to 120-180 meters like the ECM bubble. (Informing people within the BAP bubble that information in regards to them.) Just an idea to toy around with.

In regards to the distance/detection mechanic, I had that in my original ECM change, but it wasn't discussed later, so I discarded it. If other people also speak to that again, it can be re-added I think, give ECM some sort of "shielding" in this dynamic environment.

No Solis for me... (sorry, i couldn't resist)

Solis Obscuri, on 25 February 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

As a few comments:

TAG, Narc, and Artemis:
Per TT rules, Artemis IV and Narc improve cluster-hit grouping (analogous to grouping size in MWO), while TAG improves missile accuracy (analagous to tracking in MWO) by negating penalties for target movement, spotter movement, and indirect fire penalties. Artemis and Narc could not stack. Semi-guided missiles (which homed on TAG) were not compatable with either Narc or Artemis IV.

In MWO, all three give basically the same benefits - improved tracking and tighter grouping - but while Artemis and TAG stack, and TAG and Narc stack, Artemis and TAG do not. I'm really not sure why they bothered prohibiting the Artemis/Narc stacking, unless it was just to prevent people from getting a triple bonus. Narc beacons also allow indirect-fire against their target without a spotter, but have a limited duration, unlike TT rules.

I think they left out Artemis/NARC stacking as perhaps a prelude to NARC-Cap missiles discussed above, or perhaps our regular missiles are NARC-Cap by default. NARC-Cap missiles and Artemis Missiles are mutually exclusive.

BAP:
Per TT rules, an active probe confers several advantages: it detects hidden units in LoS within a 120m range, it can be used to scan for enemies at a range 50% greater than 'mech RADAR and 20% greater than 'mech IR/Magscan under conditions of obscured visibility, and it provides the user to scan for detailed information on enemy unit status and equipment (a full view of the record sheet, as opposed with telling only the 'mech variant, general % health and one specific question about a unit's status to an opponent with regular sensors).

In MWO, ECM provides a 25% bonus to targeting range, a 25% bonus to targeting info gathering time, and an ability to target shutdown units. The detailed scanning abilities are given for free to all units.

ECM:
Per TT rules, ECM gives out a number of bonuses. ECM negates the bonuses for Artemis and Narc on missiles that pass through its field of influence. It also cancels out special abilities of an active probe such as detecting hidden units and gathering additional info from sensor scans. ECM additionally interferes with scanning results for enemy units that within its 180m radius, reducing their chances of detection with scans (but not visual detection within LoS in visual range in the pilot's frontal arc).

ECM can be switched to an ECCM mode, in which it will counter the effects of an enemy ECM within its radius; it can also be switched to a Ghost Target mode, which has a chance of confusing the targeting and tracking systems of an enemy 'mech and reducing weapon accuracy if the shots pass through the affected radius of that ECM. ECM in ECCM or Ghost Target modes lose the standard benefits of ECM.

In MWO, ECM prevents any friendly 'mech in its radius of effect from being targeted or locked-onto with missiles (outside a very narrow 20m band), unless that unit is designated by TAG from outside the ECM radius. Even when using TAG or standing in the 180m-200m band, missile lock-on times against enemies within the ECM radius are doubled. Any enemy units that fall within the radius of an ECM lose their ability to lock guided missiles or spot with TAG, and cannot communicate their position to friendly units outside the ECM radius or spot targets for them. ECM negates all effects of BAP within its radius. ECM can be switched into an ECCM mode which negates the effect of one enemy ECM within its radius; in doing so it loses its normal benefits as well. PPC hits on a unit carrying an ECM will temporarily negate the effects of that ECM.

LRMs:
Per TT rules, LRMs can be fired in a direct fire mode, where they function normally as a direct-fire weapon, or without LoS in an indirect-fire mode, where the to-hit roll includes an additional +1 or +2 penalty for using a spotter (depending on whether or not the spotter makes any attacks during that turn). LRMs have a cluster-hit roll to make as well, that causes them to have a variable range of damage against an enemy target. LRMs have a 180m minimum range, and suffer a cumulative +1 to-hit penalty for every 30m their target is inside that range. SRMs function as per direct-fired LRMs, but have a shorter range and no minimum range.

In MWO, LRMs function the same in both direct fire or indirect-fire modes. They are able to track moving targets, but are generally easier to evade than other direct fire weapons due to their slow flight speed. Target lock must be maintained for the duration of their flight in order to maintain the tracking effect. Missiles are able to attain locks outside of their normal firing arcs (i.e. torso-mounted missile can lock onto targets under an arm reticule.) LRMs have a 180m minimum range, inside which they do no damage to their target. LRMs have higher damage-per-missile values than TT, as do SRMs.


SSRMs:
Per TT rules, Streak SRMs function as SRMs, but with two exceptions: if the attacker fails to make their to-hit roll, the missile launcher does not fire (conserving heat and ammunition). If the to-hit roll is successful, all missiles in the salve hit (as per a best-case roll on the cluster-hit table).

In MWO, Streak SRMs function completely differently than SMRs - SRMs are an unguided rocket, while Streaks gain a lock and unerringly hit their target. Streak missiles are designed to primarily group damage in the target's torso area. SSRMs will not fire without a lock (which is usually due to the effects of ECM). Missiles are able to attain locks outside of their normal firing arcs (i.e. torso-mounted missile can lock onto targets under an arm reticule.) SSRMs have higher damage-per-missile values than TT, identical to SRMs.

AMS:
Per TT rules, each AMS can engage a single salvo (the missiles launched from a single launcher) of incoming missiles; this is reflected by modifying the cluster-hit roll for that launcher, and will result in destroying some (or all) of those missiles depending on how good the cluster-hit roll was and how many missiles the launcher fired. AMS is effective against all types of missiles.

In MWO, an AMS attempts to engage all enemy missiles passing through the vicinity of the 'mech; this tends to be quite effective against small LRM launchers chain-fired, but can be overwhelmed by large simultaneous volleys from multiple launchers. AMS is effective against LRMs, but rarely effective against SRMs and SSRMs fired at closer ranges.

---

Looking over all of that, compared to TT, the ECM is the biggest "winner" acquiring a powerful set of abilities that far transcend its capabilities on TT.

BAP is possibly the biggest loser, giving up some of its unique abilities to basic 'mech sensors.

TAG is boosted greatly, as it gains both tracking and grouping bonuses, plus the capability to counter ECM somewhat.

Artemis IV receives a moderate boost, as it gains both tracking and grouping bonuses.

Narc receives a small bonus, as it gains both tracking and grouping bonuses, as well as an ability to designate a target without the need for a spotter with LoS. Its short duration serves as a slight nerf from TT in one regard.

LRMs become a much more situational weapon - they are more (potentially) accurate for indirect fire than on TT and can deliver much higher damage per salvo; however, they are easier to evade, the firing unit can be suppressed by other direct-fire weapons readily due to their slow flight time, their minimum range is much more strict than in TT, and their ability to attain locks is largely negated by ECM.

SRMs gain big in close - a full salve is almost guaranteed to hit point blank, and do much better and more concentrated damage than TT. Past about half their range bracket, though, they aren't very useful due to poor accuracy and wide spread.

SSRMs resemble TT in several regards, but gain big from being able to lock-on without being pointed within 60º of their target, and by having higher damage and better concentration of damage than on TT.

AMS gains somewhat against LRMs from TT, being able to target more incoming missiles, but loses big against SRMs and SSRMs, which it has a hard time engaging. It is greatly overshadowed by ECM, which gives better protection against both SSRMs and LRMs (plus a host of other benefits), and because neither work effectively against SRMs fired at point-blank ranges.

---

In general I'd agree with most of your changes, but not all. My take:

Artemis:
Same as currently implemnted in MWO.

Narc:
Same as currently implemented in MWO.

TAG:
Same as currently implemented in MWO.

BAP:
Increases sensor range by 25%.
Improves target info gathering time by 25%.
Target info gathering for loadouts and component damage past 250m becomes a function for BAP. Ordinary sensors can do the same at close range.
Can target shutdown units.

ECM:
Negates Artemis and Narc within its radius, and against friendly 'mechs in its radius.
Negates BAP effects within its radius, and against friendly 'mechs in its radius.
Negates TAG if fired within its radius.
Missile lock-on times are doubled against 'mechs in ECM radius (and for enemy 'mechs in ECM radius).
Sensor detection range against a 'mech carrying ECM is reduced by 75%.
Range for damage paperdolls 'mechs under ECM protection is reduced by 50%.
ECCM counter mode negates one enemy 'mech in radius of effect, but loses standard ECM benefits.
Ghost Target mode causes false RADAR/minimap targets to display for enemy; ECM loses standard benefits in this mode.

LRMs:
Double flight speed, reduce damage as per above (1.3/missile). Increase spread against targets in indirect-fire mode (without LoS). Restrict missile lock-on to the appropriate reticule for the weapon system (arm for arm-mounted, torso for torso-mounted).

I think we should ask in the ATD-33 about directfire/indirect fire changes/bonuses.

SRMs:
Reduce damage to 2.0/missile. Tighten spread past 100m.

Agreed, but I think in the case of this balance overhaul, we're keeping it to just discussing Electronics, and those things directly effected by them.

SSRMs:
Reduce damage to 2.0/missile. Restrict missile lock-on to the appropriate reticule for the weapon system (arm for arm-mounted, torso for torso-mounted).

Damage reduction (as above) I think is for another thread, in regards to missile targeting- I don't think the current system is OP in that regard, and implimenting multiple lock scenarios would just get too confusing. (I know I'd have to think about it.. and I've been playing Mechwarrior for years.)

AMS:
Improve effectiveness at close range, allow it to engage SRMs and SSRMs effectively even point-blank.

They do currently, they just don't do enough damage currently to take out SRMs in time- I think the 30% buff we mentioned may change that.

Let us discuss.

[Colddawg]

Narc-Capped missiles? Interesting idea but it would go nowhere towards implementation. This game is trying to turn Battletech Table Top into a first person real time strategy game. All tech and items are trying to stay true to the BT TT game. ECM is the most varying item from the TT rules as it is acting as the advanced tech Angel ECM more than guardian ECM. I would think a good balance would be to make the basic module of ECM cost more than it does-maybe half the price if a current module-and give it the rules of GUARDIAN ECM then allow for a module to upgrade the ECM to the ANGEL ECM variety with the current rules of how ECM works in the game. That way there's a good chance most ECM modules on the field will be the Guardian type with some of the longer playing members having the Angel ECM variety. It would also be nice to see players have to earn the angel ECM module for each mech in terms if c-bills and g-exp for each available chassis. That will bring in more of a balance as well as give players something else to work towards.

Edited by Colddawg, 26 February 2013 - 06:01 AM.

[Livewyr]

Colddawg, on 26 February 2013 - 06:00 AM, said:

Narc-Capped missiles? Interesting idea but it would go nowhere towards implementation. This game is trying to turn Battletech Table Top into a first person real time strategy game. All tech and items are trying to stay true to the BT TT game. ECM is the most varying item from the TT rules as it is acting as the advanced tech Angel ECM more than guardian ECM. I would think a good balance would be to make the basic module of ECM cost more than it does-maybe half the price if a current module-and give it the rules of GUARDIAN ECM then allow for a module to upgrade the ECM to the ANGEL ECM variety with the current rules of how ECM works in the game. That way there's a good chance most ECM modules on the field will be the Guardian type with some of the longer playing members having the Angel ECM variety. It would also be nice to see players have to earn the angel ECM module for each mech in terms if c-bills and g-exp for each available chassis. That will bring in more of a balance as well as give players something else to work towards.

Agreed in some regards-

I think the default missiles should remain NARC-Cap, but upgrading to Artemis removes that ability.

In regards to Guardian acting like Angel ECM (and Stealth Armor):
Angel ECM isn't available yet even in the experimental stage, and Stealth Armor isn't available for another 13 years, they shouldn't even have a presence in the game at the moment.

Also------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 3 hours I'm going to start a full and complete write-up of the status of these changes, so if you want to make an argument for changes before then, feel free. After that I'm going to let this thread die as far as I'm concerned.

[StalaggtIKE]

Abivard, on 25 February 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

great suggestions, to nerf everything except streaks, only nerf streaks that work against lights is that a nerf or a buff?

AH, now I get you. You love the current implementation of ECM because it saves you from Streaks. I was wondering what was driving your fanatical zeal. But, yeah, the OP included a nerf to SSRM as well. Just reread it.



Edit:

DocBach, on 26 February 2013 - 02:26 AM, said:

Your focus on Streak missile systems leads me to believe that it is not the people in here who have made well thought out suggestions, but you who has the problem learning to play and adapting. Specifically in an environment where people can use missiles to target you.

That's what I concluded as well.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 26 February 2013 - 07:22 AM.