142 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

The point is that those Mechs are awful on their own. That's a serious Con. When you have the choice between taking the best Light Mech in the game and mounting ECM, that's a Con. When you have to choose between a King Crab and a D-DC with ECM, that's a Con.

That is not a con of ECM. (repeat, NOT) ("Con" means a reason it is bad; or more accurately; a reason you might NOT bring it if it were available. Example: BAP, BAP doesn't do anything that you can't do with a couple of modules, UNLESS you're using missiles..so whether you want 1.5-2tons of armor, weapon, ammo, or engine rating is a question you really do ask. Do I want BAP, or do I want more ammo?

That is not a question one asks of ECM.

That is evidence that it is not balanced.

Edited by Livewyr, 02 March 2013 - 05:36 PM.

[Byk]

I think we should all just take a step back. Breathe. Wait until collisions are back in, and then come back and look at where ECM is.

[Livewyr]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 02 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

My point stands. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one apparently.

As it is a debatable speculation, I will agree to disagree.

[Vlad Ward]

Livewyr, on 02 March 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

That is not a con of ECM. (repeat, NOT) ("Con" means a reason it is bad; or more accurately; a reason you might NOT bring it if it were available. Example: BAP, BAP doesn't do anything that you can't do with a couple of modules, UNLESS you're using missiles..so whether you want 1.5-2tons of armor, weapon, ammo, or engine rating is a question you really do ask. Do I want BAP, or do I want more ammo?

That is not a question one asks of ECM.

That is evidence that it is not balanced.

You're intentionally throttling your frame of reference in order to dismiss viewpoints that differ from your own. This thread is pointless.

If you don't understand why choosing between having a Good mech without ECM and a Bad mech with ECM is a balance mechanism, then discussing this with you is not worth anyone's time.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 02 March 2013 - 05:39 PM.

[Gaan Cathal]

The con with ECM is Streaks, and to a lesser extent LRMs.

That is to say, if you outright remove ECM, you don't have anything holding those two weapon systems (particularly the former) in check.

Ideally, as an ECM user, I'd have the following adjustments:

-Allow LOS targeting of friendlies in radius, but not sharing of that info
-Remove friendlies from hostile radar w/in radius, no effect on hostile IFF
-Only causes 'signal jammed' report when opponent has BAP
-Negates BAP advantages against friendlies in radius
-'Downgrades' missile launches against friendlies/by hostiles in radius, i.e. Artemis, TAG ineffectual, maybe increased spread on SSRMs, see below however

The thing is SSRMs need to be brought in line at the same time, they're just as out of whack as ECM at the moment (complain about 1.5 ton, 2 crit ECM? How about a 0.5 ton launcher upgrade that makes SRMs never miss compared with a 1 ton, 1 crit launcher upgrade that tightens their grouping?). Torso-seeking autoaim half-heat medium lasers are bad.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 March 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

It's the SRM Boats and Streak Boats that are purely created by these games.

Butterbee. Arctic Wolf. I wish TT-purists would stop just making stuff up and assuming the rest of us are too moronic to use them thar intertubes.

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 02 March 2013 - 05:39 PM.

[Livewyr]

Byk, on 02 March 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

I think we should all just take a step back. Breathe. Wait until collisions are back in, and then come back and look at where ECM is.

I assume you're referring to lights. Lights are one symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

[Livewyr]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

You're intentionally throttling your frame of reference in order to dismiss viewpoints that differ from your own. This thread is pointless.

If you don't understand why choosing between having a Good mech without ECM and a Bad mech with ECM is a balance mechanism, then discussing this with you is not worth anyone's time.

I see the viewpoint you're coming from, at this point I just think you misunderstand what "balance" means.
Using an overpowered mechanism to "balance" a variant does not say anything to the balance of the mechanism.

Otherwise one could contend that you could use a 9ton gauss Rifle to balance a variant with others. The Hunchback 4G is generally seen as inferior to the 4P, 4SP, and 4J.. so lets give it a 9ton Gauss Rifle that no other hunchback can have and call them balanced. Do you not see the fallacy there? That doesn't make the 9ton gauss rifle balanced.


(EDIT: I would give you a more polished example of why using imbalanced mechanisms to "balance" mechs is not balancing a mechanism, but I have to go for now.)

Edited by Livewyr, 02 March 2013 - 05:44 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Gaan Cathal, on 02 March 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

The con with ECM is Streaks, and to a lesser extent LRMs.

That is to say, if you outright remove ECM, you don't have anything holding those two weapon systems (particularly the former) in check.

Ideally, as an ECM user, I'd have the following adjustments:

-Allow LOS targeting of friendlies in radius, but not sharing of that info
-Remove friendlies from hostile radar w/in radius, no effect on hostile IFF
-Only causes 'signal jammed' report when opponent has BAP
-Negates BAP advantages against friendlies in radius
-'Downgrades' missile launches against friendlies/by hostiles in radius, i.e. Artemis, TAG ineffectual, maybe increased spread on SSRMs, see below however

The thing is SSRMs need to be brought in line at the same time, they're just as out of whack as ECM at the moment (complain about 1.5 ton, 2 crit ECM? How about a 0.5 ton launcher upgrade that makes SRMs never miss compared with a 1 ton, 1 crit launcher upgrade that tightens their grouping?). Torso-seeking autoaim half-heat medium lasers are bad.




Butterbee. Arctic Wolf. I wish TT-purists would stop just making stuff up and assuming the rest of us are too moronic to use them thar intertubes.

Quoting two random mechs that rarely if ever get featured in anything but one technical manual is silly.

They aren't the norm in the universe at large (Video Games, Television Shows, Books, Tabletop, etc.). LRM boats are VERY common.

Also, ADJUST LRM'S AND STREAK'S ON THEIR OWN NOT WITH ECM.

Why do people who like ECM always throw that out as an argument? If ECM never existed, the Dev's could've lowered the damage, adjusted the speed, changed the arc, changed the spread, changed the heat, changed the ammo, changed the targeting time.

About 50 different things to adjust LRM's and Streaks without involving ECM.

[Vlad Ward]

Livewyr, on 02 March 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

I see the viewpoint you're coming from, at this point I just think you misunderstand what "balance" means.
Using an overpowered mechanism to "balance" a variant does not say anything to the balance of the mechanism.

Otherwise one could contend that you could use a 9ton gauss Rifle to balance a variant with others. The Hunchback 4G is generally seen as inferior to the 4P, 4SP, and 4J.. so lets give it a 9ton Gauss Rifle that no other hunchback can have and call them balanced. Do you not see the fallacy there? That doesn't make the 9ton gauss rifle balanced.


(EDIT: I would give you a more polished example of why using imbalanced mechanisms to "balance" mechs is not balancing a mechanism, but I have to go for now.)

Short version: The equipment doesn't need to be balanced, because it's not something that can be taken on its own. It is only one part of a whole. So long as the whole ends up reasonably balanced, then the equipment has done its job.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

That's a poor way to balance a game. Because the equipment doesn't always exist in every game. And it stacks on itself, so 8 of them is better than 1 of them.

You have to balance each item on it's own first.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 02 March 2013 - 05:48 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 March 2013 - 05:48 PM, said:

That's a poor way to balance a game. Because the equipment doesn't always exist in every game. And it stacks on itself, so 8 of them is better than 1 of them.

You have to balance each item on it's own first.

8 of them is no different than 1 of them unless you're trying to stack Streak Lights until you reach critical mass, in which case you're just holding left mouse anyways so who gives a crap?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

8 of them is no different than 1 of them unless you're trying to stack Streak Lights until you reach critical mass, in which case you're just holding left mouse anyways so who gives a crap?

8 ECM is very different than 1 ECM.

Who has ECM superiority if two teams fight and one team has 1 ECM and the other team has 3 or 4?

Which of those teams can use streaks with impunity in that situation? Which one would be more likely to be able to utilize LRM's?

[Gaan Cathal]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 March 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Quoting two random mechs that rarely if ever get featured in anything but one technical manual is silly.

They aren't the norm in the universe at large (Video Games, Television Shows, Books, Tabletop, etc.). LRM boats are VERY common.

The limiting factor on SRM boats from what I can tell is essentially that they are short ranged and heavily ammo dependent. In a 'military' setting this is a bit daft. If the BTech engineers were designing a short ranged assault (lowercase) mech that could guarantee magical resupply post engagement then they'd probably boat SRMs.

Irrespective of that, lasers are boated all over BTech. So boating is a thing. The fact that you're doing it with missile launchers, not lasers doesn't suddenly make it lore-******.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 March 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Why do people who like ECM always throw that out as an argument? If ECM never existed, the Dev's could've lowered the damage, adjusted the speed, changed the arc, changed the spread, changed the heat, changed the ammo, changed the targeting time.

Did you miss the bit where I listed how ECM should, in my opinion, be toned down? I'm saying they need to be balanced at the same time, or we'll just end up with a different broken piece of equipment. I'd rather have broken ECM than broken SSRMs as the dominant because it's defensive. The Streakcat doesn't need to make a widespread comeback (though I'm seeing more and more of them paired with Streak3Ls).

[Mystere]

Livewyr, on 02 March 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Well.. at least someone gave an actual answer ...

Oh! You were actually serious and not just trolling?

Instead of all this crying, why not just follow your own sig: ADAPT OR CRY!

Many already have, rendering ECM a non-issue for them.

Oh, wait! I guess you are following it already (i.e. the CRY part).

Edited by Mystere, 02 March 2013 - 06:01 PM.

[Volthorne]

hammerreborn, on 02 March 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

My target and I moving 150kph which I have to track and hold my reticle on rather than getting a lock, firing, and keep looking in the targets general direction

now imagine having to compensate for 150kph speeds against something only moving 64.8kph, BEFORE lag. Give me something like that for 1.5t, 2 crits, and 0 heat, and we'll call ECM balanced.

[Vlad Ward]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 March 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

8 ECM is very different than 1 ECM.

Who has ECM superiority if two teams fight and one team has 1 ECM and the other team has 3 or 4?

Which of those teams can use streaks with impunity in that situation? Which one would be more likely to be able to utilize LRM's?

Streaks are bad, okay? Can we clear that up? Streaks, in AND against anything that isn't a Light, are bad. Streaks in Lights? Still bad unless we're talking low levels of play where no one can aim anyways.

LRMs? Pop a TAG and suck it up.

[Livebait]

Cons: Nothing

ECM as is hides the fact that LRM's do to much damage and Ssrm's flight paths are a joke. AMS is basically very useless as an alternate to ECM. If AMS could track and shoot down more missiles and Ssrms under 30 meters, Then it could be an option. AMS needs ammo. So why not make it very effective. ECM just does way too much at this point in beta.

Edited by Livebait, 02 March 2013 - 06:05 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Mystere, on 02 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

Oh! You were actually serious and not just trolling?

Instead of all this crying, why not just follow your own sig: ADAPT OR CRY!

Many already have, rendering ECM a non-issue for them.

Oh, wait! I guess you are following it already (i.e. the CRY part).

Oh you've done it now. I said that in one of ops numerous other temper tantrums and it turned into a flamefest

[Volthorne]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

If you don't understand why choosing between having a Good mech without ECM and a Bad mech with ECM is a balance mechanism, then discussing this with you is not worth anyone's time.

The 3L is already the best Raven, because it has the biggest engine. The 2D is already the best Mando because it has the most missile hardpoints. The 5D is the best Spider because arm-mounted laser. The D-DC is (arguably) the best Atlas because it supports the highest damaging alpha-strike. The Cicadas are all generally the same.

You're taking the best variant of each chassis and giving it exclusive gear that only makes it better with no downside. This is unacceptable, an apparently very hard to understand because no one has an IQ over 60 (with the exception of those who can actually SEE and are willing to acknowledge that ECM is broke as hell).

Edited by Volthorne, 02 March 2013 - 06:14 PM.

[Livewyr]

cute mystere, another person completely misunderstanding my sig and trying to use it against me. why don't you go sit in the dunce corner with hammer.

Vlad...we all know streaks and LRMs are broken, nobody has said anything to the contrary in this thread. the issue is that some people seem to like that the currently horrid 'fix' (ECM) all bit eliminates streaks and LRMs(rather than fixing them), and those people only brawl or snipe anyways.

for the record, I pilot everything, hammer and mystere, everything. I have seen the issue from all sides. I've been on both sides of the argument, I, unlike you two boneheads have actually looked at the issue from all perspectives, not just the one(s) I like. you're dismissed. (you for a second time, hammer. )