142 replies to this topic

[Vlad Ward]

Volthorne, on 02 March 2013 - 11:25 PM, said:

Read the link I posted. The Jenner is basically 40% CT, 50% legs, 10% ST and arms.


You re also spreading damage across three sections instead of one.

Why are you shooting a Raven head on? When does that actually happen? Light Mechs play Chicken now?

[hammerreborn]

Seriously Vlad, this is all yours. These arguments are making my head hurt. ECM is OP because Ravens have 200% larger STs than Jenners and if you only focused on the Ravens CT and failed miserably and hit the STs as well and the Raven is the almighty god of death and destruction and only hits the Jenners CT the Raven wins. I....god

*shakes head and walks out*

Edited by hammerreborn, 02 March 2013 - 11:30 PM.

[Volthorne]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 11:26 PM, said:

Why are you shooting a Raven head on? When does that actually happen? Light Mechs play Chicken now?

I prefer "jousting". And why would you not take the time to line up a pass that almost guarantees your attack will land? Are you that bad/lazy of a pilot? Skill isn't always about making the most difficult shot possible you know.

hammerreborn, on 02 March 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

Seriously Vlad, this is all yours. These arguments are making my head hurt. ECM is OP because Ravens have 200% larger STs than Jenners and if you only focused on the Ravens CT and failed miserably and hit the STs as well and the Raven is the almighty god of death and destruction and only hits the Jenners CT the Raven wins. I....god

*shakes head and walks out*

I have no idea how we derailed this thread, but it was probably because you tools couldn't provide a single example of a downside for ECM that was actually a valid downside.

[hammerreborn]

The head on shot is the most difficult....shooting their ENORMOUS SIDE TORSO when you are broadsiding them is by far the easier shot, and way more effective (if their side torso is facing you that means they arent)

[Erasus Magnus]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 02 March 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

With increased speed, you would hit more often, especially at longer ranges. It's a bit of a nerf in terms of ammo consumption, but I think that would be more than compensated for by the fact that you could get a lot more shots on target instead of on a hill or building.



Depends on your definition of a boat. I run a C-1 with 2xALRM-15s, TAG, 3MLAS, full JJs, 5 or 6 tons of ammo, and a 300xl. I don't consider it a "boat", because I can chase off a 3L or 2D that wants to get up in my business. It's never helpless, and I can get more damage and more kills than mechs that overspecialize at the cost of mobility or flexibility.

the following is what i am promoting since closed beta:

reduce lrm damage to 1 per missile
increase the traveling speed by something between of 50-100%
increase ammo per ton by something between of 50-100%.
leave the lrm lockon and indirect fire system as is.
ecm hast to be tuned seperately.

the first two are somewhat self explanatory.
the third: right now lrm mechs have to field absurd amounts of missiles to make constant use of their main weapon system.

it would give lrm mechs more room for other weapons and equipment, further diminishing the importance of lrms.
and with a flat 1 damage per missile, there needs to be the opportunity to fire constant barrages.

IIRC, the ammo per ton in tt was roughly the same. given that the lrm launcher in tt was only fired once per rurn (10 seconds), the ammo consumption was MUCH less than it is now.

thoughts?

Edited by Erasus Magnus, 02 March 2013 - 11:33 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Volthorne, on 02 March 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

I prefer "jousting". And why would you not take the time to line up a pass that almost guarantees your attack will land? Are you that bad/lazy of a pilot? Skill isn't always about making the most difficult shot possible you know.

Jousting with a Raven is derp. The Jenner has JJs. The Raven doesn't. This means you can shake them from your tail, but they can't shake you. You're better off dogfighting and taking clean shots at their huge side profile (usually the same one, unless they attempt a rotation flop which is very risky without jets).

hammerreborn, on 02 March 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

The head on shot is the most difficult....shooting their ENORMOUS SIDE TORSO when you are broadsiding them is by far the easier shot, and way more effective (if their side torso is facing you that means they arent)

^

Edited by Vlad Ward, 02 March 2013 - 11:32 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Erasus Magnus, on 02 March 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

the following is what i am promoting since closed beta:

reduce lrm damage to 1 per missile
increase the traveling speed by something between of 50-100%
increase ammo per ton by something between of 50-100%.
leave the lrm lockon and indirect fire system as is.
ecm hast to be tuned seperately.

the first two are somewhat self explanatory.
the third: right now lrm mechs have to field absurd amounts of missiles to make constant use of their main weapon system.

it would give lrm mechs more room for other weapons and equipment, further diminishing the importance of lrms.
and with a flat 1 damage per missile, there needs to be the opportunity to fire constant barrages.

IIRC, the ammo per ton in tt was roughly the same. given that the lrm launcher in tt was only fired once per rurn (10 seconds), the ammo consumption was MUCH less than it is now.

thoughts?

I wouldn't make ammo per ton any less than it is now. Stalkers are already a huge problem just carpet bombing the entire match as is, they should have a downside for the ability to do this (less weapons to bear in short range).

Increase in flight speed I can agree with, but nearly halving the damage per missile I'd also have to say is way to low unless the flight speed is increased dramatically.

[Volthorne]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

Jousting with a Raven is derp. The Jenner has JJs. The Raven doesn't. This means you can shake them from your tail, but they can't shake you. You're better off dogfighting and taking clean shots at their huge side profile (usually the same one, unless they attempt a rotation flop which is very risky without jets).

Terrain. Use it.

hammerreborn, on 02 March 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

The head on shot is the most difficult....shooting their ENORMOUS SIDE TORSO when you are broadsiding them is by far the easier shot, and way more effective (if their side torso is facing you that means they arent)

How do you manage to miss a shot on someone running DIRECTLY AT YOU?!?

And we're still looking for a valid downside to ECM... I don't foresee one coming any time soon.

Edited by Volthorne, 02 March 2013 - 11:47 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Volthorne, on 02 March 2013 - 11:45 PM, said:

Terrain. Use it.


How do you manage to miss a shot on someone running DIRECTLY AT YOU?!?

Because if you were stupidly going for the CT (which you don't do), you're now firing at the most narrow point of the CT (the very pointy front?), and if you were to go for the side torsos (which you should do), you're also now aiming at their smallest profile, and will likely have missiles go high or too far left/right of the ST because you are aiming off center.

[Volthorne]

hammerreborn, on 02 March 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

Because if you were stupidly going for the CT (which you don't do), you're now firing at the most narrow point of the CT (the very pointy front?), and if you were to go for the side torsos (which you should do), you're also now aiming at their smallest profile, and will likely have missiles go high or too far left/right of the ST because you are aiming off center.

I meant how do you miss a frontal-shot on a Jenner. Missing a frontal-shot on a Raven was pretty obvious. In fact, it seems to me that while the Jenner is maneuvering to hit the Raven from the side, the Raven is maneuvering to hit the Jenner from the front....

Edited by Volthorne, 02 March 2013 - 11:50 PM.

[Doc Holliday]

If you lose 1 on 1 to a Jenner with a RVN-3L, you are bad, and you should feel bad.

If you lose 1 on 1 to any other mech with a RVN-3L, you are bad and you should feel bad.

If you lose 1 on 1 to any mech other than a RVN-3L with a COM-2D, you are bad and you should feel bad.

If your "best" mech has ECM, you are bad and you should feel bad.

[Vlad Ward]

Volthorne, on 02 March 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:

I meant how do you miss a frontal-shot on a Jenner. Missing a frontal-shot on a Raven was pretty obvious. In fact, it seems to me that while the Jenner is maneuvering to hit the Raven from the side, the Raven is maneuvering to hit the Jenner from the front....

It's a good thing the Jenner has significantly better cornering capability with them thar Jumpy McJets and can ensure that the engagement happens how they want it to happen.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 02 March 2013 - 11:56 PM.

[Voyager I]

Vlad Ward, on 02 March 2013 - 11:55 PM, said:

It's a good thing the Jenner has significantly better cornering capability with them thar Jumpy McJets and can ensure that the engagement happens how they want it to happen.

Don't kid yourself. The combination of Streaks and ECM in their current forms means that the Raven 3L and Commando 2D are the only functional light mechs in the game. Every other light (and Cicadas) will consistently die to them in even-numbers fights because Streaks decide light duels more than any other factor, player skill included, and nothing else gets to use Streaks against them. That means your lights have no ability to exert map control in the face of their opposition, which is what you need them for in the first place.

The real problem is the fact that Streaks are the ultimate trump card in light fights, though. If something like a Jenner F had a realistic shot of winning against a Raven 3L, ECM wouldn't be such an insurmountable advantage. The other issue with lights is that there's no reason to take anything under 35 tons when they all run the same speed and take up the same space in your deployment. It's going to be really, really hard for a Flea to look good when you could have something that weighs half again as much in the same slot.

Edited by Voyager I, 03 March 2013 - 12:13 AM.

[Volthorne]

And we're STILL looking for a valid downside to ECM. But then again, since there isn't one, and no one can provide one, then I guess the OP wins?

[Vlad Ward]

Voyager I, on 03 March 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

Don't kid yourself. The combination of Streaks and ECM in their current forms means that the Raven 3L and Commando 2D are the only functional light mechs in the game. Every other light (and Cicadas) will consistently die to them in even-numbers fights because Streaks decide light duels more than any other factor, player skill included, and nothing else gets to use Streaks against them. That means your lights have no ability to exert map control in the face of their opposition, which is what you need them for in the first place.

The real problem is the fact that Streaks are the ultimate trump card in light fights, though. If something like a Jenner F had a realistic shot of winning against a Raven 3L, ECM wouldn't be such an insurmountable advantage. The other issue with lights is that there's no reason to take anything under 35 tons when they all run the same speed and take up the same space in your deployment. It's going to be really, really hard for a Flea to look good when you could have something that weighs half again as much in the same slot.

I like most of what you're saying. But I think you're underestimating the difference between an ace Jenner and an ace Raven. The trouble is, you don't see much of either even in competitive play because it's a lot easier to put your ace pilots in heavies/assaults and throw the weakest link in a Raven-3L knowing he'll still perform at an acceptable level.

[Voyager I]

ECM doesn't necessarily need to have a downside to be balanced. 1.5 tons is a substantial sacrifice on a light, especially since their obligatory massive engines don't leave them much weight to play with for the rest of their fittings. In it's current form, it's exclusively available on light chassis that would otherwise be undesirable. The Raven 3L, for example, is basically a Jenner that goes slightly slower, has one less laser hardpoint, and can't use Jump Jets. In a raw combat role, the Jenner should still be a better choice. It's just the incredible importance of Streaks in light-fights and ECMs overpowering interaction with them that makes 3Ls (and, to a lesser extend, 2Ds) untouchable by their peers.

Of course, this still puts an onus on PGI to make sure that ECM isn't put on chassis that are already highly desirable, with the D-DC being a possible example of something that shouldn't be able to have it since it's already one of the best variants of a very good mech.

Vlad Ward, on 03 March 2013 - 12:25 AM, said:

I like most of what you're saying. But I think you're underestimating the difference between an ace Jenner and an ace Raven. The trouble is, you don't see much of either even in competitive play because it's a lot easier to put your ace pilots in heavies/assaults and throw the weakest link in a Raven-3L knowing he'll still perform at an acceptable level.

There are definitely things a Jenner can do better than a Raven; in terms of raw ability to hurt things, there's still no other light that beats them. However, in a serious business drop, the first priority for lights is being able to capture or defend control points from enemy lights sent to contest them, and there's no way I can expect a Jenner to handle itself 1v1 when the other guy gets to use Streaks and it doesn't.

I would disagree that there aren't ace pilots in lights, though. Different roles use different skillsets, so a Jenner savant won't necessarily be the best guy to drop in your poptart when you want them to be an impact player.

Edited by Voyager I, 03 March 2013 - 12:35 AM.

[Jestun]

The only con to equipping ECM is that it uses up 2 slots and 1.5 tons.

Everything else about it is a pro.

[Livewyr]

Mystere, on 02 March 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

I will not start a campaign to add them. But, you can be sure I will try to find a way to deal with them too and not go to the forums to QQ about them.

And come to think of it, I wouldn't mind if PGI decides to put them in. We are in BETA after all ... Oh, what the heck. Who am I kidding here ...

PGI, please put Magnetic Field Calibrators and Dense Fog Generators in the game.

And this is the door which you have finally actually entered that allows me to dismiss you wholly for having no idea what balance really is. I'm glad you aren't related to PGI's balance at all.

(One final sarcastic nail in the coffin of your argument: I think that everyone except Vlad Ward, hammerreborn, and Mystere should get 3 Ton, 2 critcspace ERPPCs, that do 15 damage and generate 3 heat and require no weapon hardpoints. They can handle it, they have the skills, therefore it is balanced..."Adapt or die")

-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Wow, what a journey.

7 pages, some *almost derailing* from posts by 2-3 of the most obtuse people I've ever had the displeasure of reading, and not one single answer to what would seem like an obvious question for any other item or mechanic in the game.

With that, I will add this thread into the giant oak chest of evidence that ECM is not balanced. Anyone else reading this thread should strongly consider this.

[Livewyr]

I have time.. and am feeling a bit more jerkish than usual.. so I'll go through itemize the "cons" to each weapon/item in the game.

MG: Extremely low damage, very short range, explosive ammo
SL: very short range, low damage
SPL: very short range, low damage
Flamer: high heat, extremely short range, extremely low damage
ML: high heat
SRM2: short range, no damage beyond range, explosive ammo
MPL: high heat, short range
LRM5: high minimum range, low projectile speed, requires lock, explosive ammo.
BAP: Requires missiles to be worth tonnage. (modules do it's scouting job)
AMS: Requires missile to be worth tonnage, explosive ammo
SSRM2: Requires lock, explosive ammo
ECM:-----
SRM4: short range, no damage beyond range, explosive ammo, less accurate (less tubes = multiple volleys)
SRM6: short range, no damage byeond range, explosive ammo, hardly accurate. (less tubes = multiple volleys)
NARC: short range, no damage, requires LoS to work, low ammo per ton, explosive ammo?
LL: high heat, long beam duration
ERLL, very high heat, long beam duration
LRM10; high minimum range, low projectile speed, requires lock, explosive ammo. (less tubes = multiple volleys)
AC2: Low damage, explosive ammo
LPL: very high heat
PPC: very high heat, 90 minimum range
ERPPC: Extremely high heat
LRM15: high minimum range, low projectile speed, requires lock, explosive ammo. (less tubes = multiple volleys)
AC5: Heavy, large, explosive ammo
UAC5: Heavy, large, Jams frequently, explosive ammo
LRM20: Heavy, large, high minimum range, low speed, req. lock, explosive ammo, high heat (less tubes = multiple volleys)
LB 10X: Heavy, large, spread damage, explosive ammo
AC10: very heavy, very large, explosive ammo
AC20: very heavy, Extremely Large short range, explosive ammo
Gauss: very heavy, very large, low health, explosive weapon...

Seems every item has a drawback, if nothing else; compared to counterpart items, or relevance to roles/game.

Except ECM.

[Mack1]

It has a nice light that comes on when you press it.