188 replies to this topic

[HC Ret]

wwiiogre, on 07 March 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:

Current ECM is Null Sig from the MWO future.

What we should have is called Guardian ECM it has 3 settings not two. 1. stops narc/artemis 2. counters ecm 3. ghost targeting which makes it harder to hit by any weapon system not impossible to lock

Angel ECM from the future only has two settings 1. Counter ECM 2. stop narc/artemis and ghost targeting; note this is from the future timeline of MWO yet we have this and ghost targeting was never automatic it actually was a pilot skill and sometimes did not work or did not work well and BAP and Command Console worked against it.

Null Sig, Does all of the above but works automatically, This is what we have in MWO right now. Not even a real rule or piece of equipment, so broken that Catalyst lists it as an experimental rule and it is not available on any stock mech. Yet this is what we have in MWO right now. A piece of futuristic ECM equipment that is decades away from implementation in this timeline.

Want more future equipment, how about coolant flush. Currently not available in this timeline, but MWO is now adding yet another piece of future equipment but making it better. Since coolant pods weigh something, have to be put on your mech, can be destroyed. Yet, MWO coolant flush is magic fairy power up. Not even part of the technology or timeline.

Sorry PGI, you get a fail on both of these systems. Not in this timeline, completely unbalances the game. Just when PGI got the entire heat system perfect, they throw a wrench in the system by offering future tech. Doc Brown, can you get me some more future tech please? Some without a drawback, possibly some no weight armor and ammo buffs would be nice.

In Battle Tech when you called in arty or air you actually had to pay for it in BV or weight tonnage for a drop and Air strikes took 1.5 minutes between them and Arty could take a long time to since arty had to be boards away to use. But, nope, we get magic arty/air strike powerups. Just insert cash here. Sorry another fail plus it takes away from role warfare of the command console.

So how should ECM work in this timeline for a first person shooter you ask? Let me tell you. Ghost targeting should make it harder and longer to lock targets on an ecm equipped mech. Note not impossible. Say 6 seconds to lock an ecm mech, minus one second for BAP and two seconds for command console. Note possible modules and pilot tree skills could lessen the amount even more. But at least a two second delay should be required between each shot, meaning you need to reacquire a lock on an ecm mech each time and lock is lost when missiles detonate.

Now how do we fix the broken streak mechanics, I say in the same way. Each time, like it says in the rule book for streaks a lock must be acquired. This fixes the broken fire and forget ssrm of MWO. Into a smart weapon that other mechs can dodge or break lock on. Currently because of target retention module you cannot break the lock of a raven with streaks, unless you have ecm. So a jenner, commando etc die horribly because ssrm is easy button.

How important is this to the balance of the game right now. Winter is Coming. The Clans have SSRM6 and SSRM4. Think its broken now. Wait till the 40 ton dragonfly omni mech with ecm and 4-6 ssrm6 come into play. 175kph, jump 12 and ssrm and ecm. Thats a 90 point alpha from that little 40 ton mech. How about a 10 ssrm6 daishi or the 150 point alpha. Oh and a daishi will have a command variant with ecm just like the atlas. Ooops, think balance is broken now. Doesn't take a genius to see there are problems in the future for MWO if they keep sticking with using broken systems from the BT future and instead of admitting they screwed the pooch, and trying to fix it. They just keep adding broken counter attempt after broken counter attempt.

Another major problem with ssrm, srm and lrm at the moment is they fire on ballistic paths and track to CT. Yep unguided missiles will hit dead center every time. Wait that seems guided and overpowered. Well it is. Its why in table top they have missiles hit in random locations every time. Even streaks or it breaks the game balance. What would it mean to MWO if missiles hit random locations. 6 x srm6 AT catapults would fire and each of the 36 missiles might hit different locations instead of bunching up and coring an atlas you might actually hit its legs, arms, and even head and some might not hit at all. Cause it was very rare in BT a 1 in 36 chance that all missiles hit. Higher with artemis. This is why missiles always seem broken and op in MWO right now.

So, Once again I will be shouted down by the min/max players that like to stomp pugs and pump up their stats. How about if you disagree with me you try using intellectual honesty and debate and use facts while discussing how I am wrong or how it is better now and how it is.

Chris

had to repost

[StalaggtIKE]

Lykaon, on 08 March 2013 - 01:23 AM, said:

*snippet*

My thoughts exactly. So much man power is going into altering the game to work with ECM, instead of making ECM work with the rest of the game. I'm sure everyone remember the whole X-5 uproar. It was rumored to have ECM, thus it was considered P2W. If ECM wasn't so useful, this would have not been an issue. Thing is every included mech and piece of hardware will now be measured against ECM to determine if it disrupt the fragile ecosystem of balance we currently have. Promised features such as Information warfare is nonexistent. Here's why:

• Tag - It is currently used as a self designating tool, when instead it should have been the tool of a spotter (preferably a light). That's why the default range was short. It required sneaking behind enemy lines and spotting. A range boost is fine, however this has came with the corruption of role warfare.
  
• Modules (sensor range & target info gathering) - these are copied abilities from BAP. The issue being that, these are superior, since ECM counters BAP. The only saving grace of the BAP is its ability to detect shutdown mechs, in which is easily dealt with a shot in the cockpit for anyone foolish enough to attempt such.
  
• PPC - We were promised EMP, instead we got a temporary ECM disabler. This is what an EMP does (24s mark):
  It distorts the HUD and minimap..., kind of like, I don't know, our current ECM!
  
• BAP - cost, weight and take up the same crit slots as ECM, yet it is greatly inferior. It is supposed to provide the user with a targeting range advantage, however ECM cuts everyone's default range by 75%. Thus doing a better job. ECM causes a huge disparity between detection ranges:
  Over half of BAP's abilities can be duplicated through the use of modules. On top of that ECM completely negates it.
  
• ECM - It stealths teammates, blocks missiles lock from a distance and up close, slows down missile locks within range, slows down information gathering, disrupts minimap and IFF, denies target sharing between enemies and counters opposing ECM. All of this is done passively, only requiring the user to toggle modes. The only drawbacks is the limited builds that can carry it. Instead of adding to information warfare, it is the sole denier of information and enabler of LRM/SSRM spam.

Currently the only attempted method of balance towards ECM has been through elimination from gameplay: 4 seconds from PPC, TAG removing its stealth or being destroyed. Fact is, we want ECM to harmonize with the rest of the game. As electronic counter measure it should be the equalizer to electronic advantages. Nothing more and nothing less. Therefore it does not need to be countered. It is simply doing the countering. Information warfare comes from the use of BAP, NARC and TAG. ECM is not a part of this group. We do not currently have information warfare; instead only ECM, ECM and more ECM. Hopefully there are plans in the work to correct this ~ SOON.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 08 March 2013 - 01:06 PM.

[RG Notch]

WardenWolf, on 08 March 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

I will call ECM balanced the day that *every* mech can equip it equally.

A lot of folks in this thread have ideas I strongly support, and I agree that ECM is not where I think it should be. I think the very fact that some mechs can mount it and others cannot is proof that it is not balanced.

So are Jump jets OP?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

StalaggtIKE, on 08 March 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

My thoughts exactly. So much man power is going into altering the game to work with ECM, instead of making ECM work with the rest of the game. I'm sure everyone remember the whole X-5 uproar. It was rumored to have ECM, thus it was considered P2W. If ECM wasn't so useful, this would have not been an issue. Thing is every included mech and piece of hardware will now be measured against ECM to determine if it disrupt the fragile ecosystem of balance we currently have. Promised features such as Information warfare is nonexistent. Here's why:

• Tag - It is currently used as a self designating tool, when instead it should have been the tool of a spotter (preferably a light). That's why the default range was short. It required sneaking behind enemy lines and spotting. A range boost is fine, however this has came with the corruption of role warfare.
  
• Modules (sensor range & target info gathering) - these are copied abilities from BAP. The issue being that, these are superior, since ECM counters BAP. The only saving grace of the BAP is its ability to detect shutdown mechs, in which is easily dealt with a shot in the cockpit for anyone foolish enough to attempt such.
  
• PPC - We were promised EMP, instead we got a temporary ECM disabler. This is what an EMP does (24s mark):
  
  
  
  
  
  It distorts the HUD and minimap..., kind of like, I don't know, our current ECM!
  
• BAP - cost, weight and take up the same crit slots as ECM, yet it is greatly inferior. It is supposed to provide the user with a targeting range advantage, however ECM cuts everyone's default range by 75%. Thus doing a better job. ECM causes a huge disparity between detection ranges:
  
  
  
  Over half of BAP's abilities can be duplicated through the use of modules. On top of that ECM completely negates it.
  
• ECM - It stealths teammates, blocks missiles lock from a distance and up close, slows down missile locks within range, slows down information gathering, disrupts minimap and IFF, denies target sharing between enemies and counters opposing ECM. All of this is done passively, only requiring the user to toggle modes. The only drawbacks is the limited builds that can carry it. Instead of adding to information warfare, it is the sole denier of information and enabler of LRM/SSRM spam.

Currently the only attempted method of balance towards ECM has been through elimination from gameplay: 4 seconds from PPC, TAG removing its stealth or being destroyed. Fact is, we want ECM to harmonize with the rest of the game. As electronic counter measure it should be the equalizer to electronic advantages. Nothing more and nothing less. Therefore it does not need to be countered. It is simply doing the countering. Information warfare comes from the use of BAP, NARC and TAG. ECM is not a part of this group. We do not currently have information warfare; instead only ECM, ECM and more ECM. Hopefully there are plans in the work to correct this ~ SOON.

Good post. Maybe we should start a letter writing campaign. I wonder if 600 emails every day until the devs confront the issue would be enough?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 08 March 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

Good post. Maybe we should start a letter writing campaign. I wonder if 600 emails every day until the devs confront the issue would be enough?

If theyre not confronting the issue at this point they never will. We've been raging against this thing for months since it got put it. They dont care.
Or theyre too full of themselves to change it.

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 08 March 2013 - 01:11 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I think we just might have to be more direct. We had 600 people vote they didn't feel ECM was right in the big poll.

If every one of those people sent an email to whichever official email, probably the support one, once a day. With one line requesting the ECM command chair that was promised in the Dev QnA a month ago, maybe they would respond?

Even if only 200 people did it a day, that's 1400 emails a week.

[Hillslam]

ECM is fine, always has been. [Redacted] I don't use ecm, but I have eyeballs and know how to shoot at the big robots.

Edited by Niko Snow, 08 March 2013 - 04:21 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 March 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

If theyre not confronting the issue at this point they never will. We've been raging against this thing for months since it got put it. They dont care.
Or theyre too full of themselves to change it.

The fight for a balanced ECM is more important now, than ever. With the upcoming tweaks to thermal and night vision, means ECM stealth mechs will be far harder to see. Non-ECM mechs will stand out from 800m+ due to passive radar. While thermal visibility will extend out to 700m only. Let's not forget the wonderful Airstrike and Artillery modules on the way, that will be able to strike non-ECM mechs with precision, again thanks to passive radar. This is a train wreck worth avoiding before hand.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 08 March 2013 - 01:44 PM.

[Pihoqahiak]

wwiiogre, on 07 March 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:

In Battle Tech when you called in arty or air you actually had to pay for it in BV or weight tonnage for a drop and Air strikes took 1.5 minutes between them and Arty could take a long time to since arty had to be boards away to use. But, nope, we get magic arty/air strike powerups. Just insert cash here. Sorry another fail plus it takes away from role warfare of the command console.

I'm really wondering what command consoles will even do, or if they will even bother to implement them in any way anymore. One of the only interesting things I thought they might include as one of it's benefits would be that a mech equipped with a command console gains an additional module slot, since they're going with the artillery and airstrike modules, and will probably add more modules along those lines later on as well.

Edited by Pihoqahiak, 08 March 2013 - 02:16 PM.

[Pihoqahiak]

Hillslam, on 08 March 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

ECM is fine, always has been. People are whiney girls.I don't use ecm, but I have eyeballs and know how to shoot at the big robots.

Unfortunately for you, the 8 mechs on the other team barreling down on your position that you weren't able to detect because of ECM know how to shoot at your big robot too. Add to that the fact that they knew where you were the whole time because your team aren't whiney girls and don't need that there fancy ECM junk. Two seconds later that team of 8 mechs is trotting past your broken pile of mech parts and turning the next closest mech on your team into a pile of broken mech parts too, lol.

[WardenWolf]

RG Notch, on 08 March 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

So are Jump jets OP?

Possibly - it is especially odd that some variants of a chassis can have then and others (even of the same chassis) can't. That has never been the case in BT or other MechWarrior titles.

However, at the moment I view this as more akin to the slight tuning differences in engine size, acceleration turn speed / radius, etc which the different variants are getting. Some gain JJ as an added mobility option, usually at a cost somewhere else.

Also, there are far more mechs which can support JJ than ECM at the moment, and while not ever JJ capable mech is equipped with them I almost never see an ECM-capable mech that isn't using it. That, combined with the prevalence of those variants over the others of the same chassis, should tell us a lot about the balance (or lack thereof) for ECM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Pihoqahiak, on 08 March 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

Unfortunately for you, the 8 mechs on the other team barreling down on your position that you weren't able to detect because of ECM know how to shoot at your big robot too. Add to that the fact that they knew where you were the whole time because your team aren't whiney girls and don't need that there fancy ECM junk. Two seconds later that team of 8 mechs is trotting past your broken pile of mech parts and turning the next closest mech on your team into a pile of broken mech parts too, lol.

Oh, no. He's a pro. I wonder what's his plan once thermal can't see past 700m.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Niko Snow, on 08 March 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

This thread is generating an awful lot of heat.

it wouldnt if PGI would correct ECM instead of telling us its fine and we're wrong

[Agent of Change]

Let's talk about beer now.

Stout's are OP Buff IPA's!

[Ryvucz]

Niko Snow, on 08 March 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

This thread is generating an awful lot of heat.

>thread jettisoned<

Pssh

>heat level nominal<

[Agent of Change]

don't shake your beer and you will avoid that hissing sound.

[Inappropriate1191]

Yoseful Mallad, on 07 March 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

thats the problem... We don't need more counters to ECM. We need ECM to be what it should be. ECM should not stop streaks or LRMs. It should stop you from using Artemis and other advanced electronics. It should not completely cover your signature altogether but instead not allow the enemy to know exactly what mech with ECM is out there. If an ECM equipped mech is not in LOS it should still show up on radar but not give its exact variant and load out information away. ECM should then allow its user to throw out ghost sigs so any LRM mech looking for an easy kill has a harder time targeting and hitting the REAL target. But when you have a system like ECM as PGI has set it up, that needs counter after counter after counter just so it starts to feel like you can play against it... There is a major problem.

What you're suggesting is basically that PGI has to rewrite the ECM, and effectively rescript and rebuild it. That's not happening. However, maybe we can instead get some nice workarounds with it.

Don't count on PGI listening to the forums, or even taking any of our considerations seriously. They clearly have a 'vision' for this game, and don't really give two damns about what the players think or say.

However...

Make a big enough stink, and maybe, we can hope that they'll take the lazy way out and just add more counters to the OP system. In the end, it'll still be balanced if BAP, AMS, NARC, and Command Console are actually worth a damn, and can offer some countermeasures to ECM.

I had a better post up there 3 pages ago, but... damn moderators. I'd love to meet them in game. Then in real life.

[Shadowsword8]

Inappropriate1191, on 08 March 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

What you're suggesting is basically that PGI has to rewrite the ECM, and effectively rescript and rebuild it. That's not happening. However, maybe we can instead get some nice workarounds with it.

All PGI has to do is put back the biggest drawback to the NSS, which they ignored for no rational reason: Make ECM generate 2.5 heat/second while active.

When you think about other changes PGI made, like increased damage for LRM, or SRM, You can usually guess what the idea behind the change was. LRM had damage boosted because you can avoid the salvo by hiding behind cover after it launched, which you couldn't do in TT. SRM damage was upped to make it competitive against pinpoint weapons, which were hitting randomly in TT. But removing any need to compromise when fitting ECM? There is no good reason for that!.


Put back the heat, and players wanting to use it will have a real compromise to make if they want all those advantages. ECM will be a lot less frequent, and it will also make it more interesting.

[Agent of Change]

Inappropriate1191, on 08 March 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

Stuff... not beer related

So yeah lets here's it for stone brewery and my personal favorite "Arrogant B4stard Ale". Good strong american hops and crazy aggressive a little citrus aftertase, very tasty

Edited by Agent of Change, 09 March 2013 - 01:03 AM.

[Jalak Bali]

Stop relying on LRMs and Streaks. Stop being bad at this game.