163 replies to this topic

[Taron]

Well, the game does not feel like Mechwarrior since a while. A lot of my friends left cause of that unbalanced shi*.

[FupDup]

Taron, on 17 July 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

Well, the game does not feel like Mechwarrior since a while. A lot of my friends left cause of that unbalanced shi*.

Holy mother of necro.

[General Taskeen]

A good necro, for all Mech kind.

[CancR]

Wha- WHAT JUST HAPPENED?

[Unbound Inferno]

I love necros, especially when its so ridiculously close to what I come up with and don't bother searching for first. Nice find.

The way I see Electronic Warfare should work; http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Guardian ECM
- 2 slots, 1.5 tons
- This is a restricted piece of equipment, only useable on a few select mech variants.
- The ECM can swap to ECCM to counter enemy ECM in its radius, but loses all other benefits.
- The ECM is able to work for a radius of 180m
- Beagle Active Probes within the 180m ECM field do not work and are jammed.
- ECM jams enemy ‘ghost target locks’ and NARC as well as ARTEMIS and indirect missile locks
- It adds a large amount of time to any missile locks that can be gained by line-of-sight
- It has a random chance every 10-15 seconds to cut out and break an enemy target lock under its ECM
- Prevents any info acquisition about the mech under ECM, preventing identification of weaakened or damaged parts

That is the most the ECM should do. Not too far from now, but the ECM currently has too big of a range reduction and cutting out LOS target lock abilities. The 'ghost target locks' is an interesting idea to buff LRM indirect fire and make having the ECM to counter that - not the other way around like it is now.


PGI should really rework the entire electronic warfare system here.

[Odins Fist]

The OL' ECM is OP thread rises from the grave..

Please bury this deeper.. Since when has MWO stuck to BT/TT rules very strictly..??

Anyone..?? Anyone..??

Exactly...

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 05:49 PM.

[CancR]

When has any one been right when they use that stupid argument? Anyone? anyone?

[Odins Fist]

CancR, on 17 July 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

When has any one been right when they use that stupid argument? Anyone? anyone?

Awwwww.... Tell me again how "much" MWO has been in adherence to BT/TT, then tell me again why ECM should have any different approach.??

Maybe they will change it, who knows.. I know this though, I "DIDN'T" run ECM for the longest time, and the reason for that was that I didn't have a problem dealing with it. You know that little triangle above a mech.?? If it isn't there, then guess what, you shoot at it..!! WOW..!!! I purposely didn't run ECM for a long time, I ran a Mech that didn't have the ability to carry it either, and do you now how much it bothered me..?? Guess..

You know when you get that little "Low Signal" warning on your sensor..?? Guess what, somone with ECM is near. Oh no whatever shall I do.?? I didn't run LRMs at all either, and I truly understood the outrage of the LRM crowd, I understood it, but i'm not saying I agreed with it at all.

So you want ECM to be just like BT/TT right.??? How much of that is happening in MWO..?? How many weapons are like that, how much of the heat is like that, etc, etc, etc,..??? Are they moving closer to BT/TT or further away..??
What happened to the nifty Timeline..?? Operation Revival WAVES 1-4 anyone..??

Anyone..??? Anyone..???

March 28th called, it wants it's post back

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 10:13 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Odins Fist, on 17 July 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

Awwwww.... Tell me again how MWO has been in adherence to BT/TT, then tell me again why ECM should have any different approach.??

Maybe they will change it, who knows.. I know this though, I "DIDN'T" run ECM for the longest time, and the reason for that was that I didn't have a problem dealing with it. You know that little triangle above a mech.?? If it isn't there, then guess what, you shoot at it..!! WOW..!!! I purposely didn't run ECM for a long time, I ran a Mech that didn't have the ability to carry it either, and do you now how much it bothered me..?? Guess..

You know when you get that little "Low Signal" warning on your sensor..?? Guess what, somone with ECM is near. Oh no whatever shall I do.?? I didn't run LRMs at all either, and I truly understood the outrage of the LRM crowd, I understood it, but i'm not saying I agreed with it at all.

So you want ECM to be just like BT/TT right.??? How much of that is happening in MWO..?? How many weapons are like that, how much of the heat is like that, etc, etc, etc,..??? Are they moving closer to BT/TT or further away..??
What happened to the nifty Timeline..?? Operation Revival WAVES 1-4 anyone..??

Anyone..??? Anyone..???

March 28th called, it wants it's post back

The AC line follows BT numbers as best I know.
Gauss
LRM heat - which is about it there.
SRMs (mostly)
Odds and ends for Lasers did, until they messed with them again
PPC used to, changed it and now its so OP its lost its humor.
Engines, Heat Sinks, Crit sizes, Mech Weights and stock loadouts. Initial designs of components...

need I continue?

This ENTIRE GAME was at some point started around BT, but they got things wrong and made it worse.

Recharge times are off for comparable damage, heat system is borked - some mechs are capped for max speed due to the Crysis engine can't handle it.

Once they started fiddling, and as they fiddled more in the wrong direction the game got worse.


So yes. Back to the roots, start over and get it right. Its easy if you take it simple, not when you decide to keep the bad parts and toss out the good that made it function.

[Odins Fist]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

This ENTIRE GAME was at some point started around BT, but they got things wrong and made it worse.

No kidding the "ENTIRE GAME" was based on BattleTech.. Gee Whiz Wally, I didn't know that..!! (facepalm)
Really, I mean really, you're trying to pull that one.. WOW

The ACs mostly follow, but there are so many different ammo types and fire rates/burst fire that aren't represented that I don't know where to begin.

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

LRM heat - which is about it there. <----ABOUT
SRMs (mostly) <----MOSTLY
Odds and ends for Lasers did, until they messed with them again <-----
PPC used to, changed it and now its so OP its lost its humor. <-------

So you already agree that not everything is spot on, so why would you naively think that ECM would be any different..?? Really..??

So how about this statement for ECM..??

ECM <------"MOSTLY"
And you're so upset about ECM..??

Perhaps in time they will give you what you want, because truth be told, it "STILL" doesn't affect me one bit either way.
What I would like to see is a "mostly" "about" Dead Issue be dead for a while until PGI decides to say something about it.

I'm NOT so tired of all the whining, i'm tired of the double standards people use when cherry picking what issue to cry about, and what issue they are willing to put up with.

It seems funny to me that if you were so dead set on the BT/TT being adhered and you agree about the same issues that other parts of MWO not being strictly BT/TT, but not consider them in the same light as ECM.

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

need I continue?

Yes Please...

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 10:38 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Odins Fist, on 17 July 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

No kidding the "ENTIRE GAME" was based on BattleTech.. Gee Whiz Wally, I didn't know that..!! (facepalm)
Really, I mean really, you're trying to pull that one.. WOW

The ACs mostly follow, but there are so many different ammo types and fire rates/burst fire that aren't represented that I don't know where to begin.



So you already agree that not everything is spot on, so why would you naively think that ECM would be any different..?? Really..??

So how about this statement for ECM..??

ECM <------"MOSTLY"
And you're so upset about ECM..??

Perhaps in time they will give you what you want, because truth be told, it "STILL" doesn't affect me one bit either way.
What I would like to see is a "mostly" "about" Dead Issue be dead for a while until PGI decides to say something about it.

I'm NOT so tired of all the whining, i'm tired of the double standards people use when cherry picking what issue to cry about, and what issue they are willing to put up with.

It seems funny to me that if you were so dead set on the BT/TT being adhered and you agree about the same issues that other parts of MWO not being strictly BT/TT, but not consider them in the same light as ECM.



Yes Please...

Then you obviously do not get the point on why this is all wrong.

ECM is not mostly. ECM is only similar in the fact its everything at once for nearly free.
ECM is the wrong unit module attachment and extras it shouldn't have.
There isn't a thing right about the Guardian ECM outside its name.

The Guardian ECM in this game is the Guardian ECM, Angel ECM and provides Stealth Armor to the entire team in its bubble.
With some form of pseudo ECM field that doesn't even do what it should do - instead doing everything it shouldn't.

All for a measly 2 crits and 1.5 tons.


No. They got off the beaten Battletech path and landed in this mess. THAT is why we say go back to the basics, so they can get something right.

[Mystere]

Seismic + AC20 seem to keep the 3L and DDC ... DEAD. And the coming BAP changes should help even more.

If people haven't leaned to deal with ECM by now, I really don't know what to say.

[Odins Fist]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:47 PM, said:

Then you obviously do not get the point on why this is all wrong.

ECM is not mostly. ECM is only similar

The Guardian ECM in this game is the Guardian ECM, Angel ECM and provides Stealth Armor to the entire team in its bubble..

Oh I get the point, totally... Similar, got it.

Now is ECM breaking MWO to bits..?? On a scale of 1 -10 for things to fix, (1 being most important), where do you see it..??

For me it would come in at about 23 <----- see where i'm going..??

Remember where I said --> "I'm NOT so tired of all the whining, i'm tired of the double standards people use when cherry picking what issue to cry about, and what issue they are willing to put up with."

If someone is going to be so upset over ECM, then they should be as equally upset with "mostly" "about" & "similar" when it comes to the other issues as well.

Or am I wrong about that..???

EDIT: Do you really think they are going to go back to basics, or just tweak, add, remove things as they see fit.?? You know like the Timeline, since development couldn't keep up with it..??

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 11:00 PM.

[Mystere]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:47 PM, said:

No. They got off the beaten Battletech path and landed in this mess. THAT is why we say go back to the basics, so they can get something right.

You know it's already too late to go back. So why even bother insisting that PGI do so?

[Unbound Inferno]

Odins Fist, on 17 July 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:

Oh I get the point, totally... Similar, got it.

Now is ECM breaking MWO to bits..?? On a scale of 1 -10 for things to fix, (1 being most important), where do you see it..??

For me it would come in at about 23 <----- see where i'm going..??

Remember where I said --> "I'm NOT so tired of all the whining, i'm tired of the double standards people use when cherry picking what issue to cry about, and what issue they are willing to put up with."

If someone is going to be so upset over ECM, then they should be as equally upset with "mostly" "about" & "similar" when it comes to the other issues as well.

Or am I wrong about that..???

Stop quoting out of context and read the line will you?

ECM is not mostly. ECM is only similar in the fact its everything at once for nearly free.

In other words (since you may need a translator for this) It is nothing like it should be.

That is not similar. its closer to polar opposite.Your assemsent of it being a 23 on a scale of 1 to 10 is off. Its like 32.

Mystere, on 17 July 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

You know it's already too late to go back. So why even bother insisting that PGI do so?

Basic math and changing established numbers is not that hard. Open the data.text they got stored and change that # to that #. Rinse and repeat.

I am not asking they rework the MECHANICS of it. Just the NUMBER VALUE ESTABLISHED to get the desired result.

[Odins Fist]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

Stop quoting out of context and read the line will you?

That is not similar. its closer to polar opposite.

Out of context.. you origianlly said similar, NOT polar opposite?? What a minute I took that point and ran with it... I read the line, and I also quoted --> "The Guardian ECM in this game is the Guardian ECM, Angel ECM and provides Stealth Armor to the entire team in its bubble.." to make sure that part of the point was clear. Out of context to the point of not expressing you statement.. NOPE, and that was NOT my intent.

Similar, now you want to get into just how similar when it was quoted and represented..?? Sematics I tell ya.

So you're NOT willing to put up with ECM, but are willing to put up with how much in other areas..??

Mystere, on 17 July 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

You know it's already too late to go back. So why even bother insisting that PGI do so?

I have to agree to a point with that.

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 11:12 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Odins Fist, on 17 July 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:

Out of context..?? What a minute I took that point and ran with it... I read the line, and I also quoted --> "The Guardian ECM in this game is the Guardian ECM, Angel ECM and provides Stealth Armor to the entire team in its bubble.." to make sure that part of the point was clear. Out of context to the point of not expressing you statement.. NOPE, and that was NOT my intent.

Similar, now you want to get into just how similar..?? Sematics I tell ya.

That is out of context when you take the term similar without taking the context of the sentence to see how similar. That is out of context.

So read and quote appropriately - or i"ll have to find some grammar {Godwin's Law} to get on your case.

EDIT: LOL - okay, sensor that would you stupid auto forum - I hope they get the context.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 17 July 2013 - 11:09 PM.

[Odins Fist]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:

That is out of context when you take the term similar without taking the context of the sentence to see how similar. That is out of context.

You gave your original example

"ECM is not mostly. ECM is only similar in the fact its everything at once for nearly free.
ECM is the wrong unit module attachment and extras it shouldn't have.
There isn't a thing right about the Guardian ECM outside its name."

Ok then you said "Polar Opposite" later on.

Am I wrong?

Yeah I used similar, so I used it wrong, or did the swing to "Polar Opposite" all of a sudden change things? Or should "There isn't a thing right about the Guardian ECM outside its name." been followed by "it's polar opposite" at that point?

"ECM is only similar in the fact its everything at once for nearly free."

I get what you said.... You win, BT ECM is NOT similar to MWO's ECM...
It should be called Angel ECM in MWO...

Edited by Odins Fist, 17 July 2013 - 11:32 PM.

[CancR]

Shh now, the grow ups are talking.

[ArmandTulsen]

ECM has become PGI's unforgiven sin in MWO.