1089 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

Jakob Knight, on 04 April 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

Then why doesn't ECM counter direct-fire weapons? There is far less skill involved in placing your crosshair on a target and pulling the trigger after running right up to a target than there is in holding that target long enough to gain a lock, judging the launch angle, travel time, and then continuing to hold the target through the flight time of the missiles while being open to combat, and needing to consider if the target you are guiding your missiles to is worth continuing to track or sacrificing the volley of missile already launched in favor of engaging a new target that might have higher priority.

I also find it interesting that this comes from someone who obviously never wanted to put in the time to learn how to use missiles, yet tells everyone else they have to learn to use his own weapons now.

The bottom line: Using LRMs requires far more skill than any direct-fire weapon out there. I use every weapon, and I know this for fact. I can pinpoint kill mechs with lasers. I can rain down a barrage of autocannon fire on a target. I can shred them to pieces with SRMs. But all of that simply requires me to run up to them and pull the trigger. LRMs require much more thought and patience, and anyone who simply charges in and fires them will almost always do no damage at all with them, either through poor aiming skills or not being aware of the requirements for the weapon to actually work (surprise...direct-fire weapons don't have the last restriction).

So, in conclusion, your remark is ignorant of the facts, and completely the opposite of the truth. Now, if ECM blocked all direct-fire weapons except for a tiny window of 5 m range at about 300meters (you can do damage with direct-fire weapons from 295m-300m only against an ECM protected unit), then I would say you were stating a truth.

LRMs have and should be a team weapon. Scouts with TAG and spotting exist for a reason. I love my LRM boat teammates because it gives my TAG something to do other than sweeping over the enemy to show where they are without having to type. Enjoy your free damage for my 1 ton investment.

[Shadowsword8]

red devil2, on 04 April 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

Only noobs and newbies can have any problem with ECM. I suppose the reason is that they can't use their "skill-intensive" SSRM and LRM. Veterans and competitive players almost only use direct-fire weapons (gauss, ER PPC/PPC, etc). Therefore, the only advantage of carring an ECM is the ability to sneak around your enemy in lager maps like tourmaline desert.

Moreover, with the current nerf of SSRM, jenners are back as the best light-hunter and I really don't understand why, when we play as a 8-men premade, we still find so many ravens (promptly butchered by our Jenners).

I use almost exclusively direct-fire weapons and routinely end up as top scorer by a wide margin. So I must be one of the "Veterans and competitive players" you mentionned.

But I hate the current ECM. Not because it really bother me, but because I am able to see past my personnal situation and look at the game as a whole. Something you seem unable to do. And If you can't do that, your opinion is worth less than the time it took me to write this.

[arghmace]

Apnu, on 04 April 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

I've only read through 5 pages of 25 in this thread, but from what I can tell lots of players are missing one of the main points PGI is making. Teamwork. Teamwork and communication is the best counter to ECM.

Teamwork and communication is the best way to do everything, sure, but it still doesn't make ECM balanced. Let's assume you have a squad of men armed with assault rifles and I have a squad of men armed with sticks. Your answer to this unbalance is teamwork, communication, adapting?

[Jakob Knight]

hammerreborn, on 04 April 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

LRMs have and should be a team weapon. Scouts with TAG and spotting exist for a reason. I love my LRM boat teammates because it gives my TAG something to do other than sweeping over the enemy to show where they are without having to type. Enjoy your free damage for my 1 ton investment.

The point is that use of an LRM system requires considerably more effort and thought than any other weapon in the game. Those who make flippant remarks about it being a no-skill weapon and brushing off the nature of ECM that way deserve to be called to task for their lack of understanding about what they are talking about.

That, and the fact that ECM cripples LRMs to the point of uselessness, without any counter other than the LRM unit entering brawl combat...exactly what LRM units are supposed to be avoiding. If ECM did not prevent lock-ons beyond the maximum range of the item (what other system in the game can have infinite range?), it would not be unbalanced. That it does, and the devs find this to be working as they intend, clearly shows their lack of understanding about tactical combat design.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 04 April 2013 - 09:14 AM.

[Mystere]

MasterBLB, on 03 April 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Guys (and ladies),I'm starting to think only adamant action taken by community will crack through theirs concrete skulls it's WE WHO PLAY THE GAME,AND IS UP TO US HOW WE WISH TO PLAY IT.AND WE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH CURRENT ECM IMPLEMENTATION.
They showed clearly that all reasonable dialog attempts from us is doomed to faild,sadly...

If so,I propose to all of community who wants ECM be bring back to it canonical version to COMPLETELY BOYCOTT Mechwarrior Online for a week at the beginning.It mean absolutely NO LOGING AND NO PLAY,and overall,NO PURCHASING MCs.
Let's stand tight together,it is we,community the game is making for.Without US,they are finished.Let's show them if they are really going to do things against our wishes,it'll have a price.
But be aware that we have to group with the action if we want it to succeed.

What a drama queen!

(I normally do not do such things, but ...)

[Apnu]

Deathlike, on 04 April 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

Teamwork is a great influence, but ECM increases that influence significantly. It has been said that it is a FORCE multiplier, so those with ECM AND good teamwork tend to win. Good teamwork generally wins games, but ECM tips the scales a lot more.

Its a challenge to be sure. I've been in 8v8's where our team had no ECM and the other team sent 4 ravens, 2 DDCs and 2 splatcats against us.

I think the solutions to ECM that PGI is attempting is fine. But I think the larger problem is ECM is very easy to acquire and therefore ubiquitous and too easy to min/max for the cheese-ball crowd.

I would love to see PGI introduce something to make the instance of ECM less. Perhaps if we had repair-and-rearm it would be more rare. Perhaps they should jack the cost of ECM way up. Maybe they introduce some kind of limit of ECM modules per team per game, maybe ECM should be a consumable. I don't know the solution here, but something that would make ECM rare and special instead of required and everywhere would work I think.

[Mystere]

Roadbeer, on 03 April 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

Feedback is feedback. Doesn't mean that every idea in it was going to be implemented.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

That's why they are called "feedback" and "suggestions" and not "mandatory orders".

Roadbeer, on 03 April 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

Again, I have no problem with ECM, so this time I get to be the odd man out.

No you're not because I'm with you.

Edited by Mystere, 04 April 2013 - 09:16 AM.

[Apnu]

arghmace, on 04 April 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

Teamwork and communication is the best way to do everything, sure, but it still doesn't make ECM balanced. Let's assume you have a squad of men armed with assault rifles and I have a squad of men armed with sticks. Your answer to this unbalance is teamwork, communication, adapting?

That's a bad comparison. In BT/MW terms you just compared lance of Atlases vs a lance of Urbanmechs. A better comparison would be: a team of guys with assault rifles and a few have night vision, and a team of guys with assault rifles and no night vision.

My point is, ECM gives and advantage, but not an insurmountable or intimidating one. It poses a challenge to over come, and ECM is a very climbable mountain.

[DocBach]

To all the people who say ECM is great and fine, do you actually believe tweaking various components of electronic warfare such as the effect of Beagle and ECM would be worse for the game then what we currently have in which only ECM serves any sort of useful utility?

If ECM was toned down, and other items toned up to where there was actually some use for other equipment that required any sort of critical thought placed in which equipment you would take, would that be detrimental to how the game is currently played?

[whiteknight]

DocBach, on 04 April 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

Actually, in Battletech's expansion ruleset Tactical Operations, ECM has a third mode in which enemy sensors are flooded with false targets which make getting locks harder in the form of a +1 modifier to hit, called "Ghost Target Mode."

Beagle Active Probe does indeed counter Ghost Target mode in this ruleset. Imagine that, a 1.5 ton passive piece of equipment countered by another 1.5 ton piece of equipment which can counter the other counter by running in a different mode (all without the need of a 7 ton energy weapon)!

Partly correct, Ghost targets actually effect all weapon attack rolls, and the penalty to those attack rolls depend on a piloting skill roll by the defending unit to generate ghost targets (which can fail resulting in no ghost targets being created) and a piloting skill roll by the attacking unit, which can fail resulting in a penalty, or succeed meaning no penalty at all, and yeah beagle certainly helps. In any case an ECM generating ghost targets loses its ability to disrupt C3, NARC, BAP, Artemis etc.

[arghmace]

Apnu, on 04 April 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

My point is, ECM gives and advantage, but not an insurmountable or intimidating one. It poses a challenge to over come, and ECM is a very climbable mountain.

But why does it have to give more of an advantage than any other piece of equipment in this game instead of being... you know... balanced?

Gotta say I just pretty much lost all hope for this game ever being top notch. This is just one issue, sure, but even one big issue can ruin a game bad, and that's where we stand forever apparently.

[hammerreborn]

DocBach, on 04 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

To all the people who say ECM is great and fine, do you actually believe tweaking various components of electronic warfare such as the effect of Beagle and ECM would be worse for the game then what we currently have in which only ECM serves any sort of useful utility?

If ECM was toned down, and other items toned up to where there was actually some use for other equipment that required any sort of critical thought placed in which equipment you would take, would that be detrimental to how the game is currently played?

I have nothing against buffing BAP or AMS. I believe that BAP should give you every sensor modules effect (plus the things like sensing powered down mechs), so you either use modules, or spend the 1.5 tons.

[DocBach]

whiteknight, on 04 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

Partly correct, Ghost targets actually effect all weapon attack rolls, and the penalty to those attack rolls depend on a piloting skill roll by the defending unit to generate ghost targets (which can fail resulting in no ghost targets being created) and a piloting skill roll by the attacking unit, which can fail resulting in a penalty, or succeed meaning no penalty at all, and yeah beagle certainly helps. In any case an ECM generating ghost targets loses its ability to disrupt C3, NARC, BAP, Artemis etc.

Ghost targets also have to be regenerated every turn, ie 10 seconds, so there's a chance that it won't generate targets upon starting, or has a chance of turning off randomly after running.

Edited by DocBach, 04 April 2013 - 09:34 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

DocBach, on 04 April 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

To all the people who say ECM is great and fine, do you actually believe tweaking various components of electronic warfare such as the effect of Beagle and ECM would be worse for the game then what we currently have in which only ECM serves any sort of useful utility?

If ECM was toned down, and other items toned up to where there was actually some use for other equipment that required any sort of critical thought placed in which equipment you would take, would that be detrimental to how the game is currently played?

This is kind of what I'm getting at in my other topic.

If we aren't going to change ECM. Can we have 4 or 5 other equally effective information warfare items added?

[hammerreborn]

Jakob Knight, on 04 April 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

The point is that use of an LRM system requires considerably more effort and thought than any other weapon in the game. Those who make flippant remarks about it being a no-skill weapon and brushing off the nature of ECM that way deserve to be called to task for their lack of understanding about what they are talking about.

That, and the fact that ECM cripples LRMs to the point of uselessness, without any counter other than the LRM unit entering brawl combat...exactly what LRM units are supposed to be avoiding. If ECM did not prevent lock-ons beyond the maximum range of the item (what other system in the game can have infinite range?), it would not be unbalanced. That it does, and the devs find this to be working as they intend, clearly shows their lack of understanding about tactical combat design.

Well its the only weapon you can fire in the game without worrying about retaliation. Why you keep comparing it to ease of direct fire weapons I'll never understand.

Two scenarios, let's assume no ECM.

Ac/40 Jager vs LRM Jager vs poptarts.

40Jager has to take direct fire in order get in range of the poptarts, and take fire while firing, exposing it.
LRM Jager sits behind a hill and lobs LRMs without worry about being shot if the 40 Jager hits r.

LRMs have a multitude of other problems than just ECM but I'm not going to go into them here, but saying they are harder than direct fire weapons because god forbid you might have to check and see if you're plastering a wall or not from behind the ridge in calderra is laughable.

[arghmace]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

If we aren't going to change ECM. Can we have 4 or 5 other equally effective information warfare items added?

While adding more unbalanced items to the game is not the optimal way, this would in a weird way bring better balance, so I hope we get even this instead of minor tweaks that change too little.

Edited by arghmace, 04 April 2013 - 09:30 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

arghmace, on 04 April 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

While adding more unbalanced items to the game is not the optimal way, this would in a weird way bring better balance, so I hope we get even this instead of minor tweaks that change too little.

I'll take what I can get at this point.

[arghmace]

hammerreborn, on 04 April 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

LRMs have a multitude of other problems than just ECM but I'm not going to go into them here, but saying they are harder than direct fire weapons ... is laughable.

Perhaps you should go into those other problems instead of ignoring them and calling other people laughable. Using direct fire weapons is simple since you can always use them no matter what. But if you maneuver badly, don't interpret the battle correctly, don't work as a team, your LRM's are dead weight. Very hard to use well while lasers for example are good in any noobs hands.

[hammerreborn]

arghmace, on 04 April 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

Perhaps you should go into those other problems instead of ignoring them and calling other people laughable. Using direct fire weapons is simple since you can always use them no matter what. But if you maneuver badly, don't interpret the battle correctly, don't work as a team, your LRM's are dead weight. Very hard to use well while lasers for example are good in any noobs hands.

Well you can't really say anything until they are fixed. They are/were buggy as hell, and I can't say if the speed, damage, and tracking should be improved when atm they are still doing splash damage and only focusing on the CT for damage.

And please, when people saw the LRM splash damage upon the Jager patch every tom, ****, and harry were using them. Don't act like any noob can't use LRMs just as well as they use a laser.

Any noob can use any weapon in this game easily. That's as bad as saying poptarting is hard because you have to learn to jump and shoot at the same time.

I've killed people with NARCs, Flamers and MGs on a C4, this game really isn't that hard and most players (half even!) really aren't that good

Edited by hammerreborn, 04 April 2013 - 09:43 AM.

[Deathlike]

hammerreborn, on 04 April 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

Well you can't really say anything until they are fixed. They are/were buggy as hell, and I can't say if the speed, damage, and tracking should be improved when atm they are still doing splash damage and only focusing on the CT for damage.

And please, when people saw the LRM splash damage upon the Jager patch every tom, ****, and harry were using them. Don't act like any noob can't use LRMs just as well as they use a laser.

Any noob can use any weapon in this game easily. That's as bad as saying poptarting is hard because you have to learn to jump and shoot at the same time.

I've killed people with NARCs, Flamers and MGs on a C4, this game really isn't that hard and most players (half even!) really aren't that good

You missed WHY they worked so well.

LRM usage is simplistic, as it requires a lock on a target.

The complicated part is making sure that the target takes some semblance of damage because you need to keep the lock on the target, which requires LOS from you or someone else. If you didn't get outside help to spot, you would need TAG or a someone "newbish" enough to keep standing out in the open.

When LRMaggeddon was brief, EVERYONE took it. This caused more people to stand around, making it easier to lock and fire as needed. The OPness of the LRMs in turn changed what everyone else put on their loadouts and subsequently made them equally vulnerable because they had to do the same thing.

It's a chicken or the egg problem... which doesn't seem to be apparent for those that use LRMs.

Since LRMs in their current form is useless, well guess what, fewer people are out in the open to be exposed to the effects of LRMs. It's that simple

Back to ECM:
ECM really compounds usage of LRMs.. TAG is not a solution vs ECM light mechs, since their mobility effectively reduces keeping LOS and/or consistent damage. It doesn't get used in serious play for that reason alone.

Edited by Deathlike, 04 April 2013 - 09:53 AM.