1089 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

If they are going to do a hardpoint system, they should treat it like AMS; or perhaps lump AMS into the same type of equipment slot. All tertiary gear such as TAG, AMS, Beagle, Narc, and ECM can be placed into an equipment slot, all 'Mechs have at least one, some 'Mechs have two or more.

See how many people take ECM over every other piece of equipment in the game.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

So, since BAP is useless also in this game version, why not allow BAP to allow Missile Locks for LRMs and Streaks against ECM carrying Mechs?

And again the BAP solution pops up!

It's one of the few things that basically everyone can agree on.

Edited by TOGSolid, 04 April 2013 - 01:31 PM.

[Karr285]

It really is surprising what PGI thinks is balanced, hey guys using The Stalker, do you always use all your Missile hardpoints? no.
DO LRM atlas's always put Ballistics? no. Do Jagermechs Always put 4 lasers or 2 depending on variant? No
Do you always put AMS? No, do you ever put BAP? almost never. Do you always put an XL engine on everymech? No you weigh the pros vs cons.

Does a 3L, DDC, 3M, or Com3d ALWAYS put ECM? YES. when the answer is yes to an OPTIONAL piece of equipment or weaponry it is OP.

[WardenWolf]

TOGSolid, on 04 April 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

And again the BAP solution pops up!

It's one of the few things that basically everyone can agree on.

The screwy thing is that one of the *few* things ECM is *supposed* to do in the tabletop game is to nullify BAP. Now in MWO it is doing *way more* than it should, and our suggested solution is to reverse the TT rules and have BAP work against ECM, instead of the other way around. What a world!

Karr285, on 04 April 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

Does a 3L, DDC, 3M, or Com3d ALWAYS put ECM? YES. when the answer is yes to an OPTIONAL piece of equipment or weaponry it is OP.

QFT

[Alistair Winter]

So basically, what I get from this post is "Thank you for all your feedback and thanks to everyone who spent hours typing up alternative suggestions to how ECM should work. However, we've decided not to do anything you said, we're happy with things the way they are".

"ECM has its weaknesses."
Give me a break. It's easily the best piece of equipment in the game, and combined with Streaks, it's just plain ridiculous. You can fix hitboxes, collision, whatever you want. The Raven 3L will still eat any light mech in this game.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 05 April 2013 - 11:29 AM.

[WinnieTheWhor]

ECM makes LRM boats completely worthless. I could build a commando, remove all the armor, put a STD100 engine in it and an ECM, and make it as if the opposing LRM boat had disconnected from a match.

How is it that someone can have no weapons and no armor and be effective?

[Lootee]

WardenWolf, on 04 April 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

The screwy thing is that one of the *few* things ECM is *supposed* to do in the tabletop game is to nullify BAP. Now in MWO it is doing *way more* than it should, and our suggested solution is to reverse the TT rules and have BAP work against ECM, instead of the other way around. What a world!


QFT

Well why not? TAG and PPC fire isn't supposed to do squat vs ECM either. Just like ECM isn't supposed to affect basic LRMs or Streak missiles.

I say just finish tossing the TT rulebook completely out the window and make BAP a hard counter for ECM with magickal powers it never had in Total Warfare too.

Either that or make TAG a module any mech can equip that has no weight and doesn't consume an energy hard point.

Edited by PanchoTortilla, 04 April 2013 - 02:10 PM.

[TheRulesLawyer]

What a joke. ECM is pretty much ok? LoL. Its a extremely cheap *HARD* counter to two weapon types, and need I remind you that there are entire chassis designed around this weapon type? The PPC is a soft counter at best. Modules aren't something you have access to anytime soon so a noob will have to suffer through tons of horrible gameplay first, and even then its just range extension. ECM is easily the most OP thing in the game

[Peiper]

TOGSolid, on 04 April 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

And again the BAP solution pops up!

It's one of the few things that basically everyone can agree on.

I disagree, still. ECM is designed to counter BAP, C3 (which has a built in TAG), NARC, and Artemis. It's purpose in Battletech is a countermeasure for all those other advanced systems, which all give BONUSES to hit or determine how many missiles hit IF any hit at all. That's its entire purpose in Battletech.

One thing it has never been in any version of Battletech from the pods to Living Legends to the tabletop is a CLOAKING DEVICE.

HOWEVER... If PGI continues to ignore Battletech and it's inborn checks and balances, then yes, maybe BAP should be a direct counter to ECM. If you have ECM it does it what it does now. If you have BAP, then it negates ECM instead of increases sensor range and detects shutdown mechs. Yeah, I know, at least half of the mechs out there will take BAP and render the ECM cloaking device invalid, but good. It is FUBAR.

I said this before and I say it again. If you are going to have a Guardian ECM Suite, then make it do what it does historically. If you're going to have a Cloaking Device, then call it a fugging cloaking device for Christ's sake. If you want BAP to counter ECM, then don't call it a BAP, because it is not. Call it the ASE system (All Seeing Eye).
_____________________

The other thing they didn't mention is WHEN is ECM going to be factored into the ELO/Matchmaking system? We know that if one team has more cloaking devices than the other that they have a DISTINCT, MEASURABLE advantage in gear. The same can be said about certain mechs/builds over other builds, but ECM is the one single piece of equipment that can make or break a team. So, WHY isn't it taken into account?
_________________________

Paul Says: "The Raven 3L required the ECM/BAP systems as they were the main functionality of the variant. As mentioned above, the ECM really only affects 2 weapon systems."

Obviously, this is total horsecrap for a number of reasons. ECM 'really only affects' ALL electronic warfare in one way or another, LRM's, Streaks, and basic sensors as to blind your opponents from detecting (friendly and) enemy mechs. Any soldier can tell you that KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE. lol How about the ability to SEE where damage is on another mech? This is important for pilots who use WEAPONS to PINPOINT target other mechs. So, direct fire weapons ARE affected by ECM.

The second MAJOR level of BS going on here is the first sentence in that statement. "The Raven 3L required the ECM/BAP..." NO ONE pilots a Raven 3L in the game. They pilot a different variant, when you think about it. What makes a variant what it is is it's loadout. If you CHANGE gear, systems, armor, and/or weapons on a mech is CEASES to be one variant and becomes a custom job. While you might be able to take out gear on a mech easy enough, it's extremely difficult to add new gear because in battletech lore, like modern automobiles, each part is designed to fit in and mate with every other part of a battlemech. When you change out an engine in a car, for examnple, you sometimes have to change the shape/cut a hole in the hood to fit the engine, alter the frame, put in new exhaust, distributor caps/fuel injectors, upgraded radiator, suspension to hold up the engine and so on... It's not something that can be done in a moment.

So, if you pilot a Raven 3L with it's useless NARC, BAP, and not equip streaks or a larger engine, you are a fool. IF people piloted stock mechs, then we'd see slow Ravens with limited armor and no streaks as the ONLY mech armed with ECM on the field, because NO OTHER VARIANTS had ECM in canon of the mechs we have now. Ravens would be valuable, fragile, and require the best pilots and teammates to use effectively and THEN you would have your great metagame. But as of now, with frankenmechs as the rule, BOATS, Jump snipers hiding in a D-DC's cloak field, and ECM will continue to rule the game and wreck it for anyone who appreciates a good tactical fight.

Now, maybe the PGI internal testers play stock only fights and have found ECM to be a different story, especially without jump snipers, boats, D-DC cloaked monsters, and so on. But we don't have the option to even try it without lobbies or stock-only matches.

In the end, remove ECM (or replace it with a battletech lore equivalent), or maybe even try having BAP be a total hard-counter to ECM and the game will evolve into something much more fun and balanced. Or maybe it won't. But right now, ECM is still
FUBAR!

[WardenWolf]

PanchoTortilla, on 04 April 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Well why not? TAG and PPC fire isn't supposed to do squat vs ECM either. Just like ECM isn't supposed to affect basic LRMs or Streak missiles.

I say just finish tossing the TT rulebook completely out the window and make BAP a hard counter for ECM with magickal powers it never had in Total Warfare too.

Either that or make TAG a module any mech can equip that has no weight and doesn't consume an energy hard point.

If we have to give in to ECM being a super-powered mess, then yes - BAP as a counter would be at least something more to help the situation. I would rather it go back to more TT-like rules, though... and mostly I was just commenting on the irony of the situation: in TT ECM counters BAP, in MWO we are asking for BAP to counter ECM - which one has the word 'counter' in the name?

Edited by WardenWolf, 04 April 2013 - 02:21 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

Thontor, on 04 April 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

They are going to do two things people suggested. One of them is huge IMO. Being able to see where your teammates are.
To say they've "decided not to do anything" we said is simply false.

How about "We've decided to barely do anything"?

Still being able to see your teammates is good, but the ECM is still OP, especially in combination with Streaks. The fact that it renders guided missiles obsolete in many situations is huge, especially considering the low price you have to pay. I mean, AMS barely touches missiles, and weighs the same. BAP isn't even close to nullifying ECM, and weighs the same.

The most important reason why this game isn't hasn't been reduced to a few specialised builds, is because most players get bored with their overpowered builds and want to try out new stuff. If everyone just stuck to whatever works best, things would be very different indeed.

[ElLocoMarko]

WinnieTheWhor, on 04 April 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

ECM makes LRM boats completely worthless. I could build a commando, remove all the armor, put a STD100 engine in it and an ECM, and make it as if the opposing LRM boat had disconnected from a match.

How is it that someone can have no weapons and no armor and be effective?

Yep.

I'm OK with the defensive "hiding" capabilites of ECM. I even like how it influences PUG teams to stick together (though that is on the drift since the missile nerf).
But the offensive "all your weapons belong to me" capabilities are what push way beyond.

So here are some ideas:

• Disrupt prevents nearby (180m) enemies from targeting the enemy OUTSIDE of the 180m bubble. But everything inside the bubble lights up like a christmas tree. After all, ECM is a powerful radio transmitter.
  
• Just make it do the 180m bubble of "hiding" friendlies and nothing else.
  
• TAG should always work at any range.
  
• ECM Counter module available to all mechs. Or make BAP do it. BAP is a sensor array which serves as a pretty good paper weight. Nothing says ECM counter to me like an extra set of radar dishes.

(Speaking to deaf ears, but I have to try)

Edited by ElLocoMarko, 04 April 2013 - 02:39 PM.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

I disagree, still. ECM is designed to counter BAP, C3 (which has a built in TAG), NARC, and Artemis. It's purpose in Battletech is a countermeasure for all those other advanced systems, which all give BONUSES to hit or determine how many missiles hit IF any hit at all. That's its entire purpose in Battletech.

WardenWolf, on 04 April 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

The screwy thing is that one of the *few* things ECM is *supposed* to do in the tabletop game is to nullify BAP. Now in MWO it is doing *way more* than it should, and our suggested solution is to reverse the TT rules and have BAP work against ECM, instead of the other way around. What a world!


QFT

Oh I know, I've got the TT rulebooks sitting on my bookshelf ten feet away. But at some point you just have to throw logic to the wind when you're arguing with devs that are too damn stubborn to realize when they're wrong and get any good idea, no matter how canon breaking it is, out there.

Edited by TOGSolid, 04 April 2013 - 02:44 PM.

[Side Step]

Quote

ECM should not cut out friendly signatures on the battlefield. Friendly Mechs should always be identifiable and not obscure team play.

Thank you. This was the most broken thing about ecm.

[Mawai]

Actually, I think I might understand the point they are making:

"ECM brought a whole new level of strategy and skill to the battlefield and is something that we've been striving to achieve instead of flat plane, long range combat."

They are stating that they are incapable of properly balancing LRMs within the game system and require ECM to be a complete counter in order to prevent the game devolving into LRM wars. The only long range weapon that ECM prevents the use of IS LRMs. All other direct fire weapons can hit targets at range whether ECM is present or not.

The statement being made here is that without ECM the game becomes "flat plane, long range combat" ... since LRMs are the only long range weapon directly affected by ECM, it stands to reason that it is unbalanced LRMs that result in "flat plane, long range combat". If it is the LRMs that are the problem then it is pretty clear that they are stating that they can not make all the other weapon systems attractive relative to LRMs to encourage close range combat ... so ECM is required.

I'd have to disagree with that opinion. How can it be impossible to balance LRMs such that the only possible balance mechanism is a hard counter that prevents spotting and locks?

Do LRMs do too much damage? Are they clustered too tightly? Cause too much splash damage? They can certainly be fired from locations out of line of sight of the target ... is that the issue? Maybe the secondary targeting mechanism is the reason LRMs can't be balanced so that ECM is required?

I don't know ... but somehow the logic of needing ECM to cause folks to play a close range game just doesn't hold together for me ...

[Heeden]

Side Step, on 04 April 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

Thank you. This was the most broken thing about ecm.

I heartily agree.

[Gremlich Johns]

Two steps in the right direction. Bravo Zulu!

However, ECM, when on, affects everyone, even the carrying mech. I do hope, however, that people will start learning to be proper scouts.

I still find there are some lag issues when shooting lights, but then, that could be from shooting regular lasers instead of pulses at them.

TOGSolid, on 04 April 2013 - 02:42 PM, said:

Oh I know, I've got the TT rulebooks sitting on my bookshelf ten feet away. But at some point you just have to throw logic to the wind when you're arguing with devs that are too damn stubborn to realize when they're wrong and get any good idea, no matter how canon breaking it is, out there.

I do not think it a matter of the Dev;s arrogance, I believe it is more about understanding the actual technology and trying to meld it with a fantasy game in a way that players have a great experience.

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 04 April 2013 - 03:00 PM.

[Jakob Knight]

WardenWolf, on 04 April 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

If we have to give in to ECM being a super-powered mess, then yes - BAP as a counter would be at least something more to help the situation. I would rather it go back to more TT-like rules, though... and mostly I was just commenting on the irony of the situation: in TT ECM counters BAP, in MWO we are asking for BAP to counter ECM - which one has the word 'counter' in the name?

As I suggested in the previous feedback thread, there is nothing wrong with having ECM do what it does at the normal range of effect (180 meters). Even its magical ability to shut down systems and equipment it never should would be bearable because the unit would have to be in the range where it could be engaged, but more importantly the ECM equipment would obey the rational rule that a piece of equipment with a maximum effective range is ineffective when used outside that range, which it does not do now. Having BAP remove this feature of ECM would still leave it very powerful, but would counter the unreasonable aspect of it and the unbalanced effect it has on LRMs (the only weapon in the game that can't do any damage within the entire range of an active ECM field).

We're not asking for something that's unreasonable, or to remove ECM's effects on normal units. What we're asking for is a reasonable and balanced counter that will allow mechs that should not be affected by ECM from being so.

And for the realism crowd out there, active ECM (which is what Guardian ECM is in Battletech) that is outside the range of effect (where the signal strength of the ECM transmitter can no longer overcome the power of the target active sensors) become a hazard by actually -showing- the ECM unit to the enemy by its massive broadrange emissions. This is why a Prowler ECM aircraft does not light off its ECM when it's two hundred kilometers away from an enemy radar site....it does just the opposite and shuts it down. So the idea that ECM in MWO should be jamming detection outside the maximum range of effect (180 meters) is nonsensical to say the least. Especially when a unit with -enhanced- sensors like a BAP is around that can burn through the ECM even better than normal sensors (BAP -is- supposed to be better then normal sensor equipment, right devs?).

Edited by Jakob Knight, 04 April 2013 - 03:09 PM.

[HATER 1]

NOPE.

EDIT: Seriously, late april fools, ******** joke, or just plain ignorant? You guys pick.

Edited by HATER 1, 04 April 2013 - 03:52 PM.

[Yokaiko]

TheRulesLawyer, on 04 April 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

What a joke. ECM is pretty much ok? LoL. Its a extremely cheap *HARD* counter to two weapon types, and need I remind you that there are entire chassis designed around this weapon type? The PPC is a soft counter at best. Modules aren't something you have access to anytime soon so a noob will have to suffer through tons of horrible gameplay first, and even then its just range extension. ECM is easily the most OP thing in the game

Modules don't even get in the ballpark of countering ECM, even with them you get a whopping 90m of leeway to get a lock and shoot, aka .7 seconds against a 150kph mech.