1089 replies to this topic

[HRR Mary]

A bazillion posts regarding feeback on ECM, a Gazillion QQ threads, numerous long, detailled posts that propose multiple sound changes to ECM, and you come up with those ideas?

=> Hardpoint fixed ECM ??? wait, like I've got to actually shoot "there" to kill ECM ? What about killing the mech : faster, and more efficent. Hitting specific part aside the CT, (or the torso on an XL mech) and the head (if you have good aim) is the best way to get yourself cored.
That "limitation" is flawed and useless.

Look at the actual matches, and stop looking at your telemetry. Your telemetry does not tell you when a DDC thought it was the Mechwarrior god, and walked in front of 7 mechs because "No one can see me, I have ecm" and got instakilled. A lot of people are going to the ECM mechs because they are better than their counterparts, and not all of them are geniuses.

So we stay with that :

More ECM on a team : Huge increase of win chances (unless populated by idiots)
ECM equiped mech : major boost in effectiveness (I played around with a 3L to test it out and at one point got to a 9.00 K/D ratio)
ECM counters are unreliable, (tag is taking a weapon slot, and needs you to keep your reticule on target, PPC disabling, useless on multiple overlapping ECM mechs) while ECM stays on without any effort from the pilot.
Sensor Modules that bring you an increase to the buffer zone, but not BAP (same tonnage, same slots, same functionality, but apparently can't beat ecm.... yay another shelf item with Mguns, flamers...)


EDIT : forgot to compliment you : Good job on not changing anything.

Edited by HRR Mary, 04 April 2013 - 12:25 AM.

[MN03]

I played several matches with PGI officials and most of them had ECM mechs. I guess that explains a lot.

[Shadowsword8]

Wizard Steve, on 04 April 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Comments like this make me wonder why we bother providing feedback at all.

Yeah, This comment made me roll my eyes and wonder, too.

Because disrupting a mech behind a hill you haven't even noticed, just by closing within 180m, sure require "skill". Unless they meant the "skill" to drag and drop a module in the mech lab?


OR, they meant that it takes more skill for the opponent without ECM to kill womeone with ECM. On that I'd actually agree.

[Stainless Steel]

How about these for ideas :

Rather then have the ECM unit in a specified hardpoint for each mech, why not just make it glow white-hot under thermal ?

On 20th century ECM aircraft like the EA-6B intruder and the EF-111 the aircraft had to have substantially improved cooling systems to counteract the heat caused by such powerful transmitters.

So if you see an ECM Atlas coming over the hill, and you go to Thermal then you can see where he has installed the unit as that body part is glowing white

Alternatively :

Change the size of the ECM module to 3 crits . This means the unit cannot be put in the Centre Torso or the feet, and if you are running an XL this means that one torso slot will be down to 6 crits only

[Riktor Voshek]

I don't particularly mind ECM as it is now, I don't think it's game breaking or anything, but there is one aspect to it that I don't like; I don't think the opportunity cost of using ECM is high enough.

Of the matches run with mechs that can fit ECM, what percentage of those mechs do fit ECM? I suspect it's a pretty high number, and if that is the case then that suggests that fitting ECM isn't a particularly interesting decision for the person building the mech.

I'd like to see a change where either by fitting or by actively using ECM (especially in disrupt mode), the mech pilot loses some of their ability to use their weapons. Maybe ECM generates a portion of heat while active, similar to engine heat while running. Maybe it has to be fitted in an energy hardpoint like TAG does.

Essentially, once you've fitted ECM, it's use is free, both in terms of mech resources and player engagement. All the counters to ECM require a much higher investment of either mech resources or player skill, and that just doesn't feel right.

[Verbrand]

I look forward to seeing how ECM on lights features in the meta once HSR-2 is fully in place.

We've got the PPC disabling, we've got TAG and the advanced sensor range module (pretty much a must have) to counter ECM.
I'd like it if NARC disabled ECM because then it might see some more use.

I like the dedicated hardpoint idea and I agree the ECM screwing with friendlies on the minimap was weird and needs to go. Am I correct in assuming this applies to both teams? the fact that I cannot see which way to run when an ecm light sneaks up on me is really annoying with the lack of voice comms in PUG matches.

[jakucha]

I never run ECM mechs and have never run one, and to be honest they don't bug me that much when I come across them. It'll be nice to see where the ecm actually is on the mech though. A few matches ago I 2 v 1'd 2 Ravens in a Jagermech with 1 Gauss and 2 LPLs and won.

Edited by jakucha, 04 April 2013 - 12:57 AM.

[Ghogiel]

Sol Fin, on 03 April 2013 - 11:51 PM, said:

Will just state what I think. Testing and my K/D stats clearly show that ECM equipped mechs are still the ultimate weapon of destruction. My K/D ratio is the highest one on both D-DC and 3L. Non-ECM variants of the same mech of the same build do not produce similar results.

ECM clearly needs more ECCM measures or ECM should have reduced capabilities.

3L compare to his 2X and 4X ravens. lol

[Jungle Rhino]

jakucha, on 04 April 2013 - 12:56 AM, said:

I never run ECM mechs and have never run one, and to be honest they don't bug me that much when I come across them. It'll be nice to see where the ecm actually is on the mech though. A few matches ago I 2 v 1'd 2 Ravens in a Jagermech with 1 Gauss and 2 LPLs and won.

*NEWSFLASH*

There are terrible Raven pilots


I still cannot understand what lag state rewind has to do with ECM specifically. ALL light mechs are going to suffer when people are able to actually hit them reliably with AC20s. So lights without ECM will remain just as gimped as before compared to their ECM brethren. How can PGI not see this?? It is utterly mindboggling!!

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

MN03, on 04 April 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

I played several matches with PGI officials and most of them had ECM mechs. I guess that explains a lot.

I don't blame them, as having a PGI name/logo basically makes you # 1 target every game, but it just goes to show you that ECM is OP if it's a crunch that induces better survival or competitiveness, which it is. The same cannot be said about AMS, which is exact same weight and slot cost. Both weigh the same, yet the first is 100x as powerful. All the AMS even does is shoot down a few missiles per LRM volley, which you don't even have to care about since no one even uses LRMs anymore. Also, why settle for shooting down a few missiles, when ECM stops the locks entirely?

Atlas K is still a big tincan and it's thanks to poor game design that they now refuse to even acknowledge. In a fair game, a balanced game, D DC would not be better than a K. They would both be equally viable, but that's not this game. Thanks to this fail CC update, it now looks like it'll NEVER be this game.

[Vassago Rain]

Bluten, on 04 April 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

I don't blame them, as having a PGI name/logo basically makes you # 1 target every game, but it just goes to show you that ECM is OP if it's a crunch that induces better survival or competitiveness, which it is. The same cannot be said about AMS, which is exact same weight and slot cost. Both weigh the same, yet the first is 100x as powerful. All the AMS even does is shoot down a few missiles per LRM volley, which you don't even have to care about since no one even uses LRMs anymore. Also, why settle for shooting down a few missiles, when ECM stops the locks entirely?

Atlas K is still a big tincan and it's thanks to poor game design that they now refuse to even acknowledge. In a fair game, a balanced game, D DC would not be better than a K. They would both be equally viable, but that's not this game. Thanks to this fail CC update, it now looks like it'll NEVER be this game.

Because ECM has no effect on dumbfire 5859059585 damage lurm blasts of old, which is what you had to endure. Or are you under the impression you can't fire LRMs without lock?

[Shadowsword8]

Jungle Rhino, on 04 April 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

*NEWSFLASH*

There are terrible Raven pilots


I still cannot understand what lag state rewind has to do with ECM specifically. ALL light mechs are going to suffer when people are able to actually hit them reliably with AC20s. So lights without ECM will remain just as gimped as before compared to their ECM brethren. How can PGI not see this?? It is utterly mindboggling!!

PGI is using the 3L and HSR as diversions to get attention away from the need to balance the module requirements (and to admit they were flat out wrong in the first place).

It's like saying "Streak missile are fine, because we nerfed the Catapult torso twist".


That, or they think that ECM is only an issue on the 3L. If that's the case, the team in charge of balancing the game is not playing the same game we are.


I don't know which is the most worrying.

[Slanski]

I support the "TAG counters ECM at all ranges" motion.

It would permit all lights to target paint and SSRM ECM lights, levelling the playing field between them. ECM would still suppress your signature at longer ranges, making you harder to see as a scout and covering you from unassisted LRM fire. A jenner could perform his role as light interceptor propperly again.

Incidentally it would also make sense, as TAG is an optical laser painting system and ECM is an electronic countering system suppressing RADAR, not visuals.

[J-Pax7]

I don't often post on the forum and when I do it's usually in defense of the developers against certain members of the community who's stupidity and ignorance truly perplexes is me.

This matter however is something that I feel the developers are dealing with incorrectly. ECM is a broken mechanic and a missed opportunity to add another, dynamic, level of gameplay to the game.

Firstly, ECM as it stands can totally nullify the cast majority of LRM builds to the point that if your unlucky enough to drop against a team with good ECM cover there is nothing much you can do for that match. This removes one element of gameplay from the game. Counters to ECM are laughable, TAG requires constant targeting which for a light mech (the most useful platform for tag in this situation you would think) is very hard to do for long enough for the LRMS to locks on fire and hit the target, and PPC's 4 second counter ability means that a very quick reaction from the LRM player might mean that the missiles will reach their target before loosing lock however the target is likely to have found cover by then and even if not an atlas is hardly gonna buckle under one volley of missiles and the lights are simply to fast. The point I'm trying to make is that there really is no real counter for ECM outside of another ECM (I don't really need to go into why ecms being the cause and prevention is a bad thing)

Secondly, a large point is being made about the extra dimension that ECM adds to the game. I understand what is intended here but this extra dimension is a game breaking element and is not interesting enough to be considered allowable under the circumstance. To put it simply, it means a large number of games are decided on this simple explanation; number of ecm on team A vs. number of ecm on team b = much larger probability of victory for the team with the higher number of ecms. This isn't a terribly interesting element of gameplay in this game. Imagine a whole bunch of different counter measures each countering a specific time of data. ECM as it stand could work as it does in TT (note I am note a proponent in staying loyal to TT in any way, the system however makes sense), an additional system would make lock ons harder and might stack so as to make LRMS useless when a number of them are implemented, others could even provide false data, etc, etc. This would allow for a variety of counter systems. This would add an interesting extra dimension to the game. One that would firstly not only effect missile builds and secondly means that each game would have a certain combination of counter measures that uniquely changes the way the game plays out and strategy will be the key to victory and not simply who has the most ecms. Sure you will still be able to have an ECM effect as we know it by taking multiple systems but you would then end up with a specialist mech that will be limited in slots and tonnage that can be used for conventional weapons (a type of mech I would be interested in playing).

These are my thoughts on the subject and I wouldn't dare to insist that I am either correct in the way they should be implemented or my single voice represents the community. However the communities voice does scream for changes in ECM and If that's not listened too it would truly be the developers that perplex me this time

[Jungle Rhino]

Sound post Paul. The thing I find most distressing about using ECM to 'add an exrtra dimension' is that they are admitting that their gameplay is fundamentally broken unless there is ECM in play.

If you are unfortunate enough to drop in a team with no ECM whatsoever you quickly see why PGI doesn't want to change ECM - if they do it exposes huge issues with other aspects of the game - specifcally coordinated high damage pinpoint alphas.

[Toxik]

I guess ECM will still be required upgrade for some mech given that it will still be as powerful, why would you not take something that can nerf all missile based weapon, well ok the only exception being SRM. As much as I welcome some of the changes, the so called "counters" to ECM feel like a joke. I hope they have other stuff in electronic warfare as at the moment ECM will still rule. Shame really...

[Yokaiko]

Jungle Rhino, on 04 April 2013 - 02:10 AM, said:

- specifcally coordinated high damage pinpoint alphas.

ECM has little to do with that. Suddenly Atlas only happens if you get caught slipping. ECM crushes non-ECM lights, as well as streak missiles and LRM, for 1.5 tons, no heat and a simple toggle.

That being said this being a satisfactory implementation of ECM, doesn't bode well.

Edited by Yokaiko, 04 April 2013 - 03:05 AM.

[Sh4nk0h0l1c]

AlexEss, on 03 April 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

to be honest the only real problem with ECM right now is the ECM+Streak combo. Outside of that it is perfectly fine.

In my personal opinion.

agreed

jay35, on 03 April 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

it's a solid post. Good depth, well written, explains reasoning behind existing actions and planned actions, has a bigger picture in mind, and communicates it well. I respect it. More of this, please.

also agreed! keep it up PGI/IGP, we appreciate it

[Slambot]

So, basically, you took all those replies (I read most of them) and decided to ignore 90% of them? Nifty. Successful game developers actually listen to their fanbase. Even Blizzard, arguably the number one game designer out there, listens quite closely to their fanbase.

ECM should NOT be a cloaking device. What will you do with the null signature system? I agree that ECM adds a level of strategy, but really, it defines the game currently. No one system should do so.

[charov]

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).