313 replies to this topic

[James Montana]

Satisfied, and never cared about the state of ecm. I will hit you whether you have it, or not.

[MischiefSC]

I expressed my opinion in the appropriate feedback thread. Trying to limit myself to that so I'm not spamming the same stuff all over.

Didn't like it, felt like my point got missed, or ignored.... more likely chucked out. I consider the current ECM/missile balancing as well as the proposed changes to be bad and a bad idea that represents a fundamental issue with the perception of MWO balancing.

[Alilua]

Carrioncrows, on 04 April 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

This is how I feel about the whole ECM issue

Yep. Can't say it much better myself.

[ArmandTulsen]

Still not good enough, PGI.

But, as the King says, "have it your way." It's your game, you can muck things up, if you wish.

[SilentSooYun]

Brilig, on 04 April 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

I am surprised the community is so split on this. I figured most everyone thought ECM needed a major rework, or some decent counters.

The people who use it are happy, which goes to show many people have switched to ECM Mechs. Naturally, they are happy that the Devs have decided to ignore how utterly broken this little piece of equipment is. Gives them some free time to nerf LRMs even more so they can have their sniper-only game.

[Nutlink]

Right now I wish ECM was thrown out until the complete radar and counter-ECM functions were put in. Having it in right now is just bad form. I'll wait until the ballistic rewind before making an overall judgement on this, but as it stands ECM having all the functions of pretty much every stealth item in CBT is irritating.

[Teralitha]

Kristov Kerensky, on 04 April 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

Your observations on balance are somewhat..suspect, since you seem to consider MW4 to have been an excellent and well balanced game. ECM seems to cause you no end of problems in MWO, which if you were such an exceptionally skilled pilot wouldn't be the case, as it doesn't bother the rest of us who are moderately skilled pilots.

re: MW4 and what it did to the franchise...how in any way can you say it was so great and did so well? It literally killed the franchise, it was the last MW PC title to be made and it didn't make anywhere near the money it should have. It DID sell better then MW3...but that's it, it didn't do as well as MW2, which really says it all.

I can game the system if I choose to. But is that fun? No

As for MW4, first impressions from the older MW crowd apparently were not so good. But after I played it for several years, I was able to see exactly how the game was balanced. It was perfectly balanced with puretech. Clan vs IS. If you simply played games where anythings goes, then yea I can see why you thought it sucked. I didnt like MW4 without boundries either. But when you got into a league that set boundries like tonnage limits and pure tech... suddenly everything was fair and balanced. (which is why I have the same opinion of MWO btw... it sucks with no boundries) MWO needs boundries if its going to succeed.

Edited by Teralitha, 04 April 2013 - 09:32 PM.

[MuKen]

I think the biggest problem with their statement is they don't seem to understand what constitutes a "counter". A counter is not just something that lets you deal with something else. A counter is something that makes it a bad idea for your opponent to have taken it in the first place. For example, if you build a streak-boat, and your opponent takes ECM, his ECM has countered your build (as the devs intended). If he takes ECM and you take PPCs, he doesn't regret having taken ECM, so PPC does not counter ECM.

Nothing does right now, there is no counter for ECM. If you know in advance your opponent will take ECM, there's nothing you can take that makes that a bad idea for him.

Edited by MuKen, 04 April 2013 - 09:36 PM.

[Mr 144]

Brilig, on 04 April 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

I am surprised the community is so split on this. I figured most everyone thought ECM needed a major rework, or some decent counters.

I don't know of anyone I play with that has any major problem with ECM in it's current form. People who don't mind ECM are not simply people who pilot ECM mechs. I almost never ECM in pugs. I almost never ECM in 2-4 mans. I do pilot a D-DC in 8-mans, but our team composition (based on RHOD drop decks) does not 'stack' ECM in any obnoxious way.

I've said it plenty of times, and I'll say it again...
ECM Assaults = fine (see plenty of stalkers, 9M/PBs, and soon highlanders in all 3 forms of play)
ECM Heavies = don't exist (see plenty of Heavies in all 3 forms of play)
ECM Mediums = Big whoop (see plenty of cents, trebs, and hunchies in all 3 forms of play)

ECM Lights.....
Normal Queue = variant farming mostly, but Jenners and Spiders are on the rise.
8-mans = Raven 3L

The problem is not ECM...it never has been. The problem is light 1v1. Balance the lights to each other...problem solved.

Mr 144

Edited by Mr 144, 04 April 2013 - 09:39 PM.

[Teralitha]

TruePoindexter, on 04 April 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

Broken due to lack of a weight/class restriction - not ECM. ECM is the symptom there not the cause. If there was no ECM you would simply see Raven's replaced with Jenners.

And DDC replaced with .... anything else. And the game basically back the way it was before ECM.... A very fun game. ECM simply makes the game alot less fun.

Edited by Teralitha, 04 April 2013 - 09:37 PM.

[Sephlock]

[Shadowsword8]

Brilig, on 04 April 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

I am surprised the community is so split on this. I figured most everyone thought ECM needed a major rework, or some decent counters.

It's a psychological effect at work.

When you get what is the equivalent of a dev blog over a community concern, it always has a positive effect. The players who want to know the motivations behind a situation get some answers. The players that were ticked about being ignored get some attention. And the players who wanted a small nerf get their wishes.

If I were someone on PGI's staff, and taking into account that psychological trick that give a temporary boost approval right after publication, I'd consider that anything that doesn't get approved by over two thirds of the community need to be reworked.

But then, I live in the real word, while PGI live in one where anyone who doesn't visit the forum is basically agreeing with whatever they want to believe, so it's not like this vote will have any use...

Edited by Shadowsword8, 05 April 2013 - 05:51 AM.

[Mancu]

The sad fact is, any piece of equipment that you don't have to think about using (or not using) is broken.

Narc for example, nobody uses it. It simply doesn't do enough to be worth even considering. Thus it is broken and needs reworked.

ECM is the opposite side of the coin. Everyone uses it. It isn't even worth considering not taking it. ECM exists on 100% of the mechs that can carry it. That indicates it is broken as well and needs reworked.

No item should be so good or so bad that it is used 0% or 100% of the time.

[StalaggtIKE]

I wonder if the devs are proud of why players LIKE THE CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTED ECM. Is this the desired outcome they had in mind?

[Valaska]

At this point its apparent PGI don't give a damn what the majority think, so whatever lol. Here's waiting on MechWarrior 5, again.

Shadowsword8, on 05 April 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

It's a psychological effect at work.

When you get what is the equivalent of a dev blog over a community concern, it always has a positive effect. The players who want to know the motivations behind a situation get some answers. The players that were ticked about being ignored get some attention. And the players who wanted a small nerf get their wishes.

If I were someone on PGI's staff, and taking into account that psychological trick that give a temporary boost approval right after publication, I'd consider that anything that doesn't get approved by over two thirds of the community need to be reworked.

But then, I live in the real word, while PGI live in one where anyone who doesn't visit the forum is basically agreeing with whatever they want to believe, so it's not like this vote will have any use...

Also, most people have given up at this point. I don't know a single friend who keeps up with this game or forum anymore, I'm the only one who checks back. PGI is more or less reaping what they sow.

[AC]

Piipu, on 03 April 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

ECM already is balanced to the point that lights other than a 3L are usable. I'd say it's a good idea.

Really? I see the odd non-ECM light out there, but I think it is just because people are trying to master their mechs. A Jenner pops up here and there, but i think it is because it is the Jenner and is the fastest light with the best slots. Other than that, I have not seen a regular Cicada forever, just the ECM one and the Hero one.

[Caleb Lee]

Shadowsword8, on 03 April 2013 - 09:37 PM, said:

PGi's answer to the ECM debate can be found here:

http://mwomercs.com/...f-guardian-ecm/

For those who just want the TL/DR version, PGI intend to:

- Place ECM on a fixed location, just like AMS

- Remove ECM's ability to hide your allies location.

So let's be real honest here... how does their proposed solution fix anything?

Fixed Location - Can anyone honestly say they will try to target the side torso on a light mech with any intention other than to knock out it's XL? Or facing a DDC knock out it's ECM over it's Right Torso(AC20)/Right Arm (LL/PPC) combo?

Friendly Fire - Basically this will help address FF incidents and is a good thing, will also help with situational awareness. Now if they could fix the Target Info/HUD/Mini-map bugs I'll be a lot happier in this area.

So neither of these really fix the problem of boating ECM, nor does their other fix:

PPC - Take out a single ECM mech that is soloing/lonewolf and is effective. It also REQUIRES you to have PPCs which are better now but still high weight/heat weapon. Because of ECM and the heat changes, larger maps I'm seeing a LOT of these and a lot less Gauss rifles, ER Large etc...

We still have major issues with LRM/SSRM mechanics that need to be addressed and the enemy will still have:

Stealth Armor - Can't target them... (Something that should ONLY go on a mech with ECM equipped and the armor is a lot heavier, think opposite of FF).
Null Signature - Can't ID them for focus fire... (Really nerfs teamwork, especially for lonewolfs).

So one tiny device that weighs very little breaks multiple weapon systems, requires still others to help counter then and the matchmaker doesn't even take it into account.

Yeah, I chalk this up to another 'learning experience' for PGI. No more $$ till this and other issues are resolved properly.

[Caleb Lee]

AC, on 08 April 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

Really? I see the odd non-ECM light out there, but I think it is just because people are trying to master their mechs. A Jenner pops up here and there, but i think it is because it is the Jenner and is the fastest light with the best slots. Other than that, I have not seen a regular Cicada forever, just the ECM one and the Hero one.

Pretty much this ^^. The reason I'm seeing less 3Ls is that they now have normal hit boxes and take skill to pilot, but IMHO outside of the ECM role are inferior to a Jenner who can shoot straight.

ECM is still broken. Had a sync drop with a group of 4 Spider ECM pilots literally wipe the floor of a 4 man pre-made and the rest low Elo pugs that couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. I swear the Spider's hitboxes are a lot like the Ravens were.

I've only had it happen once, it looked fun as can be, but just shows how broken ECM is and missing hitscan for ballistics etc...

[CutterWolf]

Tennex, on 03 April 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

no right now ECM hides your equipped mech even from your teamates. the fix will make it sothat no longer happens.

i always thought it was a bug but i guess it was a feature? can you say bad design?

RIght now ECM is working correctly, (i.e. it blocks all IFF signatures under its bubble) which "is" what ECM is suppose to do. They want to change it so now like "magic" ECM does not do what its suppose to do and that's to let you see those jammed IFF signatures at "all" times even when its under an enemy's IFF bubble. You know, you called up the bad guys before the battle and told them the signal type and frequency your IFF transmits on so they could make sure they would not be blocking it for you. Sure was nice of the enemy to do that don't you think?

Here is the quote from Paul: " ECM should not cut out friendly signatures on the battlefield. Friendly Mechs should always be identifiable and not obscure team play."

[TB Freelancer]

I voted no. I get where they're coming from, they see the big picture because they've got all the facts. But I really think, based on what I see right now, that ECM is simply too strong and that 180m is too much real estate in most situations.

Personally I'd sooner see different bubble sizes going by weight class i.e. 45m for a light and stepping up in 45m increments all the way to 180m for assaults that can carry ECM. Or linearly tie the bubble to throttle position. Full 180m bubble standing still to only covering the mech at 100% throttle. Maybe a combination of the two or some variation of those ideas.

Edited by TB Freelancer, 08 April 2013 - 10:55 AM.