160 replies to this topic

[Roadbeer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

That can't happen unless they nerf/change ECM.

So now you are really confusing me.

How can that not happen? I'm viewing it EXACTLY as ECM works now.
Rereading my post, I forgot to mention switching to counter mode after NARCed. Going to fix

Rofl, on 05 April 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

This. This is totally acceptable, and I'm more anit-ECM leaning. We should have soft counters in place, not lockouts.

It should've been from the start:
A makes B *less* effective, unless C. C also makes B *more* effective, unless A.

1. ECM makes LRMs less effective (read: longer locks, more spread, etc. Soft counters), unless TAG/NARC. TAG/NARC also makes LRMs *more* effective, unless ECM.
2. BAP makes spotting more effective, unless ECM. However BAP can still use missiles as per normal (ie removes the soft counter).

Something along those lines.

Now THIS is something I could get on board with.

Edited by Roadbeer, 05 April 2013 - 11:10 AM.

[Slashmckill]

DocBach, on 05 April 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

ECM was taken in the canon mainly to prevent detection from Beagle. Unlike the waste of space and tons Beagle is in this game, board game Beagle could detect units that weren't hidden (ie shut down or deliberately camouflaged such as hiding inside a blown up building), regardless of line of sight. The interaction between the two was Beagle could see beyond terrain, ECM could hide your movement as you moved around their line of sight. If a target was in line of sight, it was fair game for any weapon system, even if it was missiles.

The best part is the lore and canon of ECM is ECM provides coverage against locks in a third mode called Ghost Target mode - which isn't counted by a PPC, or TAG; it is countered by Beagle Active Probe, another passive item that weighs the same weight. Ghost Target mode also has to be maintained every 10 seconds; there is a chance it fails to generate enough static to jam the enemy. ECM in the canon and lore has some downsides to it, and other passive counters. MWO has none of this and as a result it's ECM skews the game quite a bit.

Not to sound rude but I am aware of all of that, i've read several of your posts about it, but i also know how stubborn the devs are to make whatever the hell it is that they are doing work and as long as the end result is balanced, i don't care. (i really do like the ghost mode, but i've seen the devs in action long enough to know they won't do that)

I love the lore and i love the fluff but the devs clearly don't care for how balanced it was in TT. They want something thats not TT, I want something thats balanced within itself. Hell for how badly ecm shuts down missle systems ppcs should deal through armor crits to ecm units.(High amount of power for a high amount of risk, now thats a true counter)

Edited by Slashmckill, 05 April 2013 - 11:18 AM.

[DocBach]

Rofl, on 05 April 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

This. This is totally acceptable, and I'm more anit-ECM leaning. We should have soft counters in place, not lockouts.

It should've been from the start:
A makes B *less* effective, unless C. C also makes B *more* effective, unless A.

1. ECM makes LRMs less effective (read: longer locks, more spread, etc. Soft counters), unless TAG/NARC. TAG/NARC also makes LRMs *more* effective, unless ECM.
2. BAP makes spotting more effective, unless ECM. However BAP can still use missiles as per normal (ie removes the soft counter).

Something along those lines.

In short: We want soft counters to basic equipment available and hard counters to those soft counters. We want soft buffs to basic equipment and hard counters to those soft buffs. (Read as: ECM negating Artemis IV but not LRMs entirely)

Exactly - ECM, Beagle, Artemis, AMS, Narc, ect all should be nice to have, and provide bonuses (or in ECM's case, provide protection from those bonuses) -- they should not be so overpowering that they completely and totally counter a 'Mech's weapon systems.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Um, try doing that.

Go in with a Raven with ECM, tag the atlas, then narc it. Then you have to switch your ECM to counter mode, which does the same thing as the narc anyway in actuality. Then stay in range of the atlas. Because if you move off, his ECM cancels the narc.

And you are waiting for LRM's that do no damage to come in while you stand around?

I mean that scenario just doesn't make any sense.

And ontop of all that. If there is another ECM, it doesn't work at all, period. Because the second ECM overrides everything.

Roadbeer, on 05 April 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

Now THIS is something I could get on board with.

You freaking drive me up a wall dude. That is what 75% of us having been asking for this whole time (what I mean by 75%, is most of us want a real information warfare, there are some people who just want ECM totally removed).

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM.

[DocBach]

Slashmckill, on 05 April 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

Not to sound rude but I am aware of all of that, i've read several of your posts about it, but i also know how stubborn the devs are to make whatever the hell it is that they are doing work and as long as the end result is balanced, i don't care.

not rude at all, glad someone got something out of me posting that information!

[Krondor]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

You freaking drive me up a wall dude. That is what 75% of us having been asking for this whole time (what I mean by 75%, is most of us want a real information warfare, there are some people who just want ECM totally removed).

I don't think there's anyone who wants it completely removed. Most people just don't want it to be the single God system it is now.

Edited by Krondor, 05 April 2013 - 11:15 AM.

[Mystere]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

If AMS was buffed, and they removed the missile shield from ECM, would that be ok?

Instead of completely removing the missile shield, allow SSRMs to be dumb fired and improve the dumb firing of LRMS. Then I'll be ok.

As for the AMS, I can go either way.

Edited by Mystere, 05 April 2013 - 11:21 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Krondor, on 05 April 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

I don't think there's anyone who wants it completely removed. Most people just don't want it to be the single God system it is now.

Just like the ECM crowd has stone profit and hammerreborn. The anti-ECM crowd has some crazies too.

It's how it goes in life.

But I don't get how Roadbeer says he doesn't want to change ECM, then says he loves Rofl's idea. Because Rofl's idea is what we have all been making huge posts about.

Mystere, on 05 April 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Instead of removing the missile shield, allow SSRMs to be dumb fired and improve the dumb firing of LRMS. Then I'll be ok.

As for the AMS, I can go either way.

I don't believe PGI has shown any ability to make LRM's dumbfire properly. They can't get them to work properly in their current state. So that seems a lot less likely.

Removing the shield and buffing AMS seems more like something up their skill level.

[Roadbeer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Um, try doing that.

Go in with a Raven with ECM, tag the atlas, then narc it. Then you have to switch your ECM to counter mode, which does the same thing as the narc anyway in actuality. Then stay in range of the atlas. Because if you move off, his ECM cancels the narc.

And you are waiting for LRM's that do no damage to come in while you stand around?

I mean that scenario just doesn't make any sense.

You're looking at the game as it stands now, the scenario was based off of everything working as it should, with IW elements in play and a working LRM model.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

And ontop of all that. If there is another ECM, it doesn't work at all, period. Because the second ECM overrides everything.

Yup, that's the chance you take when balancing your team pre-launch.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

You freaking drive me up a wall dude. That is what 75% of us having been asking for this whole time (what I mean by 75%, is most of us want a real information warfare, there are some people who just want ECM totally removed).

Nope, 75% of you are screaming "OMGZ NERF NOW" without even knowing what the real issue is. Very few are asking for a robust IW. When put the way Rofl did, Yeah, I'm ok with that, sounds reasonable.

Edited by Roadbeer, 05 April 2013 - 11:23 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Holy crap guy. Did you read the huge ECM post where they asked for feedback?

We are all now just trying to figure out what the hell to do after Paul's assinine ECM letter.

If you go back and read all of the huge posts by StalaggtIKE, DocBash, Livewyr, etc. All they are asking for is what you just said you liked.

Do you even understand what has been going on for the last 5 months?

Edit: F**k dude, I mean honestly it's insulting you come into this thread spouting off about not wanting to nerf ECM without having read one of the huge threads with tons of GREAT ideas to flesh out IW and create a proper ECM experience.

You just threw a huge middle finger up to about half the people posting in here with crap like that.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 05 April 2013 - 11:24 AM.

[Mystere]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

You freaking drive me up a wall dude. That is what 75% of us having been asking for this whole time (what I mean by 75%, is most of us want a real information warfare, there are some people who just want ECM totally removed).

Unfortunately, that is not what I am getting based on the huge overflowing rivers of male nerd rage tears that ECM has been generating.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Mystere, on 05 April 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

Unfortunately, that is not what I am getting based on the huge overflowing rivers of male nerd rage tears that ECM has been generating.

BULL, go back and read the huge posts with about 50 people sitting and think-tanking better ways to have ECM implemented. You choose to ignore them.

The issue is, now after all that time and effort, the best PGI could come back with is "We are ignoring all of that, and doing what we want anyway".

So now you are left with a bunch of people just fed up with the game, and angry.

And not spending a pretty penny to on it.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 05 April 2013 - 11:26 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

Holy crap guy. Did you read the huge ECM post where they asked for feedback?

We are all now just trying to figure out what the hell to do after Paul's assinine ECM letter.

If you go back and read all of the huge posts by StalaggtIKE, DocBash, Livewyr, etc. All they are asking for is what you just said you liked.

Do you even understand what has been going on for the last 5 months?

Edit: F**k dude, I mean honestly it's insulting you come into this thread spouting off about not wanting to nerf ECM without having read one of the huge threads with tons of GREAT ideas to flesh out IW and create a proper ECM experience.

You just threw a huge middle finger up to about half the people posting in here with crap like that.

Yeah, because you are such a small voice, being drown out by the QQ. It's like the people who are trying to legitimately argue for 3PV (which I'm against) and it gets drown out by "BUT PGI LIED, THEY SAID THE WORD "SACROSANCT". So, yeah, here's my middle finger to the people who create the noise that drowns out the legit argument, and make the whole thing a MUCH bigger deal than it has to be.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roadbeer, on 05 April 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

Yeah, because you are such a small voice, being drown out by the QQ. It's like the people who are trying to legitimately argue for 3PV (which I'm against) and it gets drown out by "BUT PGI LIED, THEY SAID THE WORD "SACROSANCT". So, yeah, here's my middle finger to the people who create the noise that drowns out the legit argument, and make the whole thing a MUCH bigger deal than it has to be.

No seriously, there were 3 or 4 HUGE threads theory crafting and think tanking ways to make ECM and Information Warfare function properly.

Go look up Livewyr's thread, It was epic. Had a ton of feedback from a lot of posters.

What you are talking about is the people who exploded after PGI said "Screw you guys" after all that hard work for the last 5 months.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

http://mwomercs.com/...66#entry2046966

Go read some of the links in his posts with tons of constructive ECM discussion that was flat out ignored.

[Eleshod]

Listen, ECM does not stop your direct fire weapons from functioning. All of your lasers and AC's can still be fired JUST FINE. At the same time, if an ECM mech was close enough to jam you you're not shooting LRMs to begin with.
Second on the list is the IFF scrambling. If your far enough away from your team that the IFF scramble comes into play, or that the friendly vanishing off the map and overview actually effect something you where too far away from your friendlies to begin with.

This leaves the scramble of streaks being the only REAL issue. Up close and if your whole build was based on an easy lock weapon you should be looking at your playstyle, cause ECM or not I see a mech with full streaks and I just dance around the 350+ range mark to reduce their effectiveness anyway.

I will admit, wonky Matchmaking needs to be fixed, there should be two and ONLY two ECM per team in a match. ECM is an asset and if the other team is stupid enough to expose that asset poorly, as a mech pilot you should be all to willing to chop said assest's head clean off, little or big.


P.S ~Dawns a flamesuit~

Edited by Eleshod, 05 April 2013 - 11:43 AM.

[Slashmckill]

Mystere, on 05 April 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

Unfortunately, that is not what I am getting based on the huge overflowing rivers of male nerd rage tears that ECM has been generating.

It's quite funny you say that, because most of the time when i hear talks of balance it's always people for ecm welling up with tears ready to throw a tantrum on a moments notice about how they don't want their favorite toy taken away from them or even altered in the slightest. (I'am not implying anything just pointing out how i personally see things, not to say i don't see what you are talking about)

Edited by Slashmckill, 05 April 2013 - 11:45 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I just can't believe anyone has read through the more meaningful ECM threads, and concludes people are crying for ECM to be removed.

I mean go look at the first like 6 or 7 pages of the ECM feedback page from before Paul's letter, There were a lot of people writing out long, well thought out ideas on how to deal with things.

[Trauglodyte]

I think that ECM presents two of the biggest game offenses:

1- It completely nullifies guided missiles of all variations (hard counter, not a soft counter/debuff)
2- It reduces sensor range which presents an issue, of sorts, when it comes to tracking enemies

If I use a mech centered around LRMs, I have to equip TAG to cancel it or I have to ask/hope a teammate carries TAG or NARC (lol) and then lights up my target. Even if that happens, I'm still facing reduced lock-on times even though I just added a 1 ton piece of equipment, plus LOS, to negate their 1.5 ton piece of equipment.

On top of that, if I'm scouting, I have to depend on visual accuity to see where they are. That isn't a big deal, honestly. But what is a big deal is that I have no equipment available to me to help find cloaked forces. I have to use thermal vision, which isn't a big deal, but that still presents the issue of them needing to be in visual range and not blocked by terrain.

Once we have the Magnometer mod to sense ground vibrations, UAV mod to scout, and had some sort of boosts made to BAP/NARC, ECM won't be an issue. But right now, we're in a sword dual and the only part of the sword that I have is the hilt. Yeah, I can kind of defend myself but I'm not bringing anything else to the table. THAT is the problem.



PS> For those that keep bringing up lore to the ECM subject, you have to remember that lore ECM didn't block sensors cause we were GOD during the game sitting in the heavens and looking down at the world. You can't run stealth rules when you can visually see everything. Anyway, it makes sense that ECM debuffs sensors and, as such, debuffs weapons that depend on sensor locks. It just doesn't make sense that we can't get around that without whistling Dixie while jumping on one leg and doing advanced mathematics.

[Mystere]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 05 April 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

No seriously, there were 3 or 4 HUGE threads theory crafting and think tanking ways to make ECM and Information Warfare function properly.

Go look up Livewyr's thread, It was epic. Had a ton of feedback from a lot of posters.

What you are talking about is the people who exploded after PGI said "Screw you guys" after all that hard work for the last 5 months.

I'm sorry but noise eventually drives me away. As such, if I missed (or do not remember) any of those threads, then I (rightly or wrongly) blame it all on the noise. Those threads may have come out when I periodically tuned out of MWO (again because of the noise) and instead fell back to Shogun2 or Rome: Total War.