99 replies to this topic

[IceSerpent]

Darwins Dog, on 01 May 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

They're are actually going to change ECM directly in an upcoming patch. Look at the last two points in the post. Those are direct nerfs to ECM. It may not be the specific changes that you want, but it is a nerf.

This "nerf" does nothing to fix the problem. The issue with ECM is not that it makes battlefield awareness more tricky - that's what it's supposed to be doing. The issue is that it makes guided missiles virtually useless, and that's not on the list of ECM features in BT.

[Deathlike]

There are two things about the "ECM nerf" that people don't understand.

1) There was an ECM hardpoint suggestion in one of the earlier Ask the Devs posts... so this is a "really really delayed reaction" that clearly took actual "thought".. or truly "lack thereof" in coming up with the idea.

2) Putting ECM in a designated spot DOES NOT HELP removing ECM on a LIGHT MECH. You either LEG them, or CORE THEM.. the point is moot when you are shooting light mechs in higher level play. How do you propose to shoot a light mech's side torso like the Raven? What is the point? Sure they have an XL engine... it doesn't mean the side torsos are easy to hit.

Also, in before lock.

Here's a few resources on the matter:
http://mwomercs.com/...be-a-hardpoint/ - found original suggestion
http://mwomercs.com/...evs-31-answers/ - original "no" to showing obvious ECM location
http://mwomercs.com/...vs-32-answered/ - original "no" to ECM hardpoint... at the time

Edited by Deathlike, 01 May 2013 - 08:01 AM.

[Darwins Dog]

Quoting myself to add emphasis.

Darwins Dog, on 01 May 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

They're are actually going to change ECM directly in an upcoming patch. Look at the last two points in the post. Those are direct nerfs to ECM. IT MAY NOT BE THE SPECIFIC CHANGES THAT YOU WANT, but it is a nerf.

One step at a time. There are a lot of things to fix, and they will affect each other. ECM is less popular now because missiles are pretty UP. When the missile fix goes live, it may come back. When HSR is fully implemented it may reduce the effectiveness again. The reality is that we don't know what it will do, because it has not been implemented yet.

[MaddMaxx]

General Taskeen, on 01 May 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Who are you even referencing? The OP? Sounds you are stroking E-Peens. Without evidence of even the basic skill level of your opponents, whatever you are attempting to stroke kind of makes your statement fall flat. Someone with all "cheese" this, "min/max" that, or "ecm" does not make one team great, they must prove first that they can exploit it. With the current state of balance itself in regards, to pretty much everything in the game at the moment, your fine match proves nothing.

ECM was a badly implemented item from the get-go in December 2012. Subsequent patches introduced the "big-fish" balance effect. Equip this->To Counter, To Counter That->Equip This. The point is that is not what it is supposed to be, and has never been that in TT or other Mech titles, and it was to cover up the issue of missile systems at the time.

The general consensus seems to be, on the Forums anyways, is that LRM's suck and no one uses them. I simply gave an example of where a Pug group of all things proved that that was/is not the case.

Not sure how it strokes anything, but each to their own really. What is said on these Forums needs to be taken with a heavy does of salt, otherwise you may find yourself believing stuff that is not entirely true.

Eldragon, on 01 May 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

oooh, I can play the anecdote game too!

I got two Solo kills with my Machine Gun spider K. The only mechs left on the enemy team where LRM boats. Sure it took 4 tons of ammo and 5 minutes of shooting, but I eventually chewed through the rear armor and killed them! Therefore machine guns are an awesome weapon and don't need a buff.

OK you got me. The MG doesn't suck either. With those 2 items being so closely related in usage, it is sometimes easy to forget.

[MaddMaxx]

Livewyr, on 01 May 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

Stupid anecdote game is stupid. (If balance were based on anecdotes, everything in the game would be nerfed to the ground because SOMEONE is good at using EVERYTHING..)

For once I will agree with you Livewyr. With attitudes like yours trying to be the vanguard of the Balance discussion around here, that is exactly where MWO is going to end up.

That is the very sad but very ugly truth.

[Livewyr]

MaddMaxx, on 01 May 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

For once I will agree with you Livewyr. With attitudes like yours trying to be the vanguard of the Balance discussion around here, that is exactly where MWO is going to end up.

That is the very sad but very ugly truth.

My Attitude towards balance is very simple:

Balance means that:
-there should be a reason to bring everything. (There should be situational advantages)
-there should be a reason NOT to bring everything (There should be situational DISadvantages.)


LRMs by themselves had a severe disadvantage in a fairly common situation, someone being close to you.
LRMs by themselves had a decent advantage in a fairly common situation, not having Line of Sight.

LRMs have tracking.
LRMs cannot hit a specified part of a mech.
----------------------

ECM itself has a decent advantage in any situation.
ECM itself has an incredible advantage in a common situation- someone getting close.

ECM itself has no disadvantage, at all.

That is not balanced- unless you have some anecdotal reason that bringing ECM hurt your chances?

(Edited for typo)

Edited by Livewyr, 01 May 2013 - 09:29 AM.

[Critical Fumble]

IceSerpent, on 01 May 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

This "nerf" does nothing to fix the problem. The issue with ECM is not that it makes battlefield awareness more tricky - that's what it's supposed to be doing. The issue is that it makes guided missiles virtually useless, and that's not on the list of ECM features in BT.

Is it supposed to fiddle with your awareness? All it does in TT is cancel some electronic support items (BAP, TAG, Narc, Artemis) and in later rules it apparently gave a small amount of protection against guided and semi-guided rounds.

[DocBach]

Critical Fumble, on 01 May 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

Is it supposed to fiddle with your awareness? All it does in TT is cancel some electronic support items (BAP, TAG, Narc, Artemis) and in later rules it apparently gave a small amount of protection against guided and semi-guided rounds.

Actually, Ghost Target mode gives a +1 modifier to any weapons fire against an ECM running in that mode. ECM also hides some sensor information like the ability to look at an enemies record sheet or identify the type of 'Mech beyond visually.

[Critical Fumble]

DocBach, on 01 May 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

Actually, Ghost Target mode gives a +1 modifier to any weapons fire against an ECM running in that mode. ECM also hides some sensor information like the ability to look at an enemies record sheet or identify the type of 'Mech beyond visually.

A certain degree of information on the enemy, OK. (I hadn't thought about it before, but mechs have to have one heck of a sensor package)

But there's no obfuscation of friendly locations (this would not have worked with TT rules, and is going away, yay!) and it doesn't really hide the presence of a mech to sensors or prevent a pilot from relaying the positions, at least in a general sense, of enemy mechs.

I could see the ghost targeting mode being made into something interesting ("throw" the targeting box away from your mech). But I don't see how the information obstruction actually adds anything of value to the game.

[Kommisar]

Of course, we are making some assumption on the hardpoint change for ECM. For instance, most of you are assuming that the ECM is going to be located in the Raven 3Ls side torso. Well, what if it was placed in the right arm, instead? A much more vulnerable and less armored location that, on the 3L, tends to soak a lot of fire from people trying to hit the torso.

Also, it makes a really big difference for the DDC if it is located in either side torsos. It is now eating up valuable weapon and double heat sink space. Yes, your loadout may be okay with it; but a lot of the ones I see like having those slots for DHS.

It's not a massive balance shift by any means. But might have some effect. I'm trying to stay positive here!

I love that they are removing the ability to mask Friend/Foe indicators. I've been the guy outside a brawl shooting in with no FF indicators showing. PUG drops can't coordinate paint schemes, and we all share the same mechs. It makes it nearly impossible to know whom to target.

LRMs are getting their own fixes at some point. We shall see if they make a come back or not. Personal opinion, faster missile speeds are needed to make them more viable. Make them fast enough, and they could even be used dead fire closer in; say 300 meters or so. Right now, they feel like they move slower than my Spider.

[Ransack]

I still think the darn thing needs to generate heat. A significant amount of heat at that. It has no drawbacks at all. As for the hardpoint idea, when was the last time you took out someone's AMS?

[Joseph Mallan]

Hmmm This could change the layout of my D-DC...

[MaddMaxx]

Livewyr, on 01 May 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

My Attitude towards balance is very simple:

Balance means that:
-there should be a reason to bring everything. (There should be situational advantages)
-there should be a reason NOT to bring everything (There should be situational DISadvantages.)

LRMs by themselves had a severe disadvantage in a fairly common situation, someone being close to you.
LRMs by themselves had a decent advantage in a fairly common situation, not having Line of Sight.

LRMs have tracking.
LRMs cannot hit a specified part of a mech.
----------------------

ECM itself has a decent advantage in any situation.
ECM itself has an incredible advantage in a common situation- someone getting close.

ECM itself has no disadvantage, at all.

That is not balanced- unless you have some anecdotal reason that bringing ECM hurt your chances?

(Edited for typo)

Without getting into the specifics, as they are many, but not all Mechs are capable of carrying everything. This in itself creates issues for some and not others. Some Mechs can carry more of one thing than another, again this creates issues for some but not for others.

Why is it always ECM ffs. What will you do when it ever gets fixed the way you like it? Find another axe to grind down to the nub....?

You let the rest of us know when LivewyrOnline is done. Maybe it will be fun, maybe not. No way to know until it is complete right? Same for MWO...

[Critical Fumble]

Kommisar, on 01 May 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Of course, we are making some assumption on the hardpoint change for ECM. For instance, most of you are assuming that the ECM is going to be located in the Raven 3Ls side torso. Well, what if it was placed in the right arm, instead? A much more vulnerable and less armored location that, on the 3L, tends to soak a lot of fire from people trying to hit the torso.

http://mwomercs.com/...x-localisation/
Notice the Raven's "arms". Tiny little nubs. But the point being made previously is that knowing where the ECM on a light mech is isn't much help - because specifically targeting a section on a mech that small and that fast is very difficult. Beyond that, it directly increases the benefit of the much loathed no duration pinpoint alpha mechs much more so than more balanced setups.

[Volthorne]

Neverfar, on 01 May 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

As an ECM user, and a regular user, I find it very odd that Beagle Active Probes do not counter ECM like they did in tabletop.

Just because I use something doesn't mean that pretend everything about it is perfectly fine and everyone else needs to "L2P". Wish the boaters had the same courtesy.

I have no idea what house rules YOU played by, but BAP never EVER countered ECM. Ever.

[Deathlike]

Kommisar, on 01 May 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Of course, we are making some assumption on the hardpoint change for ECM. For instance, most of you are assuming that the ECM is going to be located in the Raven 3Ls side torso. Well, what if it was placed in the right arm, instead? A much more vulnerable and less armored location that, on the 3L, tends to soak a lot of fire from people trying to hit the torso.

IIRC, you can't put ECM in the arms (it must be some BT rule, but it's certainly the current state of ECM).

Quote

Also, it makes a really big difference for the DDC if it is located in either side torsos. It is now eating up valuable weapon and double heat sink space. Yes, your loadout may be okay with it; but a lot of the ones I see like having those slots for DHS.

It will be on the Atlas's LT... where the streaks are.

Quote

It's not a massive balance shift by any means. But might have some effect. I'm trying to stay positive here!

You're trying too hard.

Quote

I love that they are removing the ability to mask Friend/Foe indicators. I've been the guy outside a brawl shooting in with no FF indicators showing. PUG drops can't coordinate paint schemes, and we all share the same mechs. It makes it nearly impossible to know whom to target.

It's easier being the player in the know, figuring these things out... it's the players that are not in the know, who would probably rage against this "less obvious" mechanic. That's a serious problem.

Quote

LRMs are getting their own fixes at some point. We shall see if they make a come back or not. Personal opinion, faster missile speeds are needed to make them more viable. Make them fast enough, and they could even be used dead fire closer in; say 300 meters or so. Right now, they feel like they move slower than my Spider.

LRMs don't really threaten slow assault mechs.. considering the mistake of the "fire and forget" mentality. Of course, with no real training map... we're stuck trying to barely communicating with the guys that you drop with...

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

What is hilarious is PGI sticks to table top rules for everything else as much as possible, but for ECM, it kicks TT rules to the curb.

The ECM behavior is the Lead Designer's pet project and no one can convince him to change it.

There is probably a big poster on the wall in the PGI offices:

Rule #1 of working for PGI: "Do not talk about ECM balance".
Rule #2 of working for PGI: "Do not talk about ECM balance".

[Fate 6]

MaddMaxx, on 01 May 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Without getting into the specifics, as they are many, but not all Mechs are capable of carrying everything. This in itself creates issues for some and not others. Some Mechs can carry more of one thing than another, again this creates issues for some but not for others.

Why is it always ECM ffs. What will you do when it ever gets fixed the way you like it? Find another axe to grind down to the nub....?

You let the rest of us know when LivewyrOnline is done. Maybe it will be fun, maybe not. No way to know until it is complete right? Same for MWO...

So you literally have no logically reason for keeping ECM broken. You just don't like that your OP item could get nerfed into the ground because it breaks the game. You think we like complaining just to complain? That's your only argument for not nerfing ECM? Sorry, you should go find a new thread to troll.

[Davers]

Ransack, on 01 May 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

I still think the darn thing needs to generate heat. A significant amount of heat at that. It has no drawbacks at all. As for the hardpoint idea, when was the last time you took out someone's AMS?

If you are using weapons that can target your opponent's AMS, then the AMS was never a concern for you to begin with.

[Livewyr]

MaddMaxx, on 01 May 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Without getting into the specifics, as they are many, but not all Mechs are capable of carrying everything. This in itself creates issues for some and not others. Some Mechs can carry more of one thing than another, again this creates issues for some but not for others.

Why is it always ECM ffs. What will you do when it ever gets fixed the way you like it? Find another axe to grind down to the nub....?

You let the rest of us know when LivewyrOnline is done. Maybe it will be fun, maybe not. No way to know until it is complete right? Same for MWO...

1st paragraph: lolwut?

2nd sentence:
You missed again, horribly.

Ask most any forum member here that has been here long than a month and has seen me post;
I used to be the optimist, I could find a logical logical reason for anything PGI had done, and therefore had room to give them the benefit of the doubt.

TL;DR: I had no "axes" to grind with PGI until ECM happened.. and even then, I'd been on both ends of the argument before settling on balance.
-------------------------------------------------------
When ECM and missiles are balanced, I'll enjoy an actual usage of missiles... not predator death drones, nor dead weight.


3rd sentence: (Since I assume you're going for "let it finish first")
I held out hope for PGI until they released their executive decision regarding ECM...

---------------------------------------

Would you like to try for a real reason to keep it as is? (or even as it will be with the new "nerfs")