105 replies to this topic

[AntharPrime]

I missed this update thanks to the new Forum format.

I'm not sure how I feel about this, I've been fighting against ECM for so long that it almost feels strange. The Streak Cat will make a comeback.

[TruePoindexter]

AntharPrime, on 06 May 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

I missed this update thanks to the new Forum format.

I'm not sure how I feel about this, I've been fighting against ECM for so long that it almost feels strange. The Streak Cat will make a comeback.

Well with the current high burst meta.. the SSRM A1 will be hard pressed to make a huge impact.

The larger change will be the RVN-3L no longer being the defacto light hunter. The JR7-D and CDA-X5 will probably take the top spot for that role.

[Davers]

It's sad that a marginally useful piece of equipment like the BAP will now be a 'must have' piece of gear for many builds. Instead of Information Warfare we have ECM countering weapon systems with tons of 'ECM on/off switches'.

[Roland]

It's possible that they will limit BAP to certain mechs. That's how MW4 did it.

[TruePoindexter]

Davers, on 06 May 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

It's sad that a marginally useful piece of equipment like the BAP will now be a 'must have' piece of gear for many builds. Instead of Information Warfare we have ECM countering weapon systems with tons of 'ECM on/off switches'.

*nods* Anything counting on SSRMs will need to equip BAP just to be able to use them consistently. It also doesn't help LRMs though they have larger issues than ECM blocking their locks.

[Roland]

TruePoindexter, on 06 May 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

It also doesn't help LRMs though they have larger issues than ECM blocking their locks.

It actually helps LRM mechs pretty hugely, since it means that an ECM mech can't shut you down merely by being close to you.

[TruePoindexter]

Roland, on 06 May 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

It actually helps LRM mechs pretty hugely, since it means that an ECM mech can't shut you down merely by being close to you.

If you have someone that close you have larger issues as an LRM mech . I was just trying to imply that the larger issue with LRMs is their subpar performance right now which is going to be addressed.

[Davers]

Roland, on 06 May 2013 - 01:45 PM, said:

It's possible that they will limit BAP to certain mechs. That's how MW4 did it.

So X mechs carry ECM and Y mechs carry BAP? What about Z mechs? Just a new class of bottom tier mechs?

Really, if they just removed ECM's ability to block lock ons everything would be fine. Let them keep covered mechs invisible on the mini-map. Prevent people from using friendlies' targeting information, things like that. Then we can stop having to invent things to counter it because it won't be so powerful that it NEEDS to be countered.

BAP, NARC, Tag, and Artemis were supposed to be so good it needed to have something counter THEM, not the other way around.

[wolf74]

(Shakes head) They are still going at it backwards. Cart before the horse.
They are trying to counter ecm with everything else vs letting ecm do it's job which was to counter [artimus IV FCS, BAP, NARC] now I don't mind giving mech under ecm a long time to lockon too and a faster time to lose a lock. But all of this has been said time and time again in both feed back ecm threads.

[Roland]

Davers, on 06 May 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

So X mechs carry ECM and Y mechs carry BAP? What about Z mechs? Just a new class of bottom tier mechs?

Mechs that can't mount ECM are bottom tier currently?
You mean like the stalker, cataphract, and the highlander?

The reality is, every mech doesn't need those things. You have SOME of your mechs carry those things.

If they make some mechs able to carry ECM, and some able to carry BAP, and some able to carry both, you'll have an interesting mix of things that are required at any given time.

That's how it worked in MW4, and it worked fairly well. Mechs like the Loki and Raven were prized because they were some of the few mechs able to carry both... but they didn't just flat out rule the field like the raven did for so long.

[Davers]

Roland, on 06 May 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

Mechs that can't mount ECM are bottom tier currently?
You mean like the stalker, cataphract, and the highlander?

Touche.

I just think it's pretty silly that mechs that don't care about lock on time or extended sensor ranges will be carrying BAP.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Ugh no more "limited" electronics. That is SO bad for this game.

ECM is terrible. We now have PPC's, BAP, UAV's, Adv. Sensors, and TAG all specifically to counter ECM. And with the upcoming ECM changes they've had two patches that have altered ECM itself.

And lest we not forget the uproar to make sure the Jenner didn't end up with ECM.

That is STUPID.

Do not keep adding more stupid into the game. The one good thing about BAP being on every mech, is that maybe we'll get to where no one uses ECM, then no one will need BAP, then we will have the end of this terrible "Electronic Warfare".

[Seanamal]

Davers, on 06 May 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

Really, if they just removed ECM's ability to block lock ons everything would be fine. Let them keep covered mechs invisible on the mini-map. Prevent people from using friendlies' targeting information, things like that. Then we can stop having to invent things to counter it because it won't be so powerful that it NEEDS to be countered.

But the whole point of ECM as I saw it was to put and end to the all LRM build bukkake parties that dominated during closed beta pre-ecm. The only way that works is that ECM breaks lock on weapons. Remove that and we're right back to where we started. I think giving BAP the burn through capability is just a way of making it more on par power to tonnage wise with ECM.

[Davers]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 May 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

Ugh no more "limited" electronics. That is SO bad for this game.

ECM is terrible. We now have PPC's, BAP, UAV's, Adv. Sensors, and TAG all specifically to counter ECM. And with the upcoming ECM changes they've had two patches that have altered ECM itself.

And lest we not forget the uproar to make sure the Jenner didn't end up with ECM.

That is STUPID.

Do not keep adding more stupid into the game. The one good thing about BAP being on every mech, is that maybe we'll get to where no one uses ECM, then no one will need BAP, then we will have the end of this terrible "Electronic Warfare".

For Information Warfare being a pillar of the game it really seems they made it out of sand. No one wants ECM reduced to AMS usefulness. Why can't PGI just give us the dynamic EW that everyone really wants? There have been so many good threads about Active/Passive sensors, ECM, BAP, NARC, Tag... Really, no one would mind if you pulled out some good ideas out of them. Maybe Information Warfare just doesn't have much use in a FPS so they had to add a bunch of other stuff to it?

[SmoothCriminal]

Looks like the return of the Jenner D. Shame I sold mine for a 3L...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Seanamal, on 06 May 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

But the whole point of ECM as I saw it was to put and end to the all LRM build bukkake parties that dominated during closed beta pre-ecm. The only way that works is that ECM breaks lock on weapons. Remove that and we're right back to where we started. I think giving BAP the burn through capability is just a way of making it more on par power to tonnage wise with ECM.

That is the most bullcrap thing in the existence of bullcrap.

You do not balance a weapon by introducing a hard counter item.

You balance a weapon by lowering it's damage, changing it's trajectory, lowering it's speed...basically you balance the WEAPON.

Seriously.

And aside from like a 2 week instance where LRM's were BUGGED to the extreme, they've always been easy to deal with during open beta; unless you were a total new player or just bad at the game.

[Davers]

Seanamal, on 06 May 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

But the whole point of ECM as I saw it was to put and end to the all LRM build bukkake parties that dominated during closed beta pre-ecm. The only way that works is that ECM breaks lock on weapons. Remove that and we're right back to where we started. I think giving BAP the burn through capability is just a way of making it more on par power to tonnage wise with ECM.

But wasn't that supposed to be AMS's job (after all the other counters of speed and positioning). Remember when the Atlas K was considered viable because it had 2 AMS slots? This game would be much better if there wasn't such a bucketload of useless equipment.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Davers, on 06 May 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

For Information Warfare being a pillar of the game it really seems they made it out of sand. No one wants ECM reduced to AMS usefulness. Why can't PGI just give us the dynamic EW that everyone really wants? There have been so many good threads about Active/Passive sensors, ECM, BAP, NARC, Tag... Really, no one would mind if you pulled out some good ideas out of them. Maybe Information Warfare just doesn't have much use in a FPS so they had to add a bunch of other stuff to it?

Like you said, there were some really good threads about how to structure Electronic Warfare and the IW Pillar.

The other major issue is the giant lack of dynamic game play. Who needs scouts when you can either see the mechs with your eyes from the start of the match, or there are basically two lanes that everyone uses to get to the bases that are always in the same place.

If we had dynamic base spawns, and some random drop points (including perhaps splitting teams up during drops), you'd suddenly have a reason to scout, and then you'd have a reason for EW/IW.

This is basic stuff. Really freaking basic.

[Seanamal]

Also, I would prefer instead of burning through ECM it simply would let you get radar / target lock through terrain in a 180 meter radius. That makes it much more dangerous on built up maps like river city and frozen city. Paired with a 360 targeting module would give you total close in situational awareness, provided you weren't within an ECM bubble.

[Davers]

Seanamal, on 06 May 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Also, I would prefer instead of burning through ECM it simply would let you get radar / target lock through terrain in a 180 meter radius. That makes it much more dangerous on built up maps like river city and frozen city. Paired with a 360 targeting module would give you total close in situational awareness, provided you weren't within an ECM bubble.

It seems that the new Seismic Sensor module will fill that role instead. Wouldn't it have been better if modules added to basic equipment instead of replacing them?