172 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Lykaon, on 17 January 2014 - 02:38 AM, said:

No,but do not try to tell me that a big red box around a targeted mech is not an advantage for aiming and leading a target.

Do not try and tell me that a lack of passive target ID is not a disadvantage to a side that does not have vs a side with it.

Do not even try to claim that the critical data that accompanies a hard lock is useless.

<more good stuff>

If you would care to review all of my comments with regard to ECM, you would see that I never denied that it was OP. But, you would also see that personally I am fine with it because there are ways to deal with ECM. I am also sure there are others who think as I do.

Now, having said that, take things from my (probably more pragmatic) point of view:

• PGI has made a significant investment with regard to ECM. As such, the probability of them reversing all of those is quite small.
  
• PGI has much bigger things to deliver, things whose absence has brought a large chunk of the player base to open hostility
  
• PGI did provide ways to counter ECM even if the difficulty level of doing so is much higher than ECM's "no brains required" usage (which really isn't 100% true, especially in ECM vs. ECM situations).
  
• A good set of eyes does negate many of ECM's effects, especially if the owner also brought a mech suitable for the occasion.
  
• Anyone who wants to bring an ECM mech can do so.

Personally, I like the challenge of facing an ECM-centric team, whether or not my team also has ECM. I like it because once ECM is detected (at least in quite a number of games I end up playing) the strategy (if you can call it that) shifts to finding ways of eliminating the enemy's ECM capability while trying to preserve ours (if any).

YMMV of course.

Edited by Mystere, 17 January 2014 - 08:57 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Lykaon, on 17 January 2014 - 02:38 AM, said:

No,but do not try to tell me that a big red box around a targeted mech is not an advantage for aiming and leading a target.

you know how many times I don't hit R and kill a mech?

[DocBach]

Mystere, on 17 January 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

• PGI has made a significant investment with regard to ECM. As such, the probability of them reversing all of those is quite small.
  
• PGI has much bigger things to deliver, things whose absence has brought a large chunk of the player base to open hostility
  
• PGI did provide ways to counter ECM even if the difficulty level of doing so is much higher than ECM's "no brains required" usage (which really isn't 100% true, especially in ECM vs. ECM situations).
  
• A good set of eyes does negate many of ECM's effects, especially if the owner also brought a mech suitable for the occasion.
  
• Anyone who wants to bring an ECM mech can do so.

• PGI does not need to reverse ECM, they just need to make it comparable to other systems of the same weight, either by toning down its abilities or raising the abilities of other electronic warfare pieces
  
• A huge chunk of the player base left and never came back because ECM is nearly the same system its been since its introduction. Polls of several thousands of players showed that more people were very unsatisfied with the ECM system than players who voted that they were neutral, satisfied or very satisfied with ECM combined.
  
• ECM is a hard counter which all of information warfare revolves around. Some of its counters have very little function if ECM is not present (Beagle).
  
• A good set of eyes does not defeat ECMs effects if a player did not bring direct fire weapons, which guides players towards certain weapon systems creating meta situations where certain weapons are superior to others.
  
• Anybody can use ECM, and frequently teams have several copies of just a fraction of chassis on their teams. Out of the limited numbers of 'Mechs that can carry ECM, they appear with much greater frequency than any 'Mech in the game since ECM's introduction.

[Roadbeer]

I see the 14th installment of "ECM is OP" is moving along swimmingly.

Keep up the good work.

[DocBach]

14th? This is about the 100,000th iteration of the same topic.

ECM is not just OP, its shallow and poorly thought out. Hard counters in a game without integrated VOIP and lobbies to let players coordinate quickly and efficiently to defeat it is bad game design.

[MustrumRidcully]

The problem with ECM is probably somewhat based on how missile locks work. PGI couldn't figure a way to make ECM work without affecting targeting, and if you affect targeting, you also affect missile locks.

If missile locks did only require you to hold a laser-pointer on target (marker) for a second - regardless of whether the target was actually targeted or not - the problem could probably be avoided. An ECM protected entity could not be visible on radar, could not be targeted or shared, and would allow no damage readouts - but missiles would still work as usual, but since no one can target share the target, you can't deliver indirect fire.

With such a system, even SRMs could act like the guided missiles they are (SSRs could simply have a faster "hold-your-laser-pointer-ontarget-time") and benefit from Narc or TAG (do they benefit from TAG in the table top? I don't know), and ECM could counter Narc, TAG and BAP as it's supposed to and as would probably be justified for a 1.5 ton piece of equipment.
And if we're really fancy, we can add stuff like radar ghosting and what not, too, either as seperate operation mode or vial modules.

Information warfare would probably be more interesting with such a system.


But unfortunately, this isn't how missiles were designed, and so... we're out of luck.

[Roadbeer]

DocBach, on 17 January 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:

14th? This is about the 100,000th iteration of the same topic.

I was referring to that since the fervor has died down, we are keeping with our series of monthly installments.

[DocBach]

You know what would be a quick fix that would tone ECM's potency down yet still satisfy the "mark 1 eyeball" crowd?

Make ECM 'Mechs invisible to sensors when you hit R, unless your reticle is over them. If they're behind cover and you can't see them you can't target them and friends in the bubble can't share their information with you. But if they're in the open and you manually target them you should be able to lock on to them, sort of how you bracket targets for lock with the CLU on the Javelin missile.

Roadbeer, on 17 January 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I was referring to that since the fervor has died down, we are keeping with our series of monthly installments.

Still at least bi-weekly, if not greater in frequency

[Mystere]

DocBach, on 17 January 2014 - 09:07 AM, said:

• A good set of eyes does not defeat ECMs effects if a player did not bring direct fire weapons, which guides players towards certain weapon systems creating meta situations where certain weapons are superior to others.
  
• Anybody can use ECM, and frequently teams have several copies of just a fraction of chassis on their teams. Out of the limited numbers of 'Mechs that can carry ECM, they appear with much greater frequency than any 'Mech in the game since ECM's introduction.

These last two points of yours tell me that you are in Elo "hell" compared to my Elo "heaven". I offer my sympathies to you then if that is indeed the case simply because I don't often see these "meta" situations you refer to. What I do see often are these "munchkins". But they're just too ineffective to worry about.

Finally, in my now (in)famous words:

"Meta" this, "Meta" that, I'm really sick of this "Meta" {Scrap}.

Edited by Mystere, 17 January 2014 - 09:30 AM.

[Deathlike]

Mystere, on 17 January 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

These last two points of yours tell me that you are in Elo "hell" compared to my Elo "heaven". I offer my sympathies to you then simply because I don't often see these "meta" situations you refer to. What I do see often are these "munchkins". But they're just too ineffective to worry about.

Finally, in my now (in)famous words:

"Meta" this, "Meta" that, I'm really sick of this "Meta" {Scrap}.

The thing is... you'll see more of it if/when CW arrives. People will take the meta to win and not "handicap" themselves (by removing ECM or JJs) because "it's not affecting me now".

[DocBach]

Mystere, on 17 January 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

Finally, in my now (in)famous words:

"Meta" this, "Meta" that, I'm really sick of this "Meta" {Scrap}.

Many Metas in MWO have been a result of poorly designed systems like ECM.

[Roadbeer]

DocBach, on 17 January 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

Still at least bi-weekly, if not greater in frequency

I'd think, by now, you'd all have your arguments down and solidified to the point you could just quote your previous stands.
That way, every time this comes up, we could all just have a "self-quote off".

[Joseph Mallan]

Doc would win every time as he has had the best suggestions on how to fix ECM.

[DocBach]

Roadbeer, on 17 January 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

I'd think, by now, you'd all have your arguments down and solidified to the point you could just quote your previous stands.
That way, every time this comes up, we could all just have a "self-quote off".

it'd be easier if they'd just sticky one big post with all the points already made

[Deathlike]

Roadbeer, on 17 January 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

I'd think, by now, you'd all have your arguments down and solidified to the point you could just quote your previous stands.
That way, every time this comes up, we could all just have a "self-quote off".

Let's be honest.. very few people look @ the mega ECM thread of doom. Not even PGI can admit to reading it all.

[Joseph Mallan]

DocBach, on 17 January 2014 - 09:37 AM, said:

it'd be easier if they'd just sticky one big post with all the points already made

Sorry Doc but the average Scrub would still start a new complaint thread!

[DocBach]

I imagine as long as the system remains the same, there are going to be people who don't like it.

ECM is the anti-stealth. Instead of encouraging moving stealthily without compromising yourself it allows entire companies of 'Mechs to walk through key avenues of approach in the open without fear of being targeted, only counterable from a distance by soft counters.

It was a bad system when it was introduced, its a bad system now.

[Khobai]

Quote

PGI has made a significant investment with regard to ECM. As such, the probability of them reversing all of those is quite small.

No one wants them to reverse all of it. Just remove stealth from ECM and add null signature system as a balanced way of gaining stealth.

And they should add active/passive sensor modes so mechs that cant equip NSS also have a way of giving themselves limited stealth, at the cost of not being able to detect anything using sensors.

The new NSS equipment plus passive sensor mode would replace the current ECM stealth bubble. Its basically the same thing we have now, but balanced. Every mech would be responsible for their own stealth instead of one mech stealthing the whole team.

Edited by Khobai, 17 January 2014 - 10:01 AM.

[Quick n Fast]

Imo, an easy fix to ECM would be to make LRMs need LoS (line of sight) , then u can take the 180m blanket off ECM.
Give both ECM & LRMs a 15k GXP module unlock, w/ 6 mill in C-bills cost, giving ECM its blanket back and giving LRMs back the ability to get locks and fire from behind cover with out needed LoS.

• ECM - only works for the mech its equipped on, adding 15k GXP 6mill cbill module restores 180m blanket.
  
• LRM - needs LoS to get locks, adding 15k GXP 6mill cbill module restores ability to get locks behind cover.

If both are going to be OP then let them need expansive modules to do so.
The reason ECM is what it is today is because LRMs don't need LoS and can rain holy hell from 900+m away from behind 2 mountains.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 17 January 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

No one wants them to reverse all of it. Just remove stealth from ECM and add null signature system as a balanced way of gaining stealth.

Many posts in that "mega ECM thread of doom" say otherwise. But if their writers are all no longer with us, then we won't have a problem moving forward on this.

The same goes for Ghost Heat.

< Forgive me. I just couldn't resist adding that last bit! >

Khobai, on 17 January 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

And they should add active/passive sensor modes so mechs that cant equip NSS also have a way of giving themselves limited stealth, at the cost of not being able to detect anything using sensors.

The new NSS equipment plus passive sensor mode would replace the current ECM stealth bubble. Its basically the same thing we have now, but balanced. Basically every mech would be responsible for their own stealth instead of one mech stealthing the whole team.

Feel free to remind me of this post of yours once we have CW up an running in a good way. But for now, my position is what it is at this time.