185 replies to this topic

[Vanguard319]

Zakius, on 27 May 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

I think far better to change it to Guardian ECM and or right now not to try and implement the Angel version of it.

Let's look at what the in-game ECM can do:
- 180m radius of influence (equivalent to 6 hexes in TT)
- can disrupt radar aka: the "stealth field" (guardian in TT does this)
- Disrupts in-game chat, though not VOIP (guardian ECM is described as being able to do this)
- shields all friendlies in it's range (guardian in TT does this)
- does not affect Infrared (guardian in TT does affect this)
- does not affect seismic (Assuming seismic is considered a sonar-based system, Guardian in TT would affect this)
- LRMs can achieve hard lock, but take longer to do so (has done this in previous Mechwarrior games)
- BAP's range is reduced, but it still functions (guardian in TT would jam this)
- Artemis IV is negated (guardian in TT does this)
- can operate in an ECCM mode (guardian in TT does this)
- does not affect NARC pods (guardian in TT would render NARC pods useless)
- streaks cannot fire in an ECM bubble without BAP, at which point, they can achieve a hard lock, taking longer to do so. (guardian in TT would allow a missile lock, regardless of BAP)
- when fired, streaks do not behave like standard SRMs in ECM bubble (guardian in TT does not do this, it is a standard feature of Angel ECM)

By the looks of things, PGI gave us an ECM suite that is more true to the Guardian Suite in TT, but without completely emulating it. (or would you prefer seismic and IR imaging to be gimped as well?) and seeing how streaks don't become dumbfire weapons, There is little to no evidence to prove it behaves like Angel ECM. (the majority of advanced systems the angel counters don't even exist in-game) The only real tweak I can see it needing is for Streaks to be able to achieve a hard lock without BAP, though they should still take longer to achieve a hard lock.

Edited by Vanguard319, 27 May 2014 - 10:53 AM.

[Tesunie]

Vanguard319, on 27 May 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

Let's look at what the in-game ECM can do:
- 180m radius of influence (equivalent to 6 hexes in TT)
- can disrupt radar aka: the "stealth field" (guardian in TT does this)
- Disrupts in-game chat, though not VOIP (guardian ECM is described as being able to do this)
- shields all friendlies in it's range (guardian in TT does this)
- does not affect Infrared (guardian in TT does affect this)
- does not affect seismic (Assuming seismic is considered a sonar-based system, Guardian in TT would affect this)
- LRMs can achieve hard lock, but take longer to do so (has done this in previous Mechwarrior games)
- BAP's range is reduced, but it still functions (guardian in TT would jam this)
- Artemis IV is negated (guardian in TT does this)
- can operate in an ECCM mode (guardian in TT does this)
- does not affect NARC pods (guardian in TT would render NARC pods useless)
- streaks cannot fire in an ECM bubble without BAP, at which point, they can achieve a hard lock, taking longer to do so. (guardian in TT would allow a missile lock, regardless of BAP)
- when fired, streaks do not behave like standard SRMs in ECM bubble (guardian in TT does not do this, it is a standard feature of Angel ECM)

By the looks of things, PGI gave us an ECM suite that is more true to the Guardian Suite in TT, but without completely emulating it. (or would you prefer seismic and IR imaging to be gimped as well?) and seeing how streaks don't become dumbfire weapons, There is little to no evidence to prove it behaves like Angel ECM. (the majority of advanced systems the angel counters don't even exist in-game) The only real tweak I can see it needing is for Streaks to be able to achieve a hard lock without BAP, though they should still take longer to achieve a hard lock.

Okay... Some things I see wrong:
- It doesn't disrupt radar, it completely disables it. Disrupting it would permit me to still lock on, but not be able to see accurate data on the target, be it exact position or inaccurate/missing damage and build data.
- It use to disable in game chat, but that has long since been removed. It was seen as being too punishing to PUG players, but wasn't hindering anyone on a voice chat system. Thus, now you can still type and be heard while within ECM.
- (All your references to TT, and yet they all seem to forget that you could still shoot LRMs at a target. It ONLY disabled NARC, BAP, Artemis and other "bonuses" to LRM to hit charts in TT. Not completely shutting down LRM systems and rendering it to blind fired only (extremely hard in this game).)
- Show me where in TT it says that ECM effects infrared and seismic. (Real ECM doesn't effect either of those systems in real life, nor in BT last I knew. Seismic is basically placing a sensor on the ground and feeling for vibrations.)
- What do you mean by hard lock? Blind fire? Good luck hitting a moving target with that in MWO. Are you talking about getting a lock as normal on an ECM target, but it being slower to get? Good luck getting through the lock cloak first. You need special gear for that (now, unlike in TT).
- BAP was created as a counter to ECM, because the only counter to ECM once it was close was ECM itself. MWO needed another counter to ECM.
- Artemis BONUS to LRMs are negated, but LRMs without Artemis is not effected at all in TT.
- At one point, the only counter to ECM was ECM itself in ECCM mode... was found to not be very well balanced. (TAG range was very short back than and could also cut through ECM, but was too short ranged to be of much help.)
- SSRMs could still shoot in TT without any needed counters. In MWO, no SSRMs if ECM is working. Thus why BAP was needed as an ECM counter module.

There are a lot of things the Guardian ECM got that it wasn't suppose to have. However, some pieces (the cloak namely) I feel is needed in this game. However, it doesn't need to be a cloak, it could be instead a delay before registering on people's sensors. (Stand out in the open, you would eventually be able to be "scanned" and locked.) Then, it could also still slow down missile locks.
The issue here is that it does each of these features, cloak and slowing missile locks, at the same time. So, even if I do manage to get a lock on them (such as the donut of targetability), you may be able to get the lock, but you wont have the time to get any target data, nor a missile lock before they slip into one side or the other of the ring.

ECM produces a double penalty against anyone who uses missile lock ons. One penalty is the cloak and complete inability to lock onto the target. The second one is the drastically increased lock on times, even when you can get a lock on them. One or the other would not be too bad, but combined together it starts to feel very strong.

[IraqiWalker]

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

-snip-

Congratulations on wasting so much space with nothing but personal attacks that muddled whatever point you had in the first place.

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 01:39 AM, said:

If that is 3-7AM your time zone, it is either mostly Russians or Europeans you are playing with. I believe there is a difference in play between continents. A few times I have been up late for EST, I wind up playing with the Asians, Australians or Russians, it is a different experience than playing North American time.

I do end up playing with aussies every now and then as well.

Grimmrog, on 27 May 2014 - 04:38 AM, said:

when you think ECM is only vs LRM, then you are doing it wrong. ECM prevents the opponent from seeing your health status, ECM also prevents your oponent teammates to spot the mech instantly on the map. Some very important things except from LRM preventing locks.

So knowing where to dakka your opponent becaue his left shoulder is ornage and his right is yellow can make a difference in taking down an XL Engine opponent.

That actually proves my point, rather than dispute it. If that ECM mech had been spotted and hit by any of your teammates, and they were in communication or coordinated with you, you'd know that information without needing to lock onto your opponent.

Prawfut Bludskin, on 27 May 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Also one major advantage ecm gives over EVERY weapon system in competitive matches is Designation and Focus fire disruptor. It is much easier for a team to focus a target with a big red "A-L" designation on the mech. untill the ecm is removed each pilot must decide for himself if the description of the focus target is actually what you are supposed to be shooting at.

That is one advantage I can already tell you, ECM doesn't actually give that well. In competitive matches we use grid locations, and we designate the type of mech as well. Plus, since everyone is packing PPCs, no mech actually remains hidden, we all get to lock on to whichever one got shot by PPCs immediately. In fact, in those settings, it can make you stand out, when you're the only one the enemy team locks on to. It makes calling which target to hit, much easier.

Zakius, on 27 May 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

There is a very simple truth about how OP ECM is right now. PGI have not released one single new mech that can mount ECM, PGI's way to nerf ECM rather than to actually fix it. is just to restrict what mechs can use it. I'm pretty sure if they could remove it from the pre exsisting mechs, they would. The trouble is they can't without creating a crapola storm within the player base.

Interesting point, but flawed. ECM's implementation was always supposed to be part of role warfare, that's why you don't see mediums or heavies with it. Just lights, and the Atlas D-DC (DC here is for "Direct Command" I believe). Clan mechs aren't going to get ECM right off the bat simply because they released the models that don't do scouting, and instead use long range fire support. The Kit Fox C can mount ECM in it's right arm, and we don't know if that arm is going to be available in the mechlab from the get-go or later.

ECM was not given to clan lights because it doesn't fit their role, and because of the big punch they have.

Mizeur, on 27 May 2014 - 08:31 AM, said:

ECM would be fine if they expanded the low signal radius, improved the radius for BAP and Adv. Sensor Range as a counter, and removed the stealth feature.

Or kept the stealth and made BAP a hard counter out to 750m. ECM mechs should have to make themselves a lot more vulnerable to counter LRMS or stick to being a lot farther from their team as ERLL/ERPPC snipers.

That would actually render TAG (TAG is a hard counter at 750M), and ECM useless for the most part. THe game is not meant to be easy, but challenging.

Tesunie, on 27 May 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

- (All your references to TT, and yet they all seem to forget that you could still shoot LRMs at a target. It ONLY disabled NARC, BAP, Artemis and other "bonuses" to LRM to hit charts in TT. Not completely shutting down LRM systems and

The difference being that TT (which is completely flawed, because mechs apparently stand still for 10 second turns there. Like a demented version of red light green light) you can dumb fire LRMs and still hit, simply because of how the turn mechanics worked. It was emulating your pilot dumb firing LRMs into the opponent's path. LRM speed increase helps with that now, to the point where dumb firing is pretty good.

[The Flaming Git]

I love my ECM mechs. Used correctly, you can sneak in at least 1 to 2 lances in forest colony through the cave system, while the other lance plays "LOOK OVER HERE"!

[Tesunie]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:

The difference being that TT (which is completely flawed, because mechs apparently stand still for 10 second turns there. Like a demented version of red light green light) you can dumb fire LRMs and still hit, simply because of how the turn mechanics worked. It was emulating your pilot dumb firing LRMs into the opponent's path. LRM speed increase helps with that now, to the point where dumb firing is pretty good.

TT and MWO can only be loosely translated to each other. What works in TT doesn't necessarily works for MWO.

As far as turn mechanics go, they don't "stand still for 10 seconds", but they are still in the motion of moving for 10 seconds and within the 10 seconds, that was their last position. This means that people who move "into" each other don't run towards the stationary target but instead look at where their target is moving and decide to move in an intercept course, leading them into each other at the end of the 10 second "phase".

It's the same as saying a full turn in D&D counts as 6 seconds (I could be wrong here) of "real time". It is just representing the amount of time it takes to preform certain actions. (I'm going to guess you know what I mean here. It's kinda hard to explain in a written form...)

[IraqiWalker]

Tesunie, on 27 May 2014 - 04:22 PM, said:

-snip-

You explained it better than I did, and yes, I understand what you mean.

[Wildstreak]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:

Congratulations on wasting so much space with nothing but personal attacks that muddled whatever point you had in the first place.

You got it backwards. From his own crazy mouth:

Vanguard319, on 23 May 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

Sounds like ECM is not so much OP as the people still complaining seem to have all the tactical brilliance of a grapefruit.

THAT is the first personal attack and not just to me. He flat out personal attacks anyone who does not blindly agree with him.
Anyone making such a statement is NOT a Thinking Person. A Thinking Person can make a point and stand by his beliefs without such statements or agreeing with it.
Don't like it? Too bad.
Nothing I said was a personal attack. Ever.

[Koniks]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:

That would actually render TAG (TAG is a hard counter at 750M), and ECM useless for the most part. THe game is not meant to be easy, but challenging.

ECM, if it's not countered, would still prevent locks. TAG would still reduce lock time, reduce target decay, and improve missile tracking.

[IraqiWalker]

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

You got it backwards. From his own crazy mouth:

I made the mistake of forgetting to quote him as well in my response (it was intended for both of you). He started with a generalized insult, and then you retaliated, and both of you started lobbing grenades back and forth.

As it stands right now, you are both guilty of muddling this argument with both insults, and trying to figure out who did it first.

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

A Thinking Person can make a point and stand by his beliefs without such statements or agreeing with it.

I completely agree with that.

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

Nothing I said was a personal attack. Ever.

Oh there were a few there in your posts.

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 01:29 AM, said:

But clearly you DO give a damn what other people like me think else you would not have posted. Horrible liar.

Go back to your tiny world where your e-peen is so huge.

So now you admit to having vision problems you cannot even see what is right in front of you? Damn.

Regardless, both of you need to calm down, and focus more on the topic. Right now it's becoming more back and forth between Vanguard and you about nothing pertaining to the subject.

Don't get me wrong, I am not biased in his favor, we might agree that ECM is not as broken as most people think, but that's as far as it goes.

Mizeur, on 27 May 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

ECM, if it's not countered, would still prevent locks. TAG would still reduce lock time, reduce target decay, and improve missile tracking.

That's an interesting point, but since our sensors already spot only as far as 750 meters (1000 with BAP). you won't get locks anyways. Hence why I say ECM would be useless. If it's only effective when you can't lock on to the mechs anyways, that's a waste of 1.5 tons.

[Tesunie]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

both of you started lobbing grenades back and forth.

*Was too slow to find cover*
Oh no. OH NO! I GOT HIT! MEDIC! I'M BLEEDING OVER HERE! DON'T TAKE THE LEG! WHY COULDN'T IT HAVE BEEN THE FACE!


(Edit: My first reaction when I started to read your post.)

Edited by Tesunie, 27 May 2014 - 07:30 PM.

[Wildstreak]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

I made the mistake of forgetting to quote him as well in my response (it was intended for both of you). He started with a generalized insult, and then you retaliated, and both of you started lobbing grenades back and forth.

And you Liked the post with his 'grenade' therefore agreed with it.
The whole 'grenade' reference is downright silly anyway as is how non-combatants like to describe themselves as in war when not.
If you want to be a Forum Mod, ask for a position.
The argument is not getting muddled, if anything, it is expanding beyond this topic.
Growing here too.
When you have multiple topics on something, the problem is bigger than some think it is.

[IraqiWalker]

Merchant, on 27 May 2014 - 07:34 PM, said:

And you Liked the post with his 'grenade' therefore agreed with it.
The whole 'grenade' reference is downright silly anyway as is how non-combatants like to describe themselves as in war when not.
If you want to be a Forum Mod, ask for a position.
The argument is not getting muddled, if anything, it is expanding beyond this topic.
Growing here too.
When you have multiple topics on something, the problem is bigger than some think it is.

The Grenade thing is a figure of speech from my country (Iraq, where war is a fact of life that we are used to, and we have a weird sense of humor about it.)

This topic is about ECM, of the last 4 posts by both of you, ECM was only really discussed in maybe 1. My point hasn't changed, discuss ECM, and what you want done with it, but stop occupying page space with this back and forth action that is irrelevant to the ECM discussion.

This is my last response on this matter, as like you mentioned, I am not a moderator, and all I can do, is ask you (general you, not just you specifically) to do things. Since my requests are being ignored. I will switch back to focusing on the reason we have this thread.


I believe that ECM as it stands is in a good balanced position (would like it more if NARC didn't just outright go through it and negate it). However, the best thing that needs to happen to really improve our situation is for the game to implement a voice comms client (Russ mentioned that they are working heavily on an integrated one)

Edited by IraqiWalker, 27 May 2014 - 08:09 PM.

[Vanguard319]

Tesunie, on 27 May 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

Okay... Some things I see wrong:
- It doesn't disrupt radar, it completely disables it. Disrupting it would permit me to still lock on, but not be able to see accurate data on the target, be it exact position or inaccurate/missing damage and build data.
- It use to disable in game chat, but that has long since been removed. It was seen as being too punishing to PUG players, but wasn't hindering anyone on a voice chat system. Thus, now you can still type and be heard while within ECM.
- (All your references to TT, and yet they all seem to forget that you could still shoot LRMs at a target. It ONLY disabled NARC, BAP, Artemis and other "bonuses" to LRM to hit charts in TT. Not completely shutting down LRM systems and rendering it to blind fired only (extremely hard in this game).)
- Show me where in TT it says that ECM effects infrared and seismic. (Real ECM doesn't effect either of those systems in real life, nor in BT last I knew. Seismic is basically placing a sensor on the ground and feeling for vibrations.)
- What do you mean by hard lock? Blind fire? Good luck hitting a moving target with that in MWO. Are you talking about getting a lock as normal on an ECM target, but it being slower to get? Good luck getting through the lock cloak first. You need special gear for that (now, unlike in TT).
- BAP was created as a counter to ECM, because the only counter to ECM once it was close was ECM itself. MWO needed another counter to ECM.
- Artemis BONUS to LRMs are negated, but LRMs without Artemis is not effected at all in TT.
- At one point, the only counter to ECM was ECM itself in ECCM mode... was found to not be very well balanced. (TAG range was very short back than and could also cut through ECM, but was too short ranged to be of much help.)
- SSRMs could still shoot in TT without any needed counters. In MWO, no SSRMs if ECM is working. Thus why BAP was needed as an ECM counter module.

There are a lot of things the Guardian ECM got that it wasn't suppose to have. However, some pieces (the cloak namely) I feel is needed in this game. However, it doesn't need to be a cloak, it could be instead a delay before registering on people's sensors. (Stand out in the open, you would eventually be able to be "scanned" and locked.) Then, it could also still slow down missile locks.
The issue here is that it does each of these features, cloak and slowing missile locks, at the same time. So, even if I do manage to get a lock on them (such as the donut of targetability), you may be able to get the lock, but you wont have the time to get any target data, nor a missile lock before they slip into one side or the other of the ring.

ECM produces a double penalty against anyone who uses missile lock ons. One penalty is the cloak and complete inability to lock onto the target. The second one is the drastically increased lock on times, even when you can get a lock on them. One or the other would not be too bad, but combined together it starts to feel very strong.

right here in black and white

Quote

The Guardian ECM Suite was introduced in 2597 by the Terran Hegemony^[1]. Designed to interfere with guided weaponry, targeting computers, and communication systems, the Guardian is typically used to shield allied units from such equipment by emitting a broad-band signal meant to confuse radar, infrared, ultraviolet, magscan and sonar sensors.^[2] Affected systems include Artemis IV, C3 and C3i Computer networks, and Narc Missile Beacons. A Guardian can jam a Beagle Active Probe (or its Clan equivalent), but the probe-equipped unit will be aware of the jamming. The Capellan Confederation expanded the utility of the Guardian even more with the introduction of Stealth Armor.^[3] Contemporary guided missiles such as standardLRM or Streak SRMs are not affected by the Guardian suite and will be able to achieve hard lock as normal.^[4]
The greatest drawback to the Guardian is its limited range, which extends out to only 180 meters. Sensors can sometimes override this jamming, though by that point the enemy unit is already within visual range and can track the opposition with their own eyes.

It doesn't disable radar, it shortens the detection range. Disabling implies that you can't detect enemies at all, which is obviously not true.

[IraqiWalker]

Vanguard319, on 27 May 2014 - 08:18 PM, said:

It doesn't disable radar, it shortens the detection range. Disabling implies that you can't detect enemies at all, which is obviously not true.

He's talking about what the ECM in game is doing. You're both agreeing actually. ECM currently disables Radar, instead of confusing/disrupting

[Koniks]

IraqiWalker, on 27 May 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

That's an interesting point, but since our sensors already spot only as far as 750 meters (1000 with BAP). you won't get locks anyways. Hence why I say ECM would be useless. If it's only effective when you can't lock on to the mechs anyways, that's a waste of 1.5 tons.

Huh? The "low signal strength" effect currently happens within 180m. At 200m you can detect ECM mechs. Between 180-200m you can also get locks. BAP pushes out your ability to detect ECM mechs past 200m (I think it's out to about 250m) and neutralizes ECM at 150m.

I'm suggesting that in exchange for removing the stealth capability, the low signal strength effect of ECM gets expanded out somewhere between 360-540m. And the BAP counter effect should be pushed out somewhat, as well. That way ECM mechs can shut down LRM locks from farther away but still have to get closer to the enemy if they're going to shield their team.

ETA: 2xERLL and ERPPC snipers don't need ECM. Most of the time they're beyond targeting range when they're shooting, anyway.

Edited by Mizeur, 27 May 2014 - 08:52 PM.

[Tesunie]

Mizeur, on 27 May 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

ETA: 2xERLL and ERPPC snipers don't need ECM. Most of the time they're beyond targeting range when they're shooting, anyway.

I think you need to look at those ECM range numbers again... I think they are off.

And, the current meta for ECM mechs is to strap on long range weapons (such as PPCs or ERLLs) and stay at a reasonable distance so ECM makes you harder to spot. The smaller the mech doing this, the better as they are even harder to spot and hit. Current "Meta" Raven 3L is 2 ERLLs and ECM. Current "Meta" Spider seems to be 2 med lasers and 1 ERLL (or just a single ERPPC). ECM on a sniper mech is even worse, as it's even harder for people to find them. It's even more difficult for LRM users, especially if they are hanging just outside of TAG range or know how to duck back info cover to break the locks...

[Koniks]

Tesunie, on 27 May 2014 - 09:04 PM, said:

I think you need to look at those ECM range numbers again... I think they are off.

And, the current meta for ECM mechs is to strap on long range weapons (such as PPCs or ERLLs) and stay at a reasonable distance so ECM makes you harder to spot. The smaller the mech doing this, the better as they are even harder to spot and hit. Current "Meta" Raven 3L is 2 ERLLs and ECM. Current "Meta" Spider seems to be 2 med lasers and 1 ERLL (or just a single ERPPC). ECM on a sniper mech is even worse, as it's even harder for people to find them. It's even more difficult for LRM users, especially if they are hanging just outside of TAG range or know how to duck back info cover to break the locks...

Pulled them from the MWO Gamepedia which uses info from the original changelog posted when ECM was patched in.

Edited by Mizeur, 27 May 2014 - 10:23 PM.

[Mechi Messer]

Just a question: Why on earth does anyone even consider ECM to be OP?
ECM is making the game playable at the moment. Nerfing ECM would change it into an even bigger lrmfest.
Look at all the builds out there. Almost every mech with a misslehardpoint carries lrms nowadays. I see DDCs with xl-engines just to fling more explosive poo arround. Maybe, MAYBE it's not the best Idea to mess around with the only viable counter to lrms.
Someone mentioned the "current meta-builds" of Spiders and Ravens. I've played this game since the end of open beta and these builds were always "meta". These are best countered by other lights oder fast mediums like it's supposed to be, NOT by missleboats. Missleboats should die horribly against a spider outside tagrange when it comes to a 1on1 situation. Not because I hate missleboats so much but because missleboats shouldn't be the swiss-army-knife of mechs. Maybe I'm getting a bit silly now but in my opinion they should have weaknesses. The negative effect of ecm is one.
Spiders and Ravens with ecm can still be hit by lasers. Even big boys can do that if the lightmech is caught off guard or in a fight with other lights.

[StalaggtIKE]

Tesunie, on 23 May 2014 - 07:15 AM, said:

It's the staking of the two that can become the problem.

You know that donut of space before ECM shuts you down, where the target is targetable? You may target the ECM mech, but good luck getting a lock on it... (or when there are too many people near the ECM mech, and you can get a lock on anyway (a fairly new balance mechanic), good luck getting that lock. It takes a while.)

If it retained one feature of the other, it wouldn't be as bad. But retaining the slowed down missile locks with the cloak is a double penalty. Then it also delays target data gathering as well... (with the stealth cloak.)

This is the "over powered" section we normally refer to. It's the staking of different effects, one of which is not lore based (but I don't mind). The cloak is the part that isn't lore based, but is probably most needed into this game itself. However, it it's going to stealth cloak, then it could use to drop a lot of the other abilities it has to hinder lock ons and missile locks, and data gathering.

Basically, each part isn't the problem. It's everything has a whole package.

Exactly.

[StalaggtIKE]

Mechi Messer, on 28 May 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

ECM is making the game playable at the moment. Nerfing ECM would change it into an even bigger lrmfest.

Perhaps coupled with decreased LRM tracking?

Quote

I see DDCs with xl-engines just to fling more explosive poo around.

Now you're just trying to hard. LT has only 12 slots. With an XL engine and ECM that leaves you with only enough for 35 missiles tops. Hardly a threat.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 28 May 2014 - 08:11 AM.