132 replies to this topic

[InspectorG]

PappySmurf, on 14 September 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

Here is a poll for you!!!!!

yes or no = ( how many players want new maps new game modes and CW before a ecm fix? yes for more content / no for a ECM fix) my vote is YES I WANT MORE CONTENT DONE BEFORE A ECM FIX. or

Excluded middle there guy, its not a yes/no proposition.

How many man-hours would it take a coder to go in and change the variable for the ECM radius to 50m???
How many to post it for the notes for the next patch?

[InspectorG]

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

No. What I gather is that people complain about not having ECM because that means an instant rain of hell from the sky from people sitting behind a hill 900m away. Hence, what's broken is not ECM - is the thing it mainly counters. Namely: LRMs.





I'm a new player (6 weeks playing), and I want to support this game. I've done it with my money, time, and youtube videos, since 6 weeks ago and I plan to keep on doing so in the future. Unless ECM gets crushed and LRMs not fixed. if that happens I'm out of this game instantly - and I know I'm not the only one with that feeling.

Since day one the one and only reason that really made me angry about this game was the LRM spam of death. I didn't get mad at clans. I didn't get mad at anything (well I do now and then about teams but PUGs are PUGs). The only thing I find unacceptable in this game, as a newcomer, is LRMs. And I know how to avoid them, but even knowing how to avoid them doesn't mean that you always can. In many cases you can't. It's a cheap weapon, with no skill requirements whatsoever, that breaks gameplay. Just try fighting under the constant rain of death of a single kintaro with LRM5s. Good luck with that.

You want new players to come and stay?. Then I have a valid voice to tell you here as I'm a new player and I want to stay: don't crush the only tool we have to keep LRM spam at bay, as LRMs is the most likely reason they'll want to go away.

First of, its not just LRM spam.

The people making it just about that often dont mention that in MWO, each mech essentially gets a FREE C3 master/slave unit, which is special, rare, expensive intel/commando equipment. What it does iS relay target into/LOCKS to ALL MEMBERS with the C3 network. SHARING LOCKS, just like all the LRM boaters beg for at the opening of a match.

In Battletech, a LRM user had to get their own locks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unless, someone else carried a TAG or NARC.

In MWO now, any one teammate can share target info with the team...which is broken from a BT point of view.

NOW, where ECM fit into this is in BT, it really didnt even do half of what it does in MWO.

It did not cloak half your team like it can do here.

The free C3 needs to be addressed because:
A. It makes LRMs into something their not which allows the Rain in the first place.
B. Makes Active Probes kinda pointless
C. Weakens scouting roles for Lights via unneeded Narc and TAG

ECM fit into this because its the only way to break the free C3 network...which it isnt even supposed to do at least on that scale.

This makes LRM boating the lowest hanging fruit as far as play goes. YOU go get me locks! Ill stay way over here away from the fight and lob rocks which might hit some poor fool/slowpoke.

Dont worry though, as you get better, you see fewer LRMs. People get better aiming with direct damage weapons and move away from LRM.
With better play, people become more aggressive and PUSH more into the enemy, with concentrated fire. This also makes LRMs less viable. At best they become a support weapon(which is good).

You will worry FAR less about LRM and WAY more about dual-Gauss as you get better.
Dual-Gauss can maim/kill most lights with one mouse-click.
Kill or cripple mediums with 1-3 shots with good aim.

LRM just cant compare at that level of play.

As far as your concern about staying:
Well, dont let initial difficulty deter you. At that stage, ECM is a crutch which keeps you from learning the basic skills of survival for this game.
After you die 1000 times from LRM, you will eventually figure to move from cover into cover, to look for spotters behind you, to not sit still and camp, etc.
These skills will save you when you run into more meta builds that will punish you just for peeking around the wrong corner.

No one said its an easy game to learn.

[Aresye]

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

For starters, anyone who decides to LRM boat and doesn't carry a TAG with him, just deserves to get no locks in the whole game. Only excuse would be the Catapult A1, which has no energy hardpoints.

There's the issue right there, which is why ECM is considered a hard counter to LRMs. It requires a pilot to equip optional equipment solely for the "possibility" that ECM might be present, preventing them from adding other necessities, such as ammo and heat sinks.

Let's hypothesize for a second. Let's say ECM doesn't hard counter, but instead doubles (or triples) lock-on time. A missile boat therefore has an important decision to make. Do they take a NARC or TAG to negate the longer lock-on time at the cost of less ammo and more heat? Or do they forgo the NARC or TAG in favor of more ammo and heat sinks, at the cost of having a more difficult time achieving locks?

That right there is effective, because it gives the player a risk vs reward decision. The way balancing SHOULD be done...for any weapon.

The problem currently is the risk is quite simply not worth the reward. An extra ton of ammo or heat sink isn't worth the risk of being unable to fire any weapons at all, meaning that due to the high probability of running into ECM, more missile boats will opt to take TAG, NARC, target decay, etc. This in turn means that in the absence of ECM or other counters, a missile heavy team will end up being drastically overpowered. Their equipment meant to counter ECM ends up being twice as effective when no ECM is present.

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

BTW, being a LRM boat doesn't prevent you from taking an UAV and putting it to good use.

So a Catapult A1 takes a UAV as his only chance of getting locks. He puts it up in the air. It gets shot within 5s. Now what? ggclose?

Trust me, I hate chain-fired Roflpults and LRM boats as a whole, but that doesn't mean it's fair that they have to rely on optional equipment to even be marginally effective. That's like saying that if you want to shoot PPCs, you HAVE to equip advanced zoom, and if you don't, your mech doesn't even let you fire them. Sure, advanced zoom could make my PPC shots more accurate, but I should be given the choice to not equip it, at the cost of not being as accurate at long range. Missile players don't get that choice.

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

Also about the lore explanations. I don't know for sure (I'm very new to the MW world and I'm very unfamiliar with the lore) but if I'm not totally wrong, in the lore, in 3050 LRMS couldn't fire on out-of-sight targets for the launcher unless NARC was in play (an some special command&control datalink between scouts and launchers?). So if we're going to mount an argument to nerf ECM based on lore, then I demand all out-of-line-of-sight firing abilities taken away from LRM boats unless its on a TAG/Narc'd target.

LRMs can be indirectly fired with a dedicated spotter that has LOS, however it's not very reliable without TAG, and even less reliable if the spotter attacks while designating. Problem we have today is there's no penalty for a spotter attacking, which makes for lights that are running around engaging separate mechs while leaving one of the mechs targeted for LRMs. Previous MechWarrior games just did away with simple spotting, requiring TAG or NARC as being the only ways to indirectly fire.

The Comm/Data link you're referring to is a C3 network. Most often assaults or other command mechs would carry C3 Master units while the others carried C3 slaves. The biggest advantage being shared targeting information beyond normal radar ranges, which we have inherent in the game already. Basically, everybody in MWO is both a C3 Master and C3 Slave, able to share targeting information, and target anybody that anybody else is targeting, regardless of LOS or radar range.

I personally think LRMs should only be indirect fire capable with TAG, NARC, or UAV. I also think shared targeting information should only be possible with those same systems, or if they implemented actual C3 equipment. A player beyond LOS would still be able to get a red dorito and target it, but unless TAG, NARC, UAV, or C3 is used on the spotter, they won't get any targeting information. They would just know that a target is there.

[ramjb]

InspectorG, on 14 September 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

First of, its not just LRM spam...

Thanks for the explanation on the lore. However as I said, I think lore should be 2ndary to gameplay. And no inter-mech datalink of contacts would make the game extremely hard. Not that I'm opposed (I like lopsided learning curves) but for user friendliness I can see why everyone can share contacts. Of course that means LRMs get as bad as you say - which doesn't agree with lore. So we need something to counter it, and that it doesn't agree with lore is not enough to dismiss and nerf it.

THe initial difficulty never deters me. In fact it propels me into learning more. I come from a hard flight simulation background and as such I'm perfectly used to deal with complicated mechanics, situational awareness and see hard to master games as a challenge and not as something that deters or puts me down.

In fact at this stage I'd say I'm a pretty decent player. Not great by any stretch of the imagination but after what I think is a normal adaptation period I'm steadily getting positive K/D ratios (K/D went for 0.77 two weeks ago to 1.02 atm) and my average XP is in excess of 1150. As in every game like this I think 90% of mastering MWO is mastering situational awareness, find the proper spot to be in, and then apply maximum effort there.
My driving is far from the best, my aiming downright sucks (which part is due to my abysmal FPS and which part is due to my natural lack of skill in mouse aiming games is open to debate ), but I tend to read the map well, know where to go and what to do, and I think I've got a good grasp of the mechanics of the game at this stage (reason why I started putting videos about them in my channel).

As for avoiding LRMs, is the first thing I learned how to do. Out of pure neccessity. And a Radar deprivation module was my first purchase after I got my first mech. But you know as good as I do, that sometimes there's no hiding possible, there's no cover available, and there's no way to avoid the Lurm of Death. And that shouldn't be the case.

Edited by ramjb, 14 September 2014 - 03:50 PM.

[White Bear 84]

PappySmurf, on 14 September 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

McGrail I hope your not saying im a noob pal been playing since MW2 have seen every incarnation of the IP series and gameplay plus I have been with MWO since the first day online on another account. So If they nerf ECM wrong I will guarantee LRM AGGEDDON will arrive once more to rear its ugly head and the whining will be loader than ever.Plus I would rather see new players protected by ECM than missiled to death in less than 30 seconds which = a quick uninstall.

Is this thread REALLY about not having ECM cover to protect you from LRM's? QQ usually arises from fear of change that a player does not like. You keep mentioning LRM's. You do not mention that the functionality of ECM as it is currently implemented is far more than what it should be doing. It was aptly described earlier as the Jesus Boom Box or something like that. Heck I could blend, roast, fry my dinner with ecm right now its so versatile.

[ramjb]

Aresye, on 14 September 2014 - 03:32 PM, said:

There's the issue right there, which is why ECM is considered a hard counter to LRMs.

Because something has to be, given how LRMs work. If it wasn't ECM it would be something else. But -something- has to keep LRMs at check or gameplay will go to oblivion.

Quote

Let's hypothesize for a second. Let's say ECM doesn't hard counter, but instead doubles (or triples) lock-on time. A missile boat therefore has an important decision to make. Do they take a NARC or TAG to negate the longer lock-on time at the cost of less ammo and more heat? Or do they forgo the NARC or TAG in favor of more ammo and heat sinks, at the cost of having a more difficult time achieving locks?

We all know the answer. Right now TAG is pretty much a must for any LRM boat and people run without any other weaponry, and no TAG, of course, just to load 180 more missiles to come closer to the magical 2000 missile figure.

Which also brings me some questions about ammo supply in lore, LRM reload times in lore, etc, as pages I've read about lore-accurate mechs talk about battlemechs carrying a couple tons of LRMs at best with few exceptions. While here even a shadowhawk can go into battle with almost 2k of them.

Quote

That right there is effective, because it gives the player a risk vs reward decision. The way balancing SHOULD be done...for any weapon.

I agree, as long as the weapon is balanced and doesn't mess the gameplay. LRMs are currently not balanced, and they would totally wreck gameplay with those changes. Right now when a UAV goes up ECM delayed lock on still kicks in and even then a single UAV means an instantaneous rain of doom. Your proposed change would mean ECM is no better than a UAV, and the result is that the rains of doom would be unavoidable, making gameplay miserable.

Sorry, no go. Again, LRMs MUST be changed before, or alongside, ECM, if ECM is changed in any way, shape or form.

Quote

So a Catapult A1 takes a UAV as his only chance of getting locks. He puts it up in the air. It gets shot within 5s. Now what? ggclose?

Call it a disadvantage of the mech (the only LRM mech that doesn't get an energy hardpoint) to balance the fact that it can mount up to SIX launchers (the only mech able to do so). The obvious advantage is there - the risk and disadvantage is there, aswell, for you to accept it. You could always use 5 launchers...and a NARC launcher, you know...

I don't see the problem (and I've run Catapult A1s as I want to master my K2. After three games I felt so dirty that I changed to a splatcat configuration - which also was kinda roflstomping, but at least was unusable beyond 270m).

Quote

LRMs can be indirectly fired with a dedicated spotter that has LOS, however it's not very reliable without TAG, and even less reliable if the spotter attacks while designating. Problem we have today is there's no penalty for a spotter attacking, which makes for lights that are running around engaging separate mechs while leaving one of the mechs targeted for LRMs. Previous MechWarrior games just did away with simple spotting, requiring TAG or NARC as being the only ways to indirectly fire.

Which brings me back to the point: we're saying the same just disagreeing on the timing. You say ECM should be nerfed first and then LRMs . I say LRMs first, and then ECM. Or both at the same time. This paragraph just reinforces what I say: LRMs currently are too powerful, thus require a too powerful counter to keep them at check. Nerf the LRMs, then do stuff with the ECM. But not before. Or do it concurrently. But what can't happen is a battlefield with current state LRMs against nerfed ECMs because the game will be an unplayable mess.

Edited by ramjb, 14 September 2014 - 04:06 PM.

[Mystere]

Aresye, on 14 September 2014 - 01:29 PM, said:

A player in the solo queue with missiles that randomly got matched with no teammates or equipment that can counter ECM shouldn't be downgraded to 100% useless.

Frankly, anyone playing in the PUG queue should know (or be taught) that they should bring a more appropriate load out.

As for being rendered 100% useless, well, we can always have this.

And look, this player gets it.

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

For starters, anyone who decides to LRM boat and doesn't carry a TAG with him, just deserves to get no locks in the whole game. Only excuse would be the Catapult A1, which has no energy hardpoints. All the rest ,do. I'm just out of a game where a summoner with LRM20 launchers and nothing else was crying because nobody was holding locks for him. Well, his fault for not moving up and achieving them with a TAG. O wait, he didn't load one. Not even a medium laser. Only LRMs. So he deserves what he got: no locks, for being so cheap to load an all-LRM weapon set with no backup weapons, much less tag, just to get a couple hundred LRMs more.

If only more players, old and new, were like this.

Edited by Mystere, 14 September 2014 - 04:10 PM.

[Aresye]

ramjb, on 14 September 2014 - 04:03 PM, said:

Which brings me back to the point: we're saying the same just disagreeing on the timing. You say ECM should be nerfed first and then LRMs . I say LRMs first, and then ECM. Or both at the same time. This paragraph just reinforces what I say: LRMs currently are too powerful, thus require a too powerful counter to keep them at check. Nerf the LRMs, then do stuff with the ECM. But not before. Or do it concurrently. But what can't happen is a battlefield with current state LRMs against nerfed ECMs because the game will be an unplayable mess.

The main argument in this thread that I'm seeing is, "Keep things the way they are, because if we tweak ECM, LRMs will be OP." If you're on the side of keeping things the way they are, then we're disagreeing on more than timing.

Let's just get one thing cleared out of the way first. There is absolutely no way that PGI will end up tweaking ECM and LRMs at the same time, and even if they did, it would require readjustments and fine tuning. So basically, barring a miracle in that PGI tweaks both ECM and LRMs at the same time, AND manages to get them perfectly balanced with each other the first time through, there's going to be a balance issue on one side or the other.

The question is, which side will get the short end of the stick?

Now, I used to be a pretty devout anti-LRM guy. I still am to a certain extent, although most of my issues with LRMs is related to the motion blur and stun-lock effects from missiles. Aside from those rare games where the planets aline perfectly and I end up on a team with no ECM against a full missile team on Caustic, I really don't have any problems with missiles. I've played dedicated missile boats on a few rare occasions, and it's pretty frustrating how terrible missiles really are.

If ECM gets nerfed first, I can guarantee that you'll see more people taking LRMs. Just a fact of the matter, but if this past lance challenge was any indication of how much missile spam can exist, I don't have any problems with that. All you need is the radar deprivation module, and always stick close to something you can use as cover.

Point is, there are other options available to people against missiles besides just ECM, and aside from Caustic and maaayyybe Alpine, most maps have suitable cover all around. The players who would suffer the most are those who relied on ECM as a crutch for poor positioning (ex: those who hang out in the open and rely on nothing other than the hard counter of ECM to protect them).

The same can't be said for those who use missiles, who already have to deal with a weapon that has so many hard counters it's a wonder people still use them. They're also minimally viable, and have practically zero presence in competitive play.

So by adjusting ECM first, some players would need to adapt to not having as protective of a shield as they were used to, but for the most part, the average player wouldn't notice that big of a difference.

If you adjust LRMs first, you've now completely eliminated an entire weapon system. One of the few (if not the only) weapons that new players can utilize while they work on getting better on aim and piloting skill.

I've been around for the one true LRMaggedon, and the other smaller LRM spam that was a few months ago when they drastically upped the speed. Trust me. It won't be as bad as you think it will be, but even if it is, who cares? A week...maybe 2 weeks tops of horrible gameplay while they adjust it? For a long-term fix of a long overdue broken mechanic?

One side's gotta give in and suck it up for a couple weeks, and I don't think it should be the side that encompasses the majority of new players.

[Mystere]

Aresye, on 14 September 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

Let's just get one thing cleared out of the way first. There is absolutely no way that PGI will end up tweaking ECM and LRMs at the same time, and even if they did, it would require readjustments and fine tuning. So basically, barring a miracle in that PGI tweaks both ECM and LRMs at the same time, AND manages to get them perfectly balanced with each other the first time through, there's going to be a balance issue on one side or the other.

The question is, which side will get the short end of the stick?

Actually, Russ himself provided an opening:

Quote

"Restricted to ECM only - Other systems can be pulled in if absolutely necessary to make the perfect ECM solution work etc."

As such, assuming that is indeed the case, declare that pulling in other systems is absolutely necessary and make the proposal say as much.

Edited by Mystere, 14 September 2014 - 10:18 PM.

[Aresye]

I definitely missed that part when reading that. Let's hope that ends up being the case.

[Lightfoot]

They can't leave ECM as it is. The Loki (Hellbringer) is a 65 ton heavy that has ECM on every alt.

We don't have one yet, but it can't be too far off. Once the Loki arrives matches will have 10-15 ECM mechs.

My idea is BAP breaks ECM at around 600 meters, but needs Line of Sight. This kind of fits the lore about ECM since terrain could boost the effectiveness of ECM and stealth items.

Anyway, 10-15 ECM mechs in a match breaks the game if ECM remains as is.

[hazeman]

Personally i see nothing wrong with ECM. there are many counters to ecm now such as tag, narc, uav, and other ecm mechs.

I dont normally run ECM mechs but i see no problem when encountering one in game. the problem lies now when someone runs LRMs exclusively and runs into an ECM unit. And i agree wholeheartedly that lrm boat MUST bring TAG or Narc to be self viable. if you wanna boat, do it right

[Kjudoon]

1. Limit it to 1 ecm per lance/star (2/3 per side per game max)
2. Remove stacking of ECM (Double or triple ECM is no longer additive. )
3. Protection only for those inside the bubble, it does not provide a screen for those behind it.

Then address the broken nature of AMS.

Edited by Kjudoon, 14 September 2014 - 10:54 PM.

[Thunder Child]

Simple fix.
Remove the broken stealth effect from ECM. ECM now counters all T2 Missile Tech, like it was supposed to.
T2 Missile tech improves tracking and lock on times, like it was supposed to.

Double the lockon time for LRMs when fired without LoS. This means that the poor spotter has to either take fire for 5-6 secs before missile support comes in, or bug out and lose lock. Also increase LRM spread for indirect fire. Lastly, reduce the impulse.

Now personally, I think they should remove the tracking from LRMs entirely, double the flight speed, and have it so that a "lock" fired indirectly results in the missiles going to the locked location, not auto-homing on the target. Have Non-Artemis missiles auto-home onto a Narc Beacon (provided they were landing within 100m of it), and have a Beacon active for say, 10 secs. Artemis Missiles would follow the crosshair when fired LoS, or could Beam-Ride a Tagged Target. Narc will not effect Artemis Missiles, and TAG will not affect Non-Artemis missiles.
ECM no longer provides Magic Invisibility, but will prevent Narc, Tag, or Artemis from working on targets within its AoE.
It makes LRMs more of a "Skill" weapon, because you lead and snap-shot like every other point and click weapon, but still allows them to dig people out of entrenched positions, unless the Muppets are dumb enough to stand there and take it.
The point of LRMs is to have a weapon system that forces people to maneuver. At the moment, they DON'T do that, because of the homing issues. But without homing they are too slow to be effective.

Just FYI, I'm a Brawler. Both need fixing for there to be balance. And both sides of the argument are right. They just need to be lenient enough to concede points to their opposition, instead of resorting to the "no, ur a NewbZ!".

Edit: Additionally, the removal of the ECM "stealth" effect, would allow for the option of Active and Passive sensors, one of the few features I sorely miss from MW4.

2nd Edit: And for the love of the Holy Urbanmech, stop saying we get "free C3". We get no such thing. All mechs have the ability to share targeting data. It's a part of the basic sensor system, that is included Default in EVERY mech.
What C3 did in TT was coordinate and collate that data through a stonking big Processor (5 tons worth) to allow mechs to fire as though they were much closer, reducing to hit rolls from +4, to +2, or even +0.
IF we had a cone of fire, C3 would reduce the size of it if we had an ally up close.
To give you another example, say a friendly was within 100m, and you were Gauss Snipering from 900m. Instead of using your zoom, you could use the resolution from your ally to place the shot. Of course, for that to work in MWO, your ally would need to be near stationary, but the point is, the C3 system was developed to allow long range accuracy against Clan Mechs, through the help of Lancemates.

Edited by Thunder Child, 14 September 2014 - 11:48 PM.

[DocBach]

InspectorG, on 14 September 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

First of, its not just LRM spam.

The people making it just about that often dont mention that in MWO, each mech essentially gets a FREE C3 master/slave unit, which is special, rare, expensive intel/commando equipment. What it does iS relay target into/LOCKS to ALL MEMBERS with the C3 network. SHARING LOCKS, just like all the LRM boaters beg for at the opening of a match.

In Battletech, a LRM user had to get their own locks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unless, someone else carried a TAG or NARC.

In MWO now, any one teammate can share target info with the team...which is broken from a BT point of view.

NOW, where ECM fit into this is in BT, it really didnt even do half of what it does in MWO.

It did not cloak half your team like it can do here.

The free C3 needs to be addressed because:
A. It makes LRMs into something their not which allows the Rain in the first place.
B. Makes Active Probes kinda pointless
C. Weakens scouting roles for Lights via unneeded Narc and TAG

ECM fit into this because its the only way to break the free C3 network...which it isnt even supposed to do at least on that scale.

This makes LRM boating the lowest hanging fruit as far as play goes. YOU go get me locks! Ill stay way over here away from the fight and lob rocks which might hit some poor fool/slowpoke.

Dont worry though, as you get better, you see fewer LRMs. People get better aiming with direct damage weapons and move away from LRM.
With better play, people become more aggressive and PUSH more into the enemy, with concentrated fire. This also makes LRMs less viable. At best they become a support weapon(which is good).

You will worry FAR less about LRM and WAY more about dual-Gauss as you get better.
Dual-Gauss can maim/kill most lights with one mouse-click.
Kill or cripple mediums with 1-3 shots with good aim.

LRM just cant compare at that level of play.

As far as your concern about staying:
Well, dont let initial difficulty deter you. At that stage, ECM is a crutch which keeps you from learning the basic skills of survival for this game.
After you die 1000 times from LRM, you will eventually figure to move from cover into cover, to look for spotters behind you, to not sit still and camp, etc.
These skills will save you when you run into more meta builds that will punish you just for peeking around the wrong corner.

No one said its an easy game to learn.

Your analysis of c3 and indirect fire not existing in battletech without c3 is entirely incorrect. Our target sharing is modeled very closely off of the indirect fire rules in total warfare.

[ToriStark]

What's wrong with this:

[x] target under ECM is traceable (w/o stealth armor)...

> ...but LRM lose any tracking when it is within ECM bubble.

Like it happens when lock-on is lost at last stage of missile flight. If target is standing still, rocket will hit it; if not = results may vary.

Is it server related? Or what? I don't get it.

[Dracol]

El Bandito, on 14 September 2014 - 08:14 AM, said:

That's not the issue. The issue is that there should not be hard counters against a whole weapon class. 1.5 ton equipment cockblocking 20-30 tons worth of weapons on multiple mechs is ridiculous.

Imagine if there was a 1.5 ton weapon that disables all PPC projectiles. Not fair for those who brought PPCs, right?

Tis not a hard counter though. A lot harder to use, yes... hard counter, no. Plenty of slow mechs to dumb fire LRMs at. And inexperienced ravens. Amazes me how many I have hit with LRMs as they stood around shooting their ER Large Lasers.

Using your PPC analogy, a device that worked like ECM against PPCs would cause PPCs to fire slower while targeting the mech... or maybe do less damage on a hit.

Edited by Dracol, 15 September 2014 - 12:37 AM.

[Dracol]

White Bear 84, on 14 September 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

Is this thread REALLY about not having ECM cover to protect you from LRM's? QQ usually arises from fear of change that a player does not like. You keep mentioning LRM's. You do not mention that the functionality of ECM as it is currently implemented is far more than what it should be doing. It was aptly described earlier as the Jesus Boom Box or something like that. Heck I could blend, roast, fry my dinner with ecm right now its so versatile.

Yes, lets slave ourselves to TT rules which translates poorly to a First person shooter/simulator......

InspectorG, on 14 September 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Excluded middle there guy, its not a yes/no proposition.

How many man-hours would it take a coder to go in and change the variable for the ECM radius to 50m???
How many to post it for the notes for the next patch?

You got a good point here. Depending on the change that is selected, it very well could be a minor tweak to the code.

I feel the OP is concerned that all the attention the ECM deal is gathering on the forums is reflected within the game studio. Which is incorrect, but it might be what the OP is perceiving.

[Dracol]

Aresye, on 14 September 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

The thought never dawned on you that when entire teams complain because they don't have a single piece of equipment, and that because they don't have that they're likely going to lose, that maybe perhaps that single piece of equipment has too much influence on the outcome of the game, and is therefore, broken?

I've seen teams complain we are going to lose because of a disconnect at the very beginning, and yet we go onto win.
Perceived imbalances versus actual imbalances can be worlds apart.

[El Bandito]

Dracol, on 15 September 2014 - 12:34 AM, said:

Tis not a hard counter though. A lot harder to use, yes... hard counter, no. Plenty of slow mechs to dumb fire LRMs at. And inexperienced ravens. Amazes me how many I have hit with LRMs as they stood around shooting their ER Large Lasers.

Using your PPC analogy, a device that worked like ECM against PPCs would cause PPCs to fire slower while targeting the mech... or maybe do less damage on a hit.

Show me a match where dumb fired LRMs consistently hit those "slow moving" mechs, then I'll consider your PoV.

Edited by El Bandito, 15 September 2014 - 03:20 AM.