446 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

ECM? What bad in ECM? Except the fact that it's not avaliable for every mech... like it should be.

I used to think that way. I was quite vocal in that opinion... Until I saw it in action, then I was quite happy it was not available for all chassis! Guardian ECM does more than AngelECM and Null Signature combined.

[KharnZor]

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure the council members will also be using voice comms at some point. Also, considering that pretty much all of the nominated members are actually of older age, (I'm one of the youngest nominations, at 25) they are more likely to be mature.

I think they'd have to. Would be terribly inefficient if they didnt. Also another thing that could be done is have the council do a live round table session on twitch. That way the community can have some live input on issues as we progress towards a solution.

[PappySmurf]

Joseph said (I used to think that way. I was quite vocal in that opinion... Until I saw it in action, then I was quite happy it was not available for all chassis! Guardian ECM does more than AngelECM and Null Signature combined. )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is where your theory goes wrong after reading hundreds of posts on ECM and playing myself in group queue and solo queue it is only the LRM boat crowd that wants ECM nerfed for there own reasons as in more LRM kills and a new LRM AGGEDON.


P.S plus this same crowd just wants to disrupt the player base and development of import features in the works by PGI and staff.Its almost like this crowd wants this game to die.

Edited by PappySmurf, 16 September 2014 - 06:37 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

KharnZor, on 16 September 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

I think they'd have to. Would be terribly inefficient if they didnt. Also another thing that could be done is have the council do a live round table session on twitch. That way the community can have some live input on issues as we progress towards a solution.

Pretty much everything the council goes through will get run by the community.

In my opinion, I think if they start filtering ideas out, for every idea filtered out, there should be an explanation as to why it is recommended the idea be downvoted.

[EboneezeeR]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 06:30 AM, said:

Guardian ECM does more than AngelECM and Null Signature combined.

As supposed to be.

[IraqiWalker]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

Joseph said (I used to think that way. I was quite vocal in that opinion... Until I saw it in action, then I was quite happy it was not available for all chassis! Guardian ECM does more than AngelECM and Null Signature combined. )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is where your theory goes wrong after reading hundreds of posts on ECM and playing myself in group queue and solo queue it is only the LRM boat crowd that wants ECM nerfed for there own reasons as in more LRM kills and a new LRM AGGEDON.


P.S plus this same crowd just wants to disrupt the player base and development of import features in the works by PGI and staff.Its almost like this crowd wants this game to die.

Half-correct. Even direct fire players want the same thing. Lore friendly players want the same thing, since ECM right now is the most OP piece of equipment in the history of BT, for it's cost.

ECM should nullify Artemis IV, and mess with missile locks and such, but it shouldn't prevent locks. If you are within the 180 meter bubble, you basically shouldn't be able to share target information. (That part it already does) Plus, there are plenty of players out there who have come up with brilliant ideas for re-tweaking it, to make it work in a more reasonable manner.

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 06:37 AM, said:

As supposed to be.

No, that is flat out wrong. Show me where Guardian is supposed to be better than Angel.

That post is just a troll post.

[PappySmurf]

IraqiWalker (Half-correct. Even direct fire players want the same thing. Lore friendly players want the same thing, since ECM right now is the most OP piece of equipment in the history of BT, for it's cost.

ECM should nullify Artemis IV, and mess with missile locks and such, but it shouldn't prevent locks. If you are within the 180 meter bubble, you basically shouldn't be able to share target information. (That part it already does) Plus, there are plenty of players out there who have come up with brilliant ideas for re-tweaking it, to make it work in a more reasonable manner.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though you are partially correct it still does not warrant a fix at this point in the game because the game itself is still viable and playable. You and your group would let this game be ground into dust and die before it lets this minor problem in the game go or your groups nomination to a player counsel we do not need.

P.S I can name 10+ higher priority things in MWO that needs input and the community's help and involvement in before a ECM fix.

Edited by PappySmurf, 16 September 2014 - 06:47 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

Joseph said (I used to think that way. I was quite vocal in that opinion... Until I saw it in action, then I was quite happy it was not available for all chassis! Guardian ECM does more than AngelECM and Null Signature combined. )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is where your theory goes wrong after reading hundreds of posts on ECM and playing myself in group queue and solo queue it is only the LRM boat crowd that wants ECM nerfed for there own reasons as in more LRM kills and a new LRM AGGEDON.


P.S plus this same crowd just wants to disrupt the player base and development of import features in the works by PGI and staff.Its almost like this crowd wants this game to die.

Its not a bad argument Pappy, I agree, I can hit a ECM mech with ACs and PPCs fairly well, it doesn't change the fact that Guardian ECM was a Counter ONLY for NARC, Active Probes, FCS, and C³. Targeting lock is not among the list of affected equipment.

Angel ECM
Artemis 4 and 5*
Beagle and Bloodhound probes* (* & Clan equivalents)
C³ Master & Slaves
Streaks can be dumbfired but do not get the advantage of guaranteed hits.

Once again no mention of LRM lock.

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 06:37 AM, said:

As supposed to be.

That sir is quite wrong. It is cheaper smaller and the rules say quite different.

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

IraqiWalker (Half-correct. Even direct fire players want the same thing. Lore friendly players want the same thing, since ECM right now is the most OP piece of equipment in the history of BT, for it's cost.

ECM should nullify Artemis IV, and mess with missile locks and such, but it shouldn't prevent locks. If you are within the 180 meter bubble, you basically shouldn't be able to share target information. (That part it already does) Plus, there are plenty of players out there who have come up with brilliant ideas for re-tweaking it, to make it work in a more reasonable manner.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though you are partially correct it still does not warrant a fix at this point in the game because the game itself is still viable and playable. You and your group would let this game be ground into dust and die before it lets this minor problem in the game go or your groups nomination to a player counsel we do not need.

P.S I can name 10+ higher priority things in MWO that needs input and the community's help and involvement in before a ECM fix.

But if it is the will of PGI for the players committee to try and tackle it then it IS time to take a swing at it.

[IraqiWalker]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

IraqiWalker (Half-correct. Even direct fire players want the same thing. Lore friendly players want the same thing, since ECM right now is the most OP piece of equipment in the history of BT, for it's cost.

ECM should nullify Artemis IV, and mess with missile locks and such, but it shouldn't prevent locks. If you are within the 180 meter bubble, you basically shouldn't be able to share target information. (That part it already does) Plus, there are plenty of players out there who have come up with brilliant ideas for re-tweaking it, to make it work in a more reasonable manner.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though you are partially correct it still does not warrant a fix at this point in the game because the game itself is still viable and playable. You and your group would let this game be ground into dust and die before it lets this minor problem in the game go or your groups nomination to a player counsel we do not need.

P.S I can name 10+ higher priority things in MWO that needs input and the community's help and involvement in before a ECM fix.

Could you please use the quote function, so I know that you are responding to my posts.

Also, the ECM fix is a good issue to tackle since it actually has a big impact, and is a major part of two pillars of MW:O, Role Warfare, and Information Warfare.

The game is okay right now, and it's fun. Where's the harm in trying to make it more fun? If you are talking about using Direct fire builds and having no problems hitting ECM mechs, this will literally cause no problems for you, in fact, it might actually help you place your shots better. This won't stop ECM from countering LRMs, and SSRMs, it just won't be the ultimate and complete shutdown for LRMs, and SSRMs, that it is right now.

Before you start saying that I'm an LRM boating player, my only LRM boating mechs right now a single summoner varaint, and the BLR-1S, and I'm slapping an XL 400 in my BLR-1S and converting it to an SRM brawler soon, btw. Got the engine, just need to finalize the build properly on Smurfy.


What exactly is the downside you're seeing to this situation? The final decision is in the hands of PGI and the community in the first place. The council is just streamlining the process.

[PappySmurf]

Joseph (But if it is the will of PGI for the players committee to try and tackle it then it IS time to take a swing at it)

All that's left to say is after this debacle fails I will see you in the next incarnation of MechWarrior Online 2 the return from IGP.

[Joseph Mallan]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

Joseph (But if it is the will of PGI for the players committee to try and tackle it then it IS time to take a swing at it)

All that's left to say is after this debacle fails I will see you in the next incarnation of MechWarrior Online 2 the return from IGP.

If it fails, I could likely be dead of old age before we meet again Pappy!

[PappySmurf]

IraqiWalker said (What exactly is the downside you're seeing to this situation? The final decision is in the hands of PGI and the community in the first place.)

Because we all could be working with Russ & Brian & PGI staff on more important issues like more game mode types or more maps created by a community map maker project ETC. Instead the community is told fix a ECM problem that is a minor issue and problematic in its reworking and implementation as far as balance and many hours on a test server.


P.S when PGI fixes there forum code and I can use the Quote function properly I will.

Edited by PappySmurf, 16 September 2014 - 07:15 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 07:13 AM, said:

IraqiWalker said (What exactly is the downside you're seeing to this situation? The final decision is in the hands of PGI and the community in the first place.)

Because we all could be working with Russ & Brian & PGI staff on more important issues like more game mode types or more maps created by a community map maker project ETC. Instead the community is told fix a ECM problem that is a minor issue and problematic in its reworking and implementation as far as balance and many hours on a test server.


P.S when PGI fixes there forum code and I can use the Quote function properly I will.

Hold on. Have you watched the Town hall meeting? If you haven't you really should. It answers a lot of what you are talking about.

For now what we do know is that 2 maps are coming our way, plus a new game mode with CW (Attack & Defend), don't know if drop ship mode counts as a different mode or not, but that one is also being worked on.

Map creation with community help gets discussed in the townhall meeting, too, btw.

Also, these problems you mentioned are not ones that the community can fix. We don't have access to the code, or modding tools, to create new game modes, or new maps. However, we can definitely work on fixing some broken mechanics.

Again, I don't see the harm. Your complaint is that we're dealing with problems you want to ignore for now in favor of dealing with others.

What browser are you using btw? I'm personally using Chrome, and I have no problems. I also believe Firefox has no problems with the forum engine.

[Jon Gotham]

E N E R G Y, on 14 September 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

As long as it's a competitive player, we are safe. They tend to understand game mechanics and balance infinitely greater than the plebeian casual player base.

I would disagree here, most strongly. From what I have seen the player type you refer to is incapable of putting themselves across in a suitable manner.
Whomever does it-needs to be able to step back, look at the issue from a detached viewpoint and have a logical, methodical approach to laying out a point and also to care about the community-not just their section of it.
Yes a "comp" player may understand mechanics but they seem almost to a fault lack the required social dimension to their presence to represent other players adequately.

I'd be happy with Koniving or a Sandpit to be honest.
I'd rather have a council involved than leave it up to joe random on a poll-the portion of the community who never read a forum page or take any active interest suddenly have power over my game experience? I'm not too keen on that thank you. It reminds me of my country's elections where most of the population take exactly 0 interest in each candidate and have no clue at all what each party stands for then are allowed to go decide the country's future......they then whine because the government turns out to be awful....the one they elected in......
Put something (summary of what is being proposed) in the launcher when the game boots up-something players CAN'T ignore, things that can change how the game is played can't be left to a heads or tails coin flip style decision by joe random as he gazes at the tickbox.

Edited by kamiko kross, 16 September 2014 - 07:55 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

FireFox didn't have problems when I used it, but like you I now use Chrome.

E N E R G Y, on 14 September 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

As long as it's a competitive player, we are safe. They tend to understand game mechanics and balance infinitely greater than the plebeian casual player base.

Of course there should be representatives from the competitive crowd. Just not all competitive players only.

[EboneezeeR]

PappySmurf, on 16 September 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

I can understand Russ and his desire to get back into the graces of his community for financial reasons.PGI cannot survive on love of the IP alone it needs new blood and $USD to continue to operate .I am against the player counsel number 1 because it is a distraction to issues with MWO that are higher priority for the survival of the game itself.
.

Solution is simple... more mechs and also more Heromechs. More Clan mechs. But sale them not on packs, but in game shop for MC. Who for the sake of the Earh want's to buy whole crap-pack if it does not contain a 2 mounth premium? None.
Bring "Siege" mode allowing to go 24 vs 24 with multiple stage battle. Map filter, allow to play random in a party with friends... actually host the room/map/etc.
That is just simple as fk.

IraqiWalker, on 16 September 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:

No, that is flat out wrong. Show me where Guardian is supposed to be better than Angel.

That post is just a troll post.

Fk Angel ECM, we don't even have Blazer Cannon and now you remembered an Angel ECM suite. That is just troll, dude.

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 06:49 AM, said:

That sir is quite wrong. It is cheaper smaller and the rules say quite different.

Fk U 2 Josh. Cause, we currently have only Guardian ECM. We even got old rusty King Crap only in January next year for C-B's. So what you guys are talking about?! What rules? TT bullcrap which is moving straight opposite direction from Arcade MWO? No way... you must be off-your-box. Both, you Josh and Iraqi.

Untill we get at least 70% of mechs on TRO3050, 100% of IS/CL weapons and at lest 60% of equipment that Guardian ECM must work like Angel ECM. And don't ya dare...

[Joseph Mallan]

EboneezeeR, on 16 September 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Solution is simple... more mechs and also more Heromechs. More Clan mechs. But sale them not on packs, but in game shop for MC. Who for the sake of the Earh want's to buy whole crap-pack if it does not contain a 2 mounth premium? None.
Bring "Siege" mode allowing to go 24 vs 24 with multiple stage battle. Map filter, allow to play random in a party with friends... actually host the room/map/etc.
That is just simple as fk.


Fk Angel ECM, we don't even have Blazer Cannon and now you remembered an Angel ECM suite. That is just troll, dude.


Fk U 2 Josh. Cause, we currently have only Guardian ECM. We even got old rusty King Crap only in January next year for C-B's. So what you guys are talking about?! What rules? TT bullcrap which is moving straight opposite direction from Arcade MWO? No way... you must be off-your-box. Both, you Josh and Iraqi.

Untill we get at least 70% of mechs on TRO3050, 100% of IS/CL weapons and at lest 60% of equipment that Guardian ECM must work like Angel ECM. And don't ya dare...

100% of the weapons are not yet available at this point in time. I agree on the TRO3050 desire! As for Blazer Cannons... Strap 2 large into one location and you have it! With BETTER damage!

And nobody named Josh has posted to the best of my recollection. I dare quite a lot Ebon so get used to me daring and daring again.

Once you've been here longer than a month you'll realize that.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 16 September 2014 - 08:39 AM.

[Reverendk]

Joseph Mallan, on 16 September 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

Of course there should be representatives from the competitive crowd. Just not all competitive players only.

It is at this time that I would like to announce my candidacy for player council class president. It's an established fact that the high elo low drag attitude is a requisite for maintaining the highest level of 'etitive play, but loyal listeners will attest to my long standing focus on an improved new player experience. Additionally as player council class president I promise to abolish homework, increase AC10 rates, promote booming bass, czech guns, and keep mechs on the ground. I will admit that I'm in the public eye, so I try to be an eyeful. Now, I do not own the world, but yes I have some pull. My detractors might claim that my support stems from some kind of push for arbitrary diversity, but my life as a strong independent woman of color who don't need no man is unrelated to the overwhelming grassroots support that has allowed me this opportunity. I promise to you, loyal viewers that only the most professional high elo community minded discussion will be possible under my administration.

If you want to live in a future with lower taxes, the loudest, deepest bass you've ever seen, and the most drag resistant high elo play then cast your vote for R to the K for player council class president and start living that high elo lifestyle.


Cheers
RK
SCDMW (Similak child, driving me wild if you still haven't put it together)
High Elo Low Drag Collective Gaming Group for the Family Friendly playing of High Intensity Team Competitive E-Games No profanity gaming clan Native Tongues fan club Low Emissivity Enthusiasts Woodworking podcasting Anit-jump up retention specialist Saltybet Real Noriega player council representative Clan

[Roland]

Honestly folks, just let it go.
There'll be some vote on some council, and then they'll present an idea and you'll get to vote on it.

If you don't like the plan, you can vote against it. It's as simple as that.

And if they present a plan, and get more than 80% of the players to vote for it... then that means it represents the will of the playerbase. And if that disagrees with you, then that's kind of too bad, because it means you're in the minority.

[Joseph Mallan]

Reverendk, on 16 September 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

*SNIP*

Holy Cats! You've been here since March of 2012, and a quarter of your posts are form the last 4 months! Where have you been hiding!

Welcome to the MW:O Forums!