129 replies to this topic

[Solis Obscuri]

627, on 16 September 2014 - 01:52 AM, said:

If you need ECM to not get killed by LRMs I have some bad news for you.

Can I sig this?

[cranect]

stjobe, on 16 September 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

You don't see the contradiction in your own words here?

The non-guided missiles are Rocket Launchers and Medium Range Missiles, the rest are self-guided.

Yes I seem to have forgotten a word in there... I meant for it to say that most of them are still guided if only a few of the systems were not guided. Forgot the not there. It was a pretty important word too.

[627]

Solis Obscuri, on 16 September 2014 - 09:44 PM, said:

Can I sig this?

sure

[wanderer]

And even MRMs have an add-on guidance system (Apollo, the MRM cousin to the Artemis system)- which means yes, even MRMs can receive at least rudimentary guidance when fired. They're just naturally dumber than their LRM/SRM cousins, in part to increase how many can be packed onto a 'Mech as ammo.

Rocket Launchers truly don't.

[Aresye]

I Zeratul I, on 15 September 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

.

In honor of recent efforts to butcher ECM. Butcher ECM, fix ECM. Same thing. The end result isn't likely to be better than butchering/fixing jump jets. The close association between fixing and butchering things in this game isn't a false equivalence,

I call upon the community to remind everyone why ECM is necessary.

Thus, I'm declaring the period of time from now till ECM changes go into effect the: LRM LOLOCAUST ERA.

I will be on a lot.

I will drop often in LRM boats.

The pain will be real. The tears of my victims will be drowned in LOL's.

People will remember why ECM is necessary and realize those calling for ECM to be nerfed are most certainly incorrect in their assessments.

I call upon you, the community to do the same.

...

.

Bring it! I loved the LRM spam of the last lance challenge. Made games easier.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

stjobe, on 16 September 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

1. It's not personal opinion, it's BattleTech lore and rules.

2. SSRMs are simply a means to save ammo; many BT 'Mechs are starved for ammo (a single ton of ammo isn't unusual).

.

#1 Many here seem to adhere to lore when they can use it as an excuse to justify something they want, like: killing jump jets. Then, the same people who quoted lore to kill jump jets, ignore lore when lore says: ECM is a rare component only select mechs can mount. They ask that more mechs mount ECM despite it violating lore.

In that, I don't take lore very seriously. It doesn't seem like something people adhere to with any real consistency. Lore is just something people support when it agrees with them. And lore is also something people toss out the window the second it disagrees with them.

I think it some ways its bad for people to support lore in blind faith without questioning. It shouldn't be enough to simply quote lore as a reason for supporting something.

The question is how do circumstances improve or worsen by changing how ECM is implemented.

People tend to be extremely vague when they say ECM is supposed to counter BAP. What does that mean, exactly? Simply that it establishes a null zone where BAP no longer functions? Ok. How does that make things better? The way things seem to me is that if ECM only counters BAP, then it doesn't really serve as a shield against LRM's because tabletop rules were never developed to cope with LRM 60 builds where missiles are being spammed en masse.

No matter what the spread is, if there are even two or three LRM boats on a single team with each having LRM 40 or higher. That's still 120+ LRM's that are going to hit. People in this game complain about dual guass and having 30 points of pinpoint damage. But, if they were asked if they would rather be hit with 30 pinpoint damage or 120 damage of LRM's that are spread out, I think most would prefer to be hit with the pinpoint damage.

So what we have is a scenario where LRM boats can focus fire large amounts of damage onto a single target. And having an ECM that only counters BAP won't diminish the fact that being hit with those amounts of damage, even if its spread out, is still massively damaging.

In that, the current implementation of ECM makes perfect sense. It would be unfair and worsen conditions in game to reduce ECM to mainly being a counter to BAP and artemis because the real problem with LRM's is that a single lock can be utilized by an entire team. And multiple LRM boats can focus fire ridiculous amounts of damage onto single targets under circumstances where spread isn't going to make a tangible difference.

.

#2 SSRM's "save ammo" due to having reduced cooldown and dps? That's pretty funny. Like the Toyota Prius of SRM systems. How much missiles per gallon do they get? Seriously, though. I think the whole point of having non tracking SRM's is to give higher damage and dps to weapons systems where aiming is necessary and balancing them with lower damage, lower dps, ssrm's that have tracking but have a tradeoff of inflicting lesser damage.

It would mess up the balance to have SRM's deal more damage, have higher dps and track the way SSRM's do.

edit --

Aresye, on 16 September 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

Bring it! I loved the LRM spam of the last lance challenge. Made games easier.

.

This reminds me of all the people who said the timberwolf would be DOA.

They said the timberwolfs side torsos were "too big" and "too easy to hit". And that they would enjoy blasting the timberwolves side torsos off when it was released.

Then what happened?

The same people who said the timberwolf would be DOA, who said they would enjoy blowing away its humongous side torsos, spammed the forum with threads complaining about the timberwolf being OP.

So, yeah. What you said there perfectly reminds me of that.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 16 September 2014 - 10:24 PM.

[Wolfways]

I Zeratul I, on 16 September 2014 - 09:40 PM, said:

But considering the way too many people on this forum pretend the have super LRM dodging skills and haven't died from LRM fire since 1970. I think its pretty safe to assume they're either fabricating myths or haven't played the game in a long time.

I have died to LRM fire before. Last time was in a match last week. Know how i remember? Because it's such a rare event. I've probably died to LRM's (or taken a lot of LRM damage and the actual kill being done by another weapon) about a dozen or so times since closed beta.

Quote

I remember a few months back when this section was heavily saturated with "PGI PLEASE NERF LRM" threads. It seems as if a lot of people have spontaneously forgotten what can happen when enough decent players decide to drop in LRM boats.

Or, lot of people aren't active enough in game to know that a lot of games are rife with LRM fire and there are still people who are complaining about the oversaturation of LRM fire.

It sounds like you don't read the forum much tbh. General Discussions is always full of threads by people complaining about LRM's. Just like the Battlefield series forums were always full of "snipers are OP" threads. People don't like a style they don't use so they complain.

Quote

There's no legitimate basis to say that ECM has made a significant impact in making LRM's "useless" as some claim.

It's not a claim, it's a fact. You cannot target someone within an ECM bubble with LRM's. Fact.

Quote

An LRM weapons system can have BAP, Artemis and TAG and can sometimes be completely shut down by buildings or mountains that are free and cost nothing!

No one seems to have a problem with that.

Why would they have a problem with something like ECM that actually costs cbills, space, tonnage and more?

Can you specifically explain why ECM is a problem and cite reasons which back your perspective?

See above.

Quote

A significant portion of the player base seems to suffer from having extremely short term memories.

It amazes me none of you seem to remember a few months ago, when half of you were spamming this section with "LRM'S ARE OP" threads.

That wasn't me then. LRM's have been OP for two days imo. When Artemis was implemented.

Quote

Nothing has changed since then. LRM's are still the same. ECM is still the same. The only difference is people got bored of spamming LRM's and decided to do something else.

So less people are using LRM's now? I guess there's even less reason to keep ECM as it is then.

Quote

In which case, it is a good thing to jog peoples memories and remind them why ECM is a necessity, as it seems they can't be trusted to remember things on their own.

ECM stops me from using LRM's. Protection-wise it stops the enemy seeing my mech info/paperdoll. That's it. But i understand that many new/bad players want to keep their LRM umbrella.

I also should add that i have been taking more LRM damage since the clans were released, but it's nearly always direct-fire.

Edited by Wolfways, 16 September 2014 - 10:39 PM.

[Sorbic]

So many folks pretending like they never take lrm damage with comments like "I almost never die to LRMs". Well no derp. LRMs are but one of MANY weapons so it makes sense that you wouldn't die to them that often. Not to mention that they aren't about killing blows. They are designed in a way that softens you up/removes bits so it's easy for others to kill you... Stop pretending like ECM and bad LRM pilots aren't a big factor in you not taking damage.

That said, ECM could use some tweaks but it would need to be done in conjunction with other changes like indirect LRM nerfs/direct LRM buffs. Basically, although I'd be ok with an ECM tweak I'd rather see resources spent fixing other stuff atm.

[DEN_Ninja]

Sorbic, on 17 September 2014 - 06:06 AM, said:

So many folks pretending like they never take lrm damage with comments like "I almost never die to LRMs". Well no derp. LRMs are but one of MANY weapons so it makes sense that you wouldn't die to them that often. Not to mention that they aren't about killing blows. They are designed in a way that softens you up/removes bits so it's easy for others to kill you... Stop pretending like ECM and bad LRM pilots aren't a big factor in you not taking damage.

That said, ECM could use some tweaks but it would need to be done in conjunction with other changes like indirect LRM nerfs/direct LRM buffs. Basically, although I'd be ok with an ECM tweak I'd rather see resources spent fixing other stuff atm.

Pretty sure that's not the exact argument my friend.

Zeratul seems to believe the main issue is LRM's. Some other folks think it is ECM.

For the most part the problem is both. Both have HUGE fundamental issues because they are in a hard counter relationship.

No one is ignoring that LRM's do damage. It just isn't main point of the argument which is that it is not purely LRM's or ECM that causes this issue but how the gameplay mechanics force it to be an either or situation.

https://docs.google....c3APiROIr4/edit

Here are some of the suggested solutions which are pretty nice.

[Joseph Mallan]

@Wolf.
I have 3 LRM5s (chain fire) on my Hellslinger(among the energy weapons). And they do pad my damage, and increase my Assists which in turn aides my team win matches.

[Lynx7725]

Tichorius Davion, on 17 September 2014 - 06:13 AM, said:

Zeratul seems to believe the main issue is LRM's. Some other folks think it is ECM.

For the most part the problem is both. Both have HUGE fundamental issues because they are in a hard counter relationship.

No one is ignoring that LRM's do damage. It just isn't main point of the argument which is that it is not purely LRM's or ECM that causes this issue but how the gameplay mechanics force it to be an either or situation.

I just want to say this. Get it out in the open.

Do I think LRM needs work? Sure. Need a lot of work? Not in my opinion, but that's subjective.

Do I think the complaints about LRMs are valid? To some degree. Do I think the complaints about LRMs are motivated by people who don't like the weapon system, and prefer to play direct fire games, and hence not motivated to understand the conceptual boundaries and constraints?

Hell yeah.

And that is why I look at every LRM complaint thread very skeptically. Is there a hidden agenda (deliberately or subconsciously) that the poster is really looking to move MWO towards a DF only game? Or is he ok with the idea of LRMs as a utility weapon that has functions other than direct damage, and sees issues with the current setup? My experience is that the majority lies more with the former than the latter.

[DEN_Ninja]

Lynx7725, on 17 September 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

I just want to say this. Get it out in the open.

Do I think LRM needs work? Sure. Need a lot of work? Not in my opinion, but that's subjective.

Do I think the complaints about LRMs are valid? To some degree. Do I think the complaints about LRMs are motivated by people who don't like the weapon system, and prefer to play direct fire games, and hence not motivated to understand the conceptual boundaries and constraints?

Hell yeah.

And that is why I look at every LRM complaint thread very skeptically. Is there a hidden agenda (deliberately or subconsciously) that the poster is really looking to move MWO towards a DF only game? Or is he ok with the idea of LRMs as a utility weapon that has functions other than direct damage, and sees issues with the current setup? My experience is that the majority lies more with the former than the latter.

Again, my view is that LRM's need to be viable in the situations that call for it. That is why instead of nerfing LRM's or even ECM you need to change the mechanics.

I freaking love LRM's. I am self titled Catapult enthusiast.

I still believe that LRM's need a mode switcher for Indirect and Direct firing. Direct change to the mechanics where one fires in arcs the other as 'straight' lines. A lot of issues come from being able to hit people behind cover.

That is where changes to how we do IW and targeting come into play. Indirect loses lock and targeting the instant they are behind cover. This is negated by having external sources scouting and giving that information back to the LRM launcher. Again these external sources being negated by ECM. Indirect becomes a valued tool in hitting targets accurately behind cover but is negated by the support tool that is ECM. Not only that but there needs to be a 'delay' between reliable locks and missile firing.

If an someone chooses to sit still while they are TAG'd or NARC'd they will catch missiles but if they move they can avoid missiles. Or they can seek cover into ECM.

Once Indirect is negated by ECM. You can switch to Direct which is a system capable of dumb and smart fired missiles but much more rigid firing patterns. ECM at this point does not counter targeting or locking. If people decide to be in the open then can get shot at but again it doesn't mean anything if they get behind cover.

The dynamic gets really interesting when you have open field battles. Do you choose direct fire or indirect? Indirect has better tracking but Direct has better time to target. Sometimes you have to use indirect to hit targets in a crowd.

Edited by Tichorius Davion, 17 September 2014 - 06:47 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

Lynx7725, on 17 September 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

And that is why I look at every LRM complaint thread very skeptically. Is there a hidden agenda (deliberately or subconsciously) that the poster is really looking to protect their current weapon of choices strength?

Sorry, no offense meant here but had to chip in-the reverse is also true I'm afraid.
From what I see, both sides can come up with some pretty farcical arguments. The anti lrm crowd tends to get over emotional and the pro lrm crowd tends...to..well ignore a certain section of things that happen in matches. There are certain baseline "facts" that just get swept over because they are awkward, or so it seems.
Personally I'm inbetween on the issue, something needs to be done but I'm not sure what to be honest. ECM is however, rarely an issue for me-even when I'm running lrms, I tend to carry my own narcs/tags and ALWAYS have BAP.


Oh and post#112...spot on a good idea.

Edited by kamiko kross, 17 September 2014 - 07:37 AM.

[Lightfoot]

They have removed all the normal B-Tech counters to LRMs which are PPCs and Gauss Rifles. PPCs and Gauss Rifles are supposed to be balanced by longer recharges than close range weapons not by slow travel times and impossible charge-up procedures. Those are both overreactions to player's complaints who could not handle that level of competition.

So now MWO is just arcade brawling AC's and Lasers with LRM support. And you will find that ACs and Lasers are still better than LRMs on most maps.

ECM has to be changed because all the Loki's have ECM by default so it's likely some teams will have 8-10 ECM mechs soon. It will just conform to the Battle Tech specs now so don't worry too much.

[Mavairo]

I Zeratul I, on 16 September 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

.

Oh. That brawler build in your sig is your mech of choice? Looks cool. I run a 400XL in my boar's head with 5 ER LL. No clue as to how someone would use that many m pulse lasers.



I would guess you're someone who doesn't play the game.

Because when you do, you lose 25+ games in a row.

So, now you just hang out on the forums and pretend to be "superior". Like a high percentage of forum posters, do.

Which we all know is a lie.

Because even JagerXII and other elite level pilots in this game die to LRM's in their live streams, sometimes.

ECM is definitely necessary for days when LRM's are out of control.

If you're not having those days, you must not be on enough to know they exist.

XL In an Atlas..... all that needs to be said about this thread.

/gg close

[DEN_Ninja]

Mavairo, on 17 September 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

XL In an Atlas..... all that needs to be said about this thread.

/gg close

Let's just get duel between Zeratul and whoever it is over already.

We had this happen with Victor Morson vs LegoPirate already. 10/10 would watch the wrecking ball that is Lpirate again.

[Calamus]

I Zeratul I, on 15 September 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

.

In honor of recent efforts to butcher ECM. Butcher ECM, fix ECM. Same thing. The end result isn't likely to be better than butchering/fixing jump jets. The close association between fixing and butchering things in this game isn't a false equivalence,

I call upon the community to remind everyone why ECM is necessary.

Thus, I'm declaring the period of time from now till ECM changes go into effect the: LRM LOLOCAUST ERA.

I will be on a lot.

I will drop often in LRM boats.

The pain will be real. The tears of my victims will be drowned in LOL's.

People will remember why ECM is necessary and realize those calling for ECM to be nerfed are most certainly incorrect in their assessments.

I call upon you, the community to do the same.

...

.

These LRM are OP arguments are really starting to irritate me. How many mechs are capable of at least one AMS? How many can outfit 2? You can even outfit 3 now!

PLUS you have AMS Overload, and AMS Range.

I encountered this in my own clan during the lance challenge. Everyone thought that LRMs were the way to get the challenge done fast. A few of my clanmates were getting angry cause they kept getting LRMd. I joined in with them, put one of our guys in a Kit Fox with ECM and triple AMS with overload. I outiftted my Nova with dual AMS and Range. The other two took mechs with Single AMS and no modules for them.

We DESTROYED every match we had. We shot down almost ALL of the LRMs that came our way. We closed distance, and all the LRM boats didn't have enough close range firepower, so we tore them up.

This is a STRATEGY GAME! If you choose to outfit your mech with one too many lasers just so you can get a higher alpha, and you forgo tactical equipment like AMS, then you're a fool and you deserve to get slaughtered in the rain.

[Jon Gotham]

Calamus, on 17 September 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

......

Just a point for the sake of devil's advocacy:
You had yourself and a few others all equip ams and associated modules just to counter one specific weapon type. Because it appeared to be such an issue for some of your guys.

Just a point I felt needed to be raised.
If you were shooting down almost all of the lrms, then you were not getting lrmed much:) When some of our guys decide to roll lrms in a lance (you are looking at around lrm 220 ish ALL on one target....), your 5 ams would not be enough, not nearly enough....
AMS only works really if you are not under heavy attack from lrms, anything serious and it gets overwhelmed REALLY fast. I'll often use a lrm5 spammer just to eat enemy ams ammo up-whilst team mates with multiple lrm 60+ go to town unhindered.
In some matches, my cutefox has gone through 4 tons of ammo in under 2 minutes flat....it's a very much last ditch option...cover and ecm are first in my opinion:)

[Kjudoon]

kamiko kross, on 17 September 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

Just a point for the sake of devil's advocacy:
You had yourself and a few others all equip ams and associated modules just to counter one specific weapon type. Because it appeared to be such an issue for some of your guys.

Just a point I felt needed to be raised.
If you were shooting down almost all of the lrms, then you were not getting lrmed much:) When some of our guys decide to roll lrms in a lance (you are looking at around lrm 220 ish ALL on one target....), your 5 ams would not be enough, not nearly enough....
AMS only works really if you are not under heavy attack from lrms, anything serious and it gets overwhelmed REALLY fast. I'll often use a lrm5 spammer just to eat enemy ams ammo up-whilst team mates with multiple lrm 60+ go to town unhindered.
In some matches, my cutefox has gone through 4 tons of ammo in under 2 minutes flat....it's a very much last ditch option...cover and ecm are first in my opinion:)

This, more than ECM is why LRMs are a feast or famine weapon. Calamus is right too.

To solve this, there are 2 things that need to be looked at for AMS to be fixed.

1. AMS must react to surroundings. This is probably not going to happen. But if it did not fire unless it had LOS on missiles or pass through solid objects... the second fix would not be needed.

2. AMS targets only the LRMs aimed at the mech it's mounted on. This is the easy fix if the hard fix is not possible.

As an anti-boating consolation, make Missile hardpoints a 'hard cap' on the tubes. If you can only mount 10 tubes on the point, that's the largest size you can bring. No more putting an LRM20 on a 5 tube hard point and getting 4 volleys of 5. This limits boating to only a handful of mechs. Anything under 40 on a heavy/assault or 25 on a medium is not boating. Lights can't boat in significant quantities, save for the Oxide, and clan lights.

[Revis Volek]

Wolfways, on 16 September 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

...I can't say I've noticed the higher ELO players dieing to LRM's, but i have noticed Sean Lang uses Radar Dep. on all his mechs and i can't for the life of me figure out why. To me it's about as useful as a flamer....

If you think Radar Derp is useless you need a lesson sir. There is a reason its on just about every mech i run (as well as 98% of my groups mechs) outside of ECM variants.

Radar Derp is like mini ECM....well as long as you are out of LOS. Lock breaks instantly the second i go behind cover and the LRM no longer guide to you after that point. Just watch em fly by...

Mavairo, on 17 September 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

XL In an Atlas..... all that needs to be said about this thread.

/gg close

HAHAHA, yea Friends dont let Friends XL Atlas....

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 16 September 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Don't forget to record so we can all watch him #GE REKT

I gave him my info, he never showed. My offer still stands.

Kjudoon, on 17 September 2014 - 10:54 AM, said:

This, more than ECM is why LRMs are a feast or famine weapon. Calamus is right too.

To solve this, there are 2 things that need to be looked at for AMS to be fixed.

1. AMS must react to surroundings. This is probably not going to happen. But if it did not fire unless it had LOS on missiles or pass through solid objects... the second fix would not be needed.

2. AMS targets only the LRMs aimed at the mech it's mounted on. This is the easy fix if the hard fix is not possible.

As an anti-boating consolation, make Missile hardpoints a 'hard cap' on the tubes. If you can only mount 10 tubes on the point, that's the largest size you can bring. No more putting an LRM20 on a 5 tube hard point and getting 4 volleys of 5. This limits boating to only a handful of mechs. Anything under 40 on a heavy/assault or 25 on a medium is not boating. Lights can't boat in significant quantities, save for the Oxide, and clan lights.

They added a toggle to AMS, still goes through terrain tho...