70 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

Almond Brown, on 23 April 2015 - 07:52 AM, said:

Because a Mech under a ECM umbrella is not impervious to LRM fire. Well of course, unless you are totally "dependent" on "others" to get your missile Locks for you.

What do you tell the Pilot who took the time and care to get his TAG laser on a target and get missiles to it? Sorry but you simply have to eat this BS 50% spread thing, because of Whines, even though he/she did exactly what was needed to negate the enemy Mechs ECM cover under the current rule set of MWO?

Stop carrying LRM's without the means to negate ECM ffs. Problem solved.

Currently, ECM makes you impervious to LRM fire by removing tracking abilities.
A TAG alone will allow the player attempting to lock on to that TAG signal (against an ECM mech) take up to a maximum of 8 seconds, assuming the lock-on is not stunned due to some server-related issue (a stunned lock is one that cannot ever be completed deliberately losing and reacquiring the lock).

ECM in Battletech does NOT disallow missiles to hit or to be fired at the target, and does NOTHING to accuracy or chance to hit (meaning if LRMs are lock-on, ECM does nothing to stop them). ECM is a counter measure to the following fairly overpowered things in Battletech:

• ECM removes Artemis accuracy bonuses, turning Artemis LRMs into standard ones. ECM masks target information data (damage status, weapons, etc).
  
• ECM in optional rules negates TAG only within 180 meters of the TAG user or within 180 meters of the missile's trajectory between the missile and the TAG user -- as Homing LRMs and Arrow IV (the only things that TAG works for in 3050) are fed their target information from the TAG user, a disconnect between the TAG user and the missile severs communication, reducing the Homing LRMs into standard LRMs.
  
• ECM counters BAP -- which is the Jesus Box of Battletech as a successful BAP scan reveals the location of all enemies within up to 2,000 1,800 meters (edit: Corrected, the range of a BAP scan is 60 hexes which is 1,800 meters) regardless of line of sight, regardless of above or under ground, and regardless of whether the mech is out in the open or inside a structure.
  
  • BAP, in return, is the only way a jammed 'Mech would even be aware that it is being jammed. That is the extent of the canonical BAP counter to ECM.
• There is mention that ECM interferes with Thermals at 180 meters, however this is obscure and there is no ruleset governing this.

Currently in MWO, ECM does the following:

• Makes you unable to be locked on by LRMs or Streaks (when ECM is NOT supposed to have an effect against Streaks).
  
• Negates Artemis even when countered, though its Artemis negating factor means absolutely nothing in most cases since you can't lock onto an ECM mech.
  
• Makes the mech invisible to scanners. Yay cloaking device!
  
• Delays target information gathering -- this is actually weaker than canonical ECM, as canonical ECM is supposed to flat-out deny it [then again this falls under the clause of "lack of detailed target information is usually overridden visually."]
  
• When soft-countered by TAG, it can take up to 8 seconds to get a lock assuming it is possible at all. No negation of lock delay capabilities.
  
  • This demonstrates that the ECM has a lock delay capability ON TOP of a sensor cloaking device negating all locks.
• When hard-countered by PPC, it can take up to 3 seconds to get a lock for a mech with no enhanced abilities. The PPC's counter works for 4 to 5 seconds (can't recall which). It's believed lock delay capabilities are negated.
  
• When hard countered by BAP, all lock delay capabilities are instantly negated.
  
• A total of 3 hard-counters and 6 soft-counters. Nine (9) counters for a single 1.5 ton piece of equipment.

ECM in Mechwarriors 3 and 4 as well as Mech Commander 2 had the following traits:

Delayed locks.
Denial of target information.
Causes wider Missile spread.
One to two counters.

Far less mandatory for silly things like "ECM-exclusive" mechs, nerfs for ECM mechs, Also any mech could equip ECM, and it wasn't a mandatory must-have piece of equipment.

Edited by Koniving, 25 April 2015 - 10:27 AM.

[mogs01gt]

Almond Brown, on 23 April 2015 - 07:52 AM, said:

Because a Mech under a ECM umbrella is not impervious to LRM fire. Well of course, unless you are totally "dependent" on "others" to get your missile Locks for you.
What do you tell the Pilot who took the time and care to get his TAG laser on a target and get missiles to it? Sorry but you simply have to eat this BS 50% spread thing, because of Whines, even though he/she did exactly what was needed to negate the enemy Mechs ECM cover under the current rule set of MWO?
Stop carrying LRM's without the means to negate ECM ffs. Problem solved.

Typical response by someone who doesnt understand weapon balancing.

[Pjwned]

Mystere, on 24 April 2015 - 06:44 AM, said:

That is what TAG is for, and BAP, and NARC, and most especially teamwork.

Of course, if you refuse to or can't use any of these, there's really nothing more I can say.

How is that anything other than moving goalposts?

"Try using your eyes to hit them."
"Yeah, okay, let me know when I can use my eyeballs to acquire locks through ECM so that I can actually fire at all."
"LOL WELL THAT'S WHY YOU USE THIS OTHER EQUIPMENT LOL LE LOL LE LEL."

Real nice.

[Mystere]

Pjwned, on 25 April 2015 - 11:40 PM, said:

How is that anything other than moving goalposts?

"Try using your eyes to hit them."
"Yeah, okay, let me know when I can use my eyeballs to acquire locks through ECM so that I can actually fire at all."
"LOL WELL THAT'S WHY YOU USE THIS OTHER EQUIPMENT LOL LE LOL LE LEL."

Real nice.

And here is another excellent example of one-dimensional thinking which I have been talking about for a while.

You are supposed to be using all facilities at your disposal to get the enemy -- not one at a time. But, if you are all alone (i.e. teamwork is not an option as you are off somewhere all by your lonesome self) and have nothing else but LRMs, well you are screwed as you are supposed to be.

Edited by Mystere, 26 April 2015 - 05:10 AM.

[JaxRiot]

Mystere, on 26 April 2015 - 05:10 AM, said:

And here is another excellent example of one-dimensional thinking which I have been talking about for a while.

You are supposed to be using all facilities at your disposal to get the enemy -- not one at a time. But, if you are all alone (i.e. teamwork is not an option as you are off somewhere all by your lonesome self) and have nothing else but LRMs, well you are screwed as you are supposed to be.

Apologies, but yours and a few others way of thinking is to either cope and adapt to a badly implemented ECM (which by the way people have been. Theyve had no choice) , or to try and change everything else around a badly implemented ECM.

ECM is the badly implemented function. Thats where the changes should be made.

[Mystere]

JaxRiot, on 26 April 2015 - 07:52 AM, said:

Apologies, but yours and a few others way of thinking is to either cope and adapt to a badly implemented ECM (which by the way people have been. Theyve had no choice) , or to try and change everything else around a badly implemented ECM.

ECM is the badly implemented function. Thats where the changes should be made.

A wise person long ago taught me that those who only cope lose, but those who adapt win.

Edited by Mystere, 26 April 2015 - 11:46 AM.

[Pjwned]

Mystere, on 26 April 2015 - 05:10 AM, said:

And here is another excellent example of one-dimensional thinking which I have been talking about for a while.

You are supposed to be using all facilities at your disposal to get the enemy -- not one at a time. But, if you are all alone (i.e. teamwork is not an option as you are off somewhere all by your lonesome self) and have nothing else but LRMs, well you are screwed as you are supposed to be.

That's fair, you shouldn't expect to do very well if you run off by yourself and especially not with LRMs as your main weapon, but I find it annoying when you say "just use your eyes" and then move the goalposts; don't say "just use your eyes" in the first place when that's not good enough against a hard counter like ECM.

The one stipulation is that you can dumb fire LRMs, which is where you would be using your eyes rather than a missile lock, but considering what a terrible option that is 95%+ of the time I would never say "yeah it's balanced because you can fire your missiles without a lock 5% (likely less) of the time and hit something under ECM rather than 0% of the time."

Mystere, on 26 April 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

A wise person long ago taught me that those who only cope lose, but those who adapt win.

And how does that apply to the people that need a piece of equipment which hard counters 2 entire missile weapon systems in a 180m radius for 1.5 (1) tons and 2 (1) slots?

Edited by Pjwned, 26 April 2015 - 01:03 PM.

[LordNothing]

i wouldn't mind having a module tyhat would reduce spread somewhere between artemis and standard. with artemis they would fire perfectly straight.

also apply spread modules to lb autocannons.

yes to quirks but i think anything that can be quirked needs modules.

Edited by LordNothing, 26 April 2015 - 01:11 PM.

[Malakie]

Lily from animove, on 23 April 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

LOL, I don't even use lrms exept I play my MDD for the fun of spamming lrm 30's in 6 packs of 5.

The issue is that lrm is a dysfunctional implemention of what it is in TT and does heavily imbalance many stuff in MW, this starts from choosing emchs with ecm oer those not having some. To the fact that a MM with many ecm on one side and many lrm on the other is just going to fail by randomness of MM.

But the solution to make ecm what it was, a counter to missiles, and not a cloak bubble, that would just be great and balance a lot stuff. Lrm's would suddenly not be useless vs a lrm mech at 800 m, because show me how epically ou tag him hidden behind his comrades with that lousy tag range. Or that amazing narc launcher.

LRM's are considered the most annoying OP'ness by noobs and the most pointless wepaon system by good players. Simply because how unreliable they are due to, terrain, positioning and ecm.

giving ecm a "nerf" to lrm's without obsoleting the entire weapon system may make them not totally worthless in the eyes of good players, and newbies can still use their lrms to some degree without being totally useless once they face any ecm protected mech..Especially when they may have chosen the trial CPLT A 1.

And when you have tag and narc or bap? it des what it already does, negate the ecm effect. so the spread then is normal again. So where is the problem there?

LRM's are a problem, because together wiht how ecm works they are both in conjunction a totally unbalanced and broken feature. And thats why many skileld pilots don't use lrm's and hardly truly care about ecm. But an entire weaponsystem in such a state is not how it should be.

LRM's are not a problem... I am not a noob and some of my mechs utilize LRM's. Played correctly they can turn the tide of a battle.. Many times I have saved my ass or a teammates using LRM's to cover a retreat..

People just do not like them because they have to work to make them useful and defenders hate them because they do some damage from a distance they cannot retaliate against...

If people would use ECM COUNTER, beagle probes and other options, the balance would be there.. but no one wants to use real tactics nor the tools to do so.. Instead everyone just wants to load up a mech with as many weapons and heat sinks as possible running around hoping one of their alpha strikes brings a mech down.

Which actually makes it easier for those like me to kill then because we can wear down the armor at a distance and by the time they close we are ready with our heavy hitting short and medium range weapons..

[JaxRiot]

Could someone tweet Russ this idea?

[Mirumoto Izanami]

I'm not sure why it took missile spread quirks to realise this suggestion (I mean, doesn't Artemis reduce spread?) as I suspect the quirk system interacts with weapons differently than systems external to the firing mech, like ECM. Its not a bad suggestion, though.