945 replies to this topic

[beerandasmoke]

I would hope they will go back and rethink the range and the way locks are acquired in game. If they just toss this ingame then all thats going to happen is another lurmaggedon except with streakboats thrown in. Players need to realize that these devs dont play the game that often. Thats why we get these wild swings in balance.

[Rasc4l]

Thank you, Paul!

It was also recently mentioned that sensor ranges might change. That is also excellent news, because lights need to see more to be able to scout properly in your new larger maps without being detected by the enemy.

Now if you would add to these changes the ability to have PASSIVE and ACTIVE radar, the Information Warfare would start to be in pretty good shape.

Edited by Rasc4l, 16 July 2015 - 02:28 AM.

[Fiona Marshe]

A change to range still doesn't fix the underlying problem.

[Black Ivan]

Guardian ECM should follow the guidelines in TT rules. There is everytwritten down how it should behave, no magic jesus box. The change won't solve the ECM issue.

[Catalina Steiner]

Great first step, I support this. I would not even mind if the ECM is only active for the carrying mech. ECM is a very valuable equipment and not staple goods for the whole team.

[Widowmaker1981]

This is actually in some ways a BUFF for ECM, at least for ECM lights.

ECM prevents sensor locks at all ranges, out to infinity if not countered.

BAP counters ECM out to its max range.

If ECM friendly bubble is reduced, that has zero effect on the actual mech that carries the ECM.

If BAP range is reduced, Streaks will only be able to lock onto ECM mechs at the new, reduced range of BAP - meaning the streak mech will need to get closer to fire, and lose lock easier.

I think that they should reduce the range of the ECM bubble as noted, but NOT reduce the range at which it is countered by BAP.

[TWIAFU]

Cody Furlong, on 15 July 2015 - 05:38 PM, said:

Mechs forced to stay closer together...Air and arty strikes will become more effective, will have to nerf those to compensate.

That we will.

We will also still see "nerf ECM" from the same people we do now after the change.

Will still have to hit the J key to be effective.

And role warfare coming! That excites and scares me. Excites me because, well, Role Warfare! Scares me because people complain now that we have objectives in game modes, cannot think how bad it will be when people have roles to fill.

Cannot imagine how bad it will get when a solo player has a role in support of the team when they refuse to be team players.

[Appogee]

An 'announcement' of 'Significant ECM Changes'... which turns out to be only a change to the range, with yet another vague and nonspecific promise of role and information warfare improvements that will be made 'in the future'.

Stop me if we've heard this one before?

Honestly Paul, you guys redefine the very concept of 'heel dragging'. You make the US Congress look like a hive of productivity.

We whales aren't going to keep buying Mech Packs forever when there is so little progress on fixing longstanding fundamental game mechanics.

I have ENOUGH Mechs. I've been waiting 3 years for MORE GAME.

/shakes head and logs off.

Edited by Appogee, 16 July 2015 - 03:33 AM.

[Ace Selin]

People are gonna get wrecked by LRM / Streak spam once this goes live, cant wait for all the QQ once this hits live servers.

I also suspect well see a larger number of people leaving the game due to the level of LRM / Streak spam that fallows, same as under LRMaggeddon.

[TWIAFU]

Ace Selin, on 16 July 2015 - 03:24 AM, said:

People are gonna get wrecked by LRM / Streak spam once this goes live, cant wait for all the QQ once this hits live servers.

I also suspect well see a larger number of people leaving the game due to the level of LRM / Streak spam that fallows, same as under LRMaggeddon.

Simple solution, stay out of pug queue.

[Squarebasher]

Tastian, on 15 July 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

ECM needs more then a range decrease. The Streak/LRM/ECM/BAP/C3/Artemis/TAG/UAV/target information relationship needs to be overhauled.

Agree with the above quote, taking ECM alone should not be done, we all need to know what PGI has in mind and start to debate this. I know I have quoted the post link below, but i feel that this is a very well thought out fix for a lot of problems, and i think this will add a lot to the game. The post is a bit of a wall of text but believe me well worth the read.

http://mwomercs.com/...cm-and-sensors/

[Av4tar]

Lrms and streaks arnt the problem. Its the target sharing/linking without C3. If PGI implement the C3 system it would be much better gameplay without Lrms rain.

[IraqiWalker]

Eden Blackheaven, on 16 July 2015 - 03:38 AM, said:

Lrms and streaks arnt the problem. Its the target sharing/linking without C3. If PGI implement the C3 system it would be much better gameplay without Lrms rain.

Ideally? Yes. Realistically? No, thank you. That is one aspect of the game that really should never change. We need target sharing right now. It's hard enough to herd a team of cats in a proper direction when they do see the enemy locations. Making it impossible for them to see it without mounting giant C3 components is not good.

[Livewyr]

Disappointing.
ECM wouldn't need the range cut...if it just worked the way it was supposed to instead of a free umbrella of null-sig armor...

But... at least there was a *nerf* and "ECM" in the same post...

Edited by Livewyr, 16 July 2015 - 03:51 AM.

[Blackavar]

Quite happy to see this 180m->90m change go in as a test.

I've got used to playing with a lot of ECM-cloaking on the battlefield, but it still annoys me when I've died primarily because the entire enemy team are hidden rather than any clear tactical error on my part, or I've taken a primarily LRM-based mech build and been useless to my team as a result. Closing the bubble down somewhat would make matches against ECM-heavy opposition far more interesting.

[Lily from animove]

Widowmaker1981, on 16 July 2015 - 02:55 AM, said:

This is actually in some ways a BUFF for ECM, at least for ECM lights.

ECM prevents sensor locks at all ranges, out to infinity if not countered.

BAP counters ECM out to its max range.

If ECM friendly bubble is reduced, that has zero effect on the actual mech that carries the ECM.

If BAP range is reduced, Streaks will only be able to lock onto ECM mechs at the new, reduced range of BAP - meaning the streak mech will need to get closer to fire, and lose lock easier.

I think that they should reduce the range of the ECM bubble as noted, but NOT reduce the range at which it is countered by BAP.

and you forgot, with less ECM range, the lights can ninja even more because the "low signal" indicator will appear a lot later. Which makes the ecm carrying mech even more stealthed as before.

[SgtMagor]

Lily from animove, on 16 July 2015 - 03:53 AM, said:

and you forgot, with less ECM range, the lights can ninja even more because the "low signal" indicator will appear a lot later. Which makes the ecm carrying mech even more stealthed as before.

if that's correct then my Recon D-DC thx's you!

Edited by SgtMagor, 16 July 2015 - 04:08 AM.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

no no no no and NO.It is same just with different range.Useless change...ECM implementation is OP not range...

[Otto Cannon]

It's a start.

60m would be better though, and carrier effect only would be best.

[Koshirou]

JudgeDeathCZ, on 16 July 2015 - 04:10 AM, said:

no no no no and NO.It is same just with different range.Useless change...ECM implementation is OP not range...

+1.