42 replies to this topic

[ShadowFire]

How about two versions of ECM. One would be just like our current version with same range except it weighs 5 tons. The another would weigh the same as our current version but would only provide a 15 meter (basically self) protection bubble. (First for Heavies/Assaults, second designed for lights/mediums.)

I heard rumor the original ECM programmer left but unless he skipped town and with the source code leaving only the binary/complied code behind, would this be too hard to program?

Edited by ShadowFire, 03 September 2015 - 04:38 PM.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

How about damn Battletech ECM version.

Winterburn, on 03 September 2015 - 06:49 AM, said:

Making the cover bubble 90 m is the way to go, not making ECM mechs easy pickings.

More Buff to ECM?

[Brollocks]

As a month+ new player who has never used a mech with ECM, I say yes, let everyone suffer these insufferable, annoying, skulking sissies who love their LRM's.

[FupDup]

Something I find strange is that a lot of people ask for ECM to be a soft-counter device instead of hard-counter, but then they propose that ECM completely disables enemy BAP, NARC, and Artemis with its range...which is literally the definition of a hard-counter. Lol...

In order for ECM to be a TRUE soft-counter, it would have to reduce the bonuses of those items instead of turning them off completely. For example, since Artemis provides 35% tighter missile spread, perhaps an Artemis affected by ECM would only give 10-15% spread reduction. Thus, it still functions but at a lower effect. If ECM made Artemis do absolutely nothing, then ECM would be a HARD counter instead of soft.

Edited by FupDup, 03 September 2015 - 07:24 PM.

[MechWarrior3671771]

Lots of good ideas re ECM, problem is the 90m change is already in the pike. Not likely to get another change till other stuff is done - kinda like wanting to install marble countertops a week after you just installed granite.

How about making NARC more useful? It needs longer range, more velocity, more ammo per ton. Make it cut through ECM-covered mechs no matter what. Make it disable radar dep too.

[Wyest]

FupDup, on 03 September 2015 - 07:22 PM, said:

Something I find strange is that a lot of people ask for ECM to be a soft-counter device instead of hard-counter, but then they propose that ECM completely disables enemy BAP, NARC, and Artemis with its range...which is literally the definition of a hard-counter. Lol...

It's because you're confusing what the hard vs soft counter is referring to.
ECM currently completely disables locking, period. That's a hard counter.
ECM as proposed would not completely disable locking. That's a soft counter.
It would, however, retain some usefulness by hard-countering things that provide bonuses to locking or improve LRM damage. So while it hard-counters some kit, it doesn't prevent anyone from locking targets and doing damage. That's the definition of a soft-counter role.

[Funkin Disher]

Fenrisulvyn, on 03 September 2015 - 07:35 PM, said:

kinda like wanting to install marble countertops a week after you just installed granite.

Except you're changing a text document, not hauling stone.

[FupDup]

Wyest, on 03 September 2015 - 08:07 PM, said:

It's because you're confusing what the hard vs soft counter is referring to.
ECM currently completely disables locking, period. That's a hard counter.
ECM as proposed would not completely disable locking. That's a soft counter.
It would, however, retain some usefulness by hard-countering things that provide bonuses to locking or improve LRM damage. So while it hard-counters some kit, it doesn't prevent anyone from locking targets and doing damage. That's the definition of a soft-counter role.

What you described is a soft counter when it refers to missile locks specifically, but every else is still hard-countered...in some cases harder than now (Narc and BAP would lose their ability to counter ECM and thus be useless when in range of ECM).

So it's half and half...I'd rather go all the way with soft countering, e.g. I don't want my 3 ton Narc beacon to become entirely useless the moment an ECM gets in range.

[Wyest]

You seem to think everyone will bring ECM if it changes to this. I don't. What's the point in bringing something that only blocks BAP within 180m, Artemis within 180m and NARC beacons within 180m? For a lot of people, they'd rather bring their own BAP/cAP for the bonus (which applies out to how far? yeah, not just 180m is it...), or Artemis (1000m LoS) or NARC (map wide beacon).

Although the NARC beacon, if you want them to work through ECM, you'll need to rework how NARC beacons, missiles, ECM and targetting all interact. Otherwise, they go from being too limited, to being OP again.

[zagibu]

Muddy Funster, on 03 September 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:

As a month+ new player who has never used a mech with ECM, I say yes, let everyone suffer these insufferable, annoying, skulking sissies who love their LRM's.

It might be unbelievable for you, but nobody actually uses LRMs in the upper player tiers. A big reason is because there are usually 2-3 ECM mechs on any team.

[Black Ivan]

Revert Guardian ECM to Battletech rules, problem solved.

[LordNothing]

ShadowFire, on 03 September 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:

How about two versions of ECM. One would be just like our current version with same range except it weighs 5 tons. The another would weigh the same as our current version but would only provide a 15 meter (basically self) protection bubble. (First for Heavies/Assaults, second designed for lights/mediums.)

I heard rumor the original ECM programmer left but unless he skipped town and with the source code leaving only the binary/complied code behind, would this be too hard to program?

this is my favorite solution to the problem. the other that i was toying with was 3 mode ecm. protect your self, the team, or break someone else's protection but not all 3 at the same time. doing guardian and angel would mean introducing new equipment of course, really a cut and paste job, just offering two instances of the same module with different values for things like tonnage, slots, bubble size and detection ranges. you already have special ecm hardpoints so the framework is already there to have two ecm systems.

Edited by LordNothing, 04 September 2015 - 03:28 AM.

[MechWarrior3671771]

Fen: "kinda like wanting to install marble countertops a week after you just installed granite."

Funkin: "Except you're changing a text document, not hauling stone."

I think its more involved than that. How much time passed between when PGI decided to revisit ECM balance and the patch to change ECM?

If you make NARC useful, you won't have to keep going back for another ECM balance pass.

Edited by Fenrisulvyn, 04 September 2015 - 06:46 AM.

[Scar Glamour]

zagibu, on 03 September 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

Because ECM is too good at the moment. With this simple change, it would still be good, but more of a teamplay item.

That is a very subjective statement. Too good for what?
I am still playing non-ECM mechs. I do not see any appreciable difference in KD or WL.

Jaeger Gonzo, on 03 September 2015 - 05:19 PM, said:

More Buff to ECM?

How exactly is reducing the effective range a buff?

I have another very simple solution for people unhappy about the ECM. Bring a BAP. Problem solved.

Edited by Winterburn, 04 September 2015 - 07:15 AM.

[FupDup]

Winterburn, on 04 September 2015 - 07:11 AM, said:

How exactly is reducing the effective range a buff?

The idea is that an enemy ECM mech could get closer to you before you get the "No Signal" warning to make you immediately know they're nearby.

So, it could be interpreted as a buff for flanker/backstabber mechs (namely lights) but it does make the equipment less effective for deathball coverage.

[Khobai]

Quote

That is a very subjective statement. Too good for what?

Too good at providing long range stealth and hard countering missile weapons like LRMs.

Quote

I have another very simple solution for people unhappy about the ECM. Bring a BAP. Problem solved.

Except BAP doesnt counter ECM at long range. And ECM at long range is the problem. No one has problems with ECM at short range lolol.

BAP is a full range sensor suite, if anything can detect stealth at long range, it should be BAP.

Thats why they need to make sensor warfare work more like a soft counter system rather than this ridiculous hard counter system.

Edited by Khobai, 04 September 2015 - 07:42 AM.

[Scar Glamour]

FupDup, on 04 September 2015 - 07:29 AM, said:

The idea is that an enemy ECM mech could get closer to you before you get the "No Signal" warning to make you immediately know they're nearby.

So, it could be interpreted as a buff for flanker/backstabber mechs (namely lights) but it does make the equipment less effective for deathball coverage.

Oh, no, I was talking about the invisibility bubble only. The disruption bubble is fine as it is. Otherwise, you would need to hug folks to disrupt their targeting.

[zagibu]

Winterburn, on 04 September 2015 - 07:11 AM, said:

That is a very subjective statement. Too good for what?
I am still playing non-ECM mechs. I do not see any appreciable difference in KD or WL.

That's because you get covered by your team mates with ECM.

[Scar Glamour]

zagibu, on 04 September 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

That's because you get covered by your team mates with ECM.

Oh, my, I am being covered by ECM all the time and don't notice it? I would doubt that, but, obviously, you know my gameplay experience better than myself.

So in the end you're trying to say that ECM provides advantage even to mechs that don't have it. Yet, this is somehow unfair. Right, that makes perfect sense.

Khobai, on 04 September 2015 - 07:35 AM, said:

Too good at providing long range stealth and hard countering missile weapons like LRMs.

Except BAP doesnt counter ECM at long range. And ECM at long range is the problem. No one has problems with ECM at short range lolol.

Then you should move to short range with BAP and have no more problem.

Seriously, do you realize that demanding that you can engage at a certain range with no difficulty makes ECM pointless? Everyone wants to laservomit/LRM folks to death, and if the enemy team has good sense to have ECM coverage, your team needs to do actual teamwork too. Concentrate fire on ECM, advance to brawling range, etc.

It isn't that hard. Not as easy as demanding change from PGI, but a lot more effective.

[Khobai]

Quote

Then you should move to short range with BAP and have no more problem.

Again the problem with ECM isnt at short range. Its at long range. Are you dumb? Moving to short range isnt an option when the meta is dominated by long-range weapons and short-range weapons like SRMs are gimped beyond belief with bad hit detection.

Also nobody wants ECM to be pointless, they just want it to be balanced, and what it does not is NOT balanced for something that only weighs 1.5 tons. The benefits it provides are way too good for its trivial tonnage cost