26 replies to this topic

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Almond Brown, on 26 February 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

So, just replace the current ECM with AECM at what cost to the Mech and players? Keep ECM at 1 Slot and no weight cost (restricted by chassis) like now and then ADD AECM which would cost what exactly? Perhaps 2t and 3 slots... or 3t for 3 slots. The stealth abilities of current ECM carriers are already whined about incessantly right?

Thus, I am not seeing how replacing something, that is heavily griped about in its current state, with something the same but may have weight and or more slot requirement, unless ALL Mechs have access? Is that where this is going...ALL MECHS can have stealth? LOL!

It's more that the ECM that we have now is actually more like AECM than GECM. AECM is the one that blocked almost all detection and GECM just interfered with detection systems.

It's about making tiers for the equipment and giving each differentiating features.

GECM/CECM would still cost tonnage/crits/hardpoints, but if you want the stealth you'd have to pay more. That's fair.

Just to be clear, current ECM versions are not weightless, nor did I propose that AECM that all 'Mechs should be on any 'Mech that doesn't have an ECM handprint.

Edited by Brandarr Gunnarson, 27 February 2016 - 03:54 AM.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

JagdFlanker, on 26 February 2016 - 05:42 PM, said:

well the clan TC Mk1 has the same target info data speed as the CAP so outside of breaking ECM (which to me is kinda pointless)....

The former is just shameful and evidence that Active Probes need to do more.

The latter is not really true, it only counters ECM within the ECM range... I think. The way it counters ECM is ridiculous. Active Probes should be THE counter to ECM equipment. That at least makes them meaningful.

[Jeffrey Wilder]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 27 February 2016 - 04:05 AM, said:

The latter is not really true, it only counters ECM within the ECM range... I think. The way it counters ECM is ridiculous. Active Probes should be THE counter to ECM equipment. That at least makes them meaningful.

That's what I thought.

[Metus regem]

El Bandito, on 26 February 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

Meh, not even the majority of non-ECM mechs carry BAP/CAP in the first place, unless one is boating LRMs. BAP/CAP are very under-utilized pieces of equipment.

And that is just sad, for 1.5t you get a lot of benefits from it...

[Lyoto Machida]

Metus regem, on 04 March 2016 - 07:19 AM, said:

And that is just sad, for 1.5t you get a lot of benefits from it...

Not as much benefit as you get for 1.5t of ECM.

"Oh, I have 1.5 tons free...do I take ECM, BAP or AMS???"

[Metus regem]

Lyoto Machida, on 04 March 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

Not as much benefit as you get for 1.5t of ECM.

"Oh, I have 1.5 tons free...do I take ECM, BAP or AMS???"

Yes to all three if I have the mounts to all three.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Lyoto Machida, on 04 March 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

Not as much benefit as you get for 1.5t of ECM.

"Oh, I have 1.5 tons free...do I take ECM, BAP or AMS???"

Metus regem, on 04 March 2016 - 10:51 AM, said:

Yes to all three if I have the mounts to all three.

But if you don't have the space for all three, then there's not much of a choice. The first one to get dropped is BAP/CAP because it just isn't worth it.

The choice between the other two is more meaningful (though ECM still probably trumps AMS).

Now, if they made Active Probes a meaningful counter to ECM, that would make it a harder choice. It would also necessitate introducing an Active Probe hardpoint to limit the 'Mechs that could mount it. (I would be very happy about this.)