55 replies to this topic

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Stock loadouts are already horrible in this game with the current design. If altering weight and slot requirements breaks the importation of stock designs. So be it.

Edited by crabcakes66, 01 February 2013 - 04:53 AM.

[Skoll Lokeson]

CobraFive, on 28 November 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

You are thinking EMP, not ECM.

In real life, ECM is gear that aircraft use to disrupt lock-on and radar targeting.

But not from lock-on heat sensors. I wonder if it would be possible develop some sort of technology for a heat seeking weapon or thermal sensor in 3050.

[zmeul]

WarOrk, on 30 January 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Now I'm no physicist, but when is the last time a radio wave blocked a laser beam??????

light is both a wave and a particle

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Quote

What PGI did was way over inflate the impact of TT in their game.

I think thats more to the truth

Lykaon, on 01 February 2013 - 03:04 AM, said:

I can answer that for you.

It has the ability to jam streak locks because it was far easyer to impliment that than to actually ballance the hugely imballanced streak weapon mechanics.

So its better to break the timeline they so value than fix the game? Ah...

[Biruke]

Novawrecker, on 01 February 2013 - 03:20 AM, said:

No longer a 100% true statement as savvy LRM'ers have incorporated TAG and deploy tactics that help them lessen the ECM blanket. Is it still bothersome to them? Yes, but they no longer cry murder when facing ECM units.

That only proves the statement. With the TAG there ARE much less 'ECM OP' topics now.

[Novawrecker]

Biruke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

That only proves the statement. With the TAG there ARE much less 'ECM OP' topics now.

How does lessening the blanket of ECM still = LRM hate ECM? It doesn't prove the statement at all, as it was already pointed out burden of ECM was lowered, not sustained.

[DocBach]

http://mwomercs.com/...m-with-modules/

[Trauglodyte]

Let's not go overboard here with the ECM hate. ECM in game is NOT Null Sig. Anyone with any level of reading comprehension understands that. Beyond that, everything else is just artistic license on the part of PGI, for good or for bad. Consider that they're idea of ECM is a lot like their soon to be released idea of PPC EMP. It was in fluff and has now been converted/equalized to the current game. Their notion of what ECM should do is just interpretation of what it might be if you actually piloted a mech. Consider it like this:

- When you play TT BT, you're taking the position of a spy satelite, or God, or a spy satelite God like the main villain from the really bad 1980's Transformers cartoon movie. Anyway, you sit up on high looking at the field of battle (the maps) looking at your mech or mech lance. Everything outside the edge of the maps is considered fog of war and therefore not subject to rules (if it were, you could just tell the GM that you're circumventing the incoming enemy and blowing up their city or drop ship). When the enemy player(s) enters the map, any true present day actualities of ECM flies out the window because you now see your enemy's mechs. The TT rules for ECM takes that into account which is why it says that it doesn't hide their movements. Furthermoe, IF TT rules prevented the lock on of LRMs and Streaks, it would remove like 1/3 of the weapons in game and would pretty much decimate 75%+ of all mechs in game. That would have been a massive mistake on the part of FASA.

So, what we have today in MWO is a much better and more technologically appropriate system of what ECM should be. By way of TT, it interferes with electrical detection and calculations (ie, BAP, NARC, etc). It stands to reason, then, that it would affect missile locks as that is just moving the logic in a linear fasion. That it is part of Angel and not Guardian is more an issue with compartmentalizing logic at the cost of FASA TT time lines. In regards to missiles, LRMs were handled just like any other weapon, save for Streaks, in TT but PGI went with the concept of fighter missile locks which is, after all, a lot more fun. But, if you an block the electronic information gathered by BAP, it has to affect all sensors. And if it is going to block the telemetry data gathered by way of Artemis, NARC, and TAG, it needs to block missile locks as well meaning too bad for LRMs and Streaks.

The only real issue with ECM is that they took some of it too far (sensor reduction) and didn't provide any means of anti-ECM other than more ECM. I don't agree with a lot of what they did, and Doc knows this as we've spoken about it in length in prior topics. But, when you take a 2d game and put it isn't a FPS simulator, you've got to change things up to make them understandable and believable.

[Thuzel]

Fake Inception, on 30 January 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

Spot on post OP.

Although be prepared for the insults and flames from the rabid fanboys;

Fanboys see it as blasphemy to criticize or question this game, valid or not.

Mwhighlander couldn't of said it better, they ****** up, pure and simple, but it was - dev's pet project, so they are reluctant to change it. Someone _Really_ doesn't like egg on their face.

Not the first time this has happened. The DHS fiasco was also a major screw up, and they went so far as to go through the forums and delete most of the posts calling them out on it.

They even said they'd go back and "re-visit" the DHS values to tune them, but that's never happened and hasn't really been mentioned since (unless I missed it somewhere).

[Thuzel]

Lykaon, on 01 February 2013 - 04:47 AM, said:

The problem with increasing the wieght or slot costs on any item is,that dispite arguments to the contrary,The table top game IS the SOURCE of the mech configurations we have introduced into this game.

Changing weight or slot requirements invalidates designs and prevents easy inclusion into this game.

How would you change the 3L Raven that comes stock with ECM if suddenly it weighed more and took up more space?

That adds more problems than simply altering the functionality of the item.

That would be fine if they'd kept the same system of balance and given ECM the same relative power it had in TT. But they didn't do that, which is fine since this isn't TT, but now they're stuck with a completely overpowered system with the original weight and crit requirements.

They have to make a decision to either change it all for balance, or just be stuck with what we have. If they want to change things, then change them, but change it all to keep it in line. This mix and match stuff is causing problems.

[ArmandTulsen]

Zakie Chan, on 30 January 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

Their implementation of ecm is pretty much word for word. Dont forget that the devs gave all mechs c3 computers.

That said in the adaptation to making this a sim/fps, there is a need for change.

That's another thing that's irritating. This makes C3 itself absolutely useless.

[Solis Obscuri]

Trauglodyte, on 01 February 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Let's not go overboard here with the ECM hate.  ECM in game is NOT Null Sig.  Anyone with any level of reading comprehension understands that. 

True, ECM in MWO is much more similar to a Void Signature system. Null-Sig can at least be visually detected and targeted by onboard sensors.

[Empyrus]

I'd like to see ECM as something that makes detection at distance difficult, and maybe reducing missile effectiveness at mid range but not much more.
BAP should be more effective, maybe give it limited ability to see through terrain, buildings and so on.
And when Stealth Armor is introduced, it should be what current ECM is BUT at penalty of highish base heat.

[Fajther]

Sigh...... I wouldn't mind ECM if I had more counter play options. You could make it even better if there was something in the game that made ECM a bad idea. ATM pgi's priority is helping players manage the annoyance. Current counter play for ECM is 1. Lasers+L2aim 2. Pray 3. Tag + cry

[DocBach]

Solis Obscuri, on 01 February 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

True, ECM in MWO is much more similar to a Void Signature system. Null-Sig can at least be visually detected and targeted by onboard sensors.

Isn't void sig like, preadator camo that makes you invisible? I don't think its that bad, but it certainly does more than just block sensor scans when you are outside of the bubble.

[Solis Obscuri]

DocBach, on 02 February 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Isn't void sig like, preadator camo that makes you invisible? I don't think its that bad, but it certainly does more than just block sensor scans when you are outside of the bubble.

Void sig does work a bit like that, so our ability to see things would also be hindered; but our 'mechs should be able to target and track in the visual band without ECM having an effect, so MWO ECM is like Void Sig in that regard.