Jump to content

[Poll] Ecm On All Mechs?


90 replies to this topic

Poll: ECM on all mechs (296 member(s) have cast votes)

Should ECM be available to all mechs?

  1. Yes (44 votes [14.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.86%

  2. No (252 votes [85.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.14%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 General Taskeen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,737 posts
  • LocationCircinus

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:51 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

What is preventing us, as we are already doing something out of the norm, actually customizing our mechs, not being able to mount something that is star league era technology. Word of god. That is all, nothing else, just the devs said only specific things WE want you to have you can have. In a game which has pretty much been dictated by customization already this is a bad precedent.

By limiting it to certain chassis you prevent people, not just from customizing their mechs as they like, but remove entire chassis as being viable choices. such as the atlas D and rs models, the raven model 2x, the commando models as a whole almosst except for the 1b and the other cicada models as a whole almost.


Again, variety in chassis. Yes, it prevents a form of customization (not everything gets ECM). The balls-out build rules in TT, you could mount anything on anything. It doesn't necessarily make other variants unviable, because people want to use a Mech with specific weapon hardpoints. I use all 4 Founders Mechs, for instance, which would not be ECM mountable, and I'm fine with that, since skill/tactics will determine what happens when I engage an ECM-equipped unit.

But, please re-evaluate my post, and look at the reconsidered choices if that would at least be acceptable to you (meaning, all 4 weight classes would be covered).

Edited by General Taskeen, 30 November 2012 - 12:52 AM.


#22 Biruke

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,162 posts
  • LocationMsk, RF, Terra

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:53 AM

I believe ECM should be available to anyone, but it should be very fragile. One shot in the right torso, say, and ECM's out.

#23 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:56 AM

View PostWizard Steve, on 30 November 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

We have that already but further balancing efforts will improve the situation. The ECM suite as it's currently laid out will get balanced too. I see no reason for people to be getting their knickers in a twist.

Where is the stagnation beyond the limited loads of cents and dragons? Dragons are barely classed as heavies(minimum weight) and do not have a very viable weapons loadout due to their reliance on ballistics, and their missiles being center mounted. Centurions are ******* huge targets that are fragile and cannot carry heavy weapons very well. Both mechs are general purpose mechs and for their job, do more than just well at that.


View PostGeneral Taskeen, on 30 November 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:


Again, variety in chassis. Yes, it prevents a form of customization (not everything gets ECM). The balls-out build rules in TT, you could mount anything on anything. It doesn't necessarily make other variants unviable, because people want to use a Mech with specific weapon hardpoints. I use all 4 Founders Mechs, for instance, which would not be ECM mountable, and I'm fine with that, since skill/tactics will determine what happens when I engage an ECM-equipped unit.

But, please re-evaluate my post, and look at the reconsidered choices if that would at least be acceptable to you (meaning, all 4 weight classes would be covered).

Word of god is the only limiting factor currently.

In this game we can see the hard point on a mech, not just a spreadsheet, this gives us a view as to what we can put and where before we even look at the stats of how many hard points we have. In TT we only had "concept art" of the mechs looks and descriptions that made areas more defined, if only slightly.

http://www.sarna.net.../Highlander_IIC
For example, that right arm definitely holds a powerful weapon huh? yeah tat whole weapon system only weighs 13 tons despite protruding out of 2 parts of the arm.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Highlander
Supposedly that same right arm is now half the size, same firepower, but the gun weighs more and uses a slot more?

Yup yup, totally makes sense.

Edited by Deadoon, 30 November 2012 - 01:02 AM.


#24 p00k

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:59 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

such as the atlas D and rs models, the raven model 2x, the commando models as a whole almosst except for the 1b and the other cicada models as a whole almost.

i plan to continue to play my atlas D. in an atlas, fighting things atlases fight, lack of ecm isn't crippling. if the atlas D could carry ecm then sure i'd equip it, but i'll still take a D without ecm over a ddc with.

now, if i were a pugger, or if they had kept the jenner d on the list, then i'd probably cave and go for the ddc

Edited by p00k, 30 November 2012 - 01:00 AM.


#25 Stormwolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,951 posts
  • LocationCW Dire Wolf

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:01 AM

No, all the chassis should have certain unique features that you can't find in others.

I even think that engines and internals should be locked, or atleast limit the engines that you can't simply upgrade/downgrade to a XL engine. You'll have to buy a Atlas AS7-K if you want to have Atlas with a XL engine for instance. External things like armor should be easy to replace since the armor sections are already somewhat modular when it comes to repairing and replacing.

Also, the Atlas AS7-K's second AMS slot should give the option for either a ECM or AMS, you shouldn't be able to have 2 AMS along with a ECM.

There should be tons of choices when you look at the sheer number of chassis and their variants, PGI could have a few hundred variants if we had 40 or so mechs ingame.

#26 Mahws

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:06 AM

Not everything can mount jumpjets. Not everything can mount an AC20. Not everything can boat seven medium lasers or four AC2's either.

Part of customization is having meaningful differences between different mechs and variants. Claiming that giving the Raven ECM and not the Jenner is going to throw out balance is silly, the Jenner already packs Jump Jets and more boat friendly hardpoints, the balance is already thrown off, giving the Raven something that the Jenner can't do better is simply restoring variety and meaningful choices.

#27 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:06 AM

View Postp00k, on 30 November 2012 - 12:59 AM, said:

i plan to continue to play my atlas D. in an atlas, fighting things atlases fight, lack of ecm isn't crippling. if the atlas D could carry ecm then sure i'd equip it, but i'll still take a D without ecm over a ddc with.

now, if i were a pugger, or if they had kept the jenner d on the list, then i'd probably cave and go for the ddc

What is the benefit of the Atlas D, do you get a silent guardian(bad joke yes) and an extra missile slot or do you get 2 more center mounted lasers and no more ecm? best you could put in the center spot is a large pulse laser. which I doubt 1 large pulse laser is better than another lrm/(s)srm and a guardian system.


View PostMahws, on 30 November 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

Not everything can mount jumpjets. Not everything can mount an AC20. Not everything can boat seven medium lasers or four AC2's either.

Part of customization is having meaningful differences between different mechs and variants. Claiming that giving the Raven ECM and not the Jenner is going to throw out balance is silly, the Jenner already packs Jump Jets and more boat friendly hardpoints, the balance is already thrown off, giving the Raven something that the Jenner can't do better is simply restoring variety and meaningful choices.

Hard points for weapons and jjs make sense, as they are external, we are arguing something that is purely internal. I'd still want jj to be on every variant of a mech chassis capable of using them, but that is something for another time when those are fixed.

Edited by Deadoon, 30 November 2012 - 01:08 AM.


#28 Garrand

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:09 AM

There isn't any reason to use a Raven without ECM.

#29 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:11 AM

View PostGarrand, on 30 November 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

There isn't any reason to use a Raven without ECM.

Especially because that was the whole reason behind the ravens design after all.

#30 Garrand

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:12 AM

View PostZnail, on 30 November 2012 - 12:49 AM, said:

The entire issue with ECM is that it's too strong, not that it's limited to a few mechs.


So you've played with the release version thoroughly across all maps and against multiple opposing team comps?

No? You don't know anything about how strong it is then.

#31 Armorpiercer M82

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 759 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:13 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 12:47 AM, said:

Why not, seriously make a viable argument that isn't just word of god.


there should be variety on what Mech to choose for a specific role in team. having ecm on everymech will instakill this idea.

#32 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:14 AM

View PostGarrand, on 30 November 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:


So you've played with the release version thoroughly across all maps and against multiple opposing team comps?

No? You don't know anything about how strong it is then.

Read up on it please, it is ******** overpowered, it is practically the null sig system making a giant bubble around you and doesn't generate heat.

View PostArmorpiercer M82, on 30 November 2012 - 01:13 AM, said:


there should be variety on what Mech to choose for a specific role in team. having ecm on everymech will instakill this idea.

Just like all those atlas missile boats destroy the role of the catapult, or how the gauss cat destroys the role of the ctf4x as a ballistic fire support? or maybe it is that the dragon imposes on the cent for it's role as a general purpose mech? Maybe the awesome encroaches on the long range fire support of the k2?

Edited by Deadoon, 30 November 2012 - 01:17 AM.


#33 p00k

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,661 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:17 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

What is the benefit of the Atlas D, do you get a silent guardian(bad joke yes) and an extra missile slot or do you get 2 more center mounted lasers and no more ecm? best you could put in the center spot is a large pulse laser. which I doubt 1 large pulse laser is better than another lrm/(s)srm and a guardian system.

i prefer the lasers
lrm's are garbage, they're only good for killing people who haven't learned how to walk behind rocks
the tradeoff becomes an extra missile slot +ecm for the center torso energy slots.

here's the thing. atlases, with the current class-based matching, fight other assaults. and help fight other big fat things. to which end i'd rather have longer range, pinpoint damage. were it just the energy slots vs the missile slot, i'd take the energy, no contest

with atlases, and as a predominantly premade player, the lack of ecm also doesn't hurt me much. again i don't use lrms, and would be happier if my teammates had less reason to take lrm's. the intel effects are negligible when your teammates are on voip. so the only real loss is ssrm's. which, while i currently run ssrm's on my atlas, i'd be ok relegating squirrel chasing to my own team's squirrels

#34 Kurayami

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Stone Cold
  • Stone Cold
  • 916 posts
  • LocationSochi

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:17 AM

my vote is no since im against mindless adding ecm to everything. here is why - while ecm by itself is not so OP, combined with specific builds of specific mechs it will make those OP. gauss cat is bad - now think for a second that you cannot call lrm storm on it. streak cat is bad - now think about being unable to detect it until its too late - not to mention that you cannot hide - streak will just activate cecm mode. lrm boat - whole reason was to cover you from those yet it can now both hide AND negate your countermeasure. swayback - you wont see what hit you. i can continue endlessly.

im ok with ecm on mando even though it is not canon since balance wise this will make mando viable. on raven since it will rise it to be somehow on par with jenners (though it is already best of ravens - 2x-4x are nowhere near it). cicada is overboard but at least it is not so deadly (and not lagshield protected) fatlas - its is not like i need a lock to hit something that big (but chosen variant is long range boat which is wrong move =_=)

#35 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:19 AM

View PostKurayami, on 30 November 2012 - 01:17 AM, said:

my vote is no since im against mindless adding ecm to everything. here is why - while ecm by itself is not so OP, combined with specific builds of specific mechs it will make those OP. gauss cat is bad - now think for a second that you cannot call lrm storm on it. streak cat is bad - now think about being unable to detect it until its too late - not to mention that you cannot hide - streak will just activate cecm mode. lrm boat - whole reason was to cover you from those yet it can now both hide AND negate your countermeasure. swayback - you wont see what hit you. i can continue endlessly.

im ok with ecm on mando even though it is not canon since balance wise this will make mando viable. on raven since it will rise it to be somehow on par with jenners (though it is already best of ravens - 2x-4x are nowhere near it). cicada is overboard but at least it is not so deadly (and not lagshield protected) fatlas - its is not like i need a lock to hit something that big (but chosen variant is long range boat which is wrong move =_=)

It makes a bubble and a team play game with a team of atlases using the gecm to assist Gauss cats and missile boats makes an invisible impossible to lock onto mech group that ends up being utter ******** to fight against.

Also Word of god argument again, sorry make something viable please.

Edited by Deadoon, 30 November 2012 - 01:19 AM.


#36 Shadowsword8

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 323 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:26 AM

I'd be in favor of ECM on all mechs IF it's fitting requirement were really forcing a compromise between ECM or firepower/heat management. Something in the line of 8 tons and 8 slots.

Edited by Shadowsword8, 30 November 2012 - 01:28 AM.


#37 Deadoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:33 AM

View PostShadowsword8, on 30 November 2012 - 01:26 AM, said:

I'd be in favor of ECM on all mechs IF it's fitting requirement were really forcing a compromise between ECM or firepower/heat management. Something in the line of 8 tons and 8 slots.

How the hell would you even begin to be able to explain that one, please? That weighs more than and uses more space than even the null sig system or void system. Not to mention the raven mounts it by default

Edited by Deadoon, 30 November 2012 - 01:33 AM.


#38 Apoc1138

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:35 AM

not right now, but when all the other issues are fixed and all the other equipment and modules are in the game, then yes

#39 Garrand

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:38 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:

Read up on it please, it is ******** overpowered, it is practically the null sig system making a giant bubble around you and doesn't generate heat.


I prefer to actually play with a game mechanic and gain experience with equipment before saying something is too strong or too weak. But I understand, evidence is a difficult concept for most people. Again, you have no idea how strong or weak this will be until you use it and have it used against you.

View PostShadowsword8, on 30 November 2012 - 01:26 AM, said:

I'd be in favor of ECM on all mechs IF it's fitting requirement were really forcing a compromise between ECM or firepower/heat management. Something in the line of 8 tons and 8 slots.


So you don't want anyone but the Atlas using it, okay. Why not just say so?

#40 Kurayami

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Stone Cold
  • Stone Cold
  • 916 posts
  • LocationSochi

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:38 AM

View PostDeadoon, on 30 November 2012 - 01:19 AM, said:

...

so balance issues is a "word of god" now. then tell me please why cent have 6 tubes launcher with 3 missile hardpoints while raven with the same 6 tubes launcher have 1 missile hardpoint without using "word of god".

making ecm mindlessly available to every mech variant will ruin gameplay and kill diversity. making it available to specific slightly gimped\adjusted variant of every chassis is OK imho.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users