2028 replies to this topic

[Xigunder Blue]

Intention seems to be pushing us toward a free for all brawler FPS. Like (too many other games to count). No actual tactics or even strategy (cap - Assault or Conquest). Not looking good and ECM used to neutralize the 'roles' of many mechs and require just brawlers.

Tactic: Armored thrust or armored turtle defense. Not flaming just pointing it out. Nothing much beyond a mobile arena. Solaris on wheels.

[bryce]

I've switched to using an ecm raven since the patch, and started having fun again. Why? Well ECM is ridiculously overpowered and I'm doing damage on the scale of using my assault because the combination of speed and ECM is just not fair. I'll keep playing this way because it's fun, but being on both the giving and receiving end of ECM I strongly believe that it needs to be changed.

[Elddric]

People seem to not actually know what the TT rules are so Let me quote the TT … Please turn your bible to the following….
FASA Corporation

Battletech 1640, The Battletech Compendium

Page 120, Verse 1, paragraph one

“The Guardian ECM suite is a broad-spectrum jamming and electronic countermeasure device designed to reduce the effectiveness of enemy long-range scanning and surveillance equipment.

A Guardian ECM suite nullifies the affects an enemy Beagle Active Probe (though it would notice it is being jammed) Artemis fire control systems, Narc missile beacon or C3 Computer when that unit is within 6 hexes of a Guardian equipped UNIT. Friendly systems of these sorts are not effected.

A Guardian nullifies these systems even when not directed at the Guardian equipped UNIT. It also works when the path of the enemy system pass with 6 hexes of the Guardian. For example, if the LOS to a narc or the LOS between 2 C3 linked units passes within 6 hexes of an enemy Guardian, The line of communications is broken until the Guardian no longer interferes.”

So with that said, if you look at the system as it is now you will see that its actually VERY close to TT rules.

Notes:

The way MWO currently works is that we are all running C3 integrated systems. If you wander into the 6 hex area around a Guardian Equipped Mech you will be effected just as the TT says.

TAG still works for the mech your running in. Trust me I use it all the time right now for my streaks. inside the 6 hex bubble you will not relay info to your team mates but it will still work internal for your personal mech.

Edited by Elddric, 14 December 2012 - 11:40 AM.

[Vasces Diablo]

Elddric, on 14 December 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

People seem to not actually know what the TT rules are so Let me quote the TT … Please turn your bible to the following….
FASA Corporation

Battletech 1640, The Battletech Compendium

Page 120, Verse 1, paragraph one

“The Guardian ECM suite is a broad-spectrum jamming and electronic countermeasure device designed to reduce the effectiveness of enemy long-range scanning and surveillance equipment.

A Guardian ECM suite nullifies the affects an enemy Beagle Active Probe (though it would notice it is being jammed) Artemis fire control systems, Narc missile beacon or C3 Computer when that unit is within 6 hexes of a Guardian equipped UNIT. Friendly systems of these sorts are not effected.

A Guardian nullifies these systems even when not directed at the Guardian equipped UNIT. It also works when the path of the enemy system pass with 6 hexes of the Guardian. For example, if the LOS to a narc or the LOS between 2 C3 linked units passes within 6 hexes of an enemy Guardian, The line of communications is broken until the Guardian no longer interferes.”

So with that said, if you look at the system as it is now you will see that its actually VERY close to TT rules.

Notes:

The way MWO currently works is that we are all running C3 integrated systems. If you wander into the 6 hex area around a Guardian Equipped Mech you will be effected just as the TT says.

TAG still works for the mech your running in. Trust me I use it all the time right now for my streaks. inside the 6 hex bubble you will not relay info to your team mates but it will still work internal for your personal mech.

First off, the "Verse 1" was a nice touch, I chuckled.

However, if you look back through this thread (I know, a lot of pages) there are several posts that explain in great detail how ECM in the game is actually far beyond what the table top rules state. The same is true for the "we're all running around with C3 units" theory. We're not actually. Again, other people have explained it in great detail, but essentially, in double blind, one 1 mech has line of sight, all mechs know its there, C3 or not.

[Tolkien]

Elddric, on 14 December 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

People seem to not actually know what the TT rules are so Let me quote the TT … Please turn your bible to the following….
FASA Corporation

Battletech 1640, The Battletech Compendium

Page 120, Verse 1, paragraph one

“The Guardian ECM suite is a broad-spectrum jamming and electronic countermeasure device designed to reduce the effectiveness of enemy long-range scanning and surveillance equipment.

A Guardian ECM suite nullifies the affects an enemy Beagle Active Probe (though it would notice it is being jammed) Artemis fire control systems, Narc missile beacon or C3 Computer when that unit is within 6 hexes of a Guardian equipped UNIT. Friendly systems of these sorts are not effected.

A Guardian nullifies these systems even when not directed at the Guardian equipped UNIT. It also works when the path of the enemy system pass with 6 hexes of the Guardian. For example, if the LOS to a narc or the LOS between 2 C3 linked units passes within 6 hexes of an enemy Guardian, The line of communications is broken until the Guardian no longer interferes.”

So with that said, if you look at the system as it is now you will see that its actually VERY close to TT rules.

Notes:

The way MWO currently works is that we are all running C3 integrated systems. If you wander into the 6 hex area around a Guardian Equipped Mech you will be effected just as the TT says.

TAG still works for the mech your running in. Trust me I use it all the time right now for my streaks. inside the 6 hex bubble you will not relay info to your team mates but it will still work internal for your personal mech.

I'm glad people are reading into the rules more, but take a look at this: http://mwomercs.com/...36#entry1591436 I'll quote it here so you don't have to follow the link, just for verification.

Not a Number, on 12 December 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

Well I decided to check out the Tactical Handbook myself to be sure I'm not just repeating nonsense spouted by someone else. On page 10 it states:

"... To be affected, the spotting unit must be in the normal operating radius of the ECM system. This radius is not affected by LOS."

Page 63 covering the Angel ECM suite does not mention spotting but does state:

"... The Angel counters Beagle and Bloodhound probes, Artemis and Streak fire-control systems, NARC missile beacons, C3 computers, the Clan Watchdog probe, and Clan targeting computers.

The Angel ECM Suite negates the effects of the aforementioned systems whenever they are used within 6 hexes of a 'Mech equipped with the Angel. The Angel also defeats such systems when they are used to direct weapons whose LOS passes within 6 hexes of an Angel-equipped 'Mech or are targeted at hexes within 6 hexes of an Angel-equipped 'Mech."

So ECM (the Angel anyway) can still affect weapons passing through its 180M bubble, even when fired from outside of it. For it to do anything else, like interfere with spotting, the ECM equipped mech needs to be within 180M of the mech(s) it wants to affect.

This makes sense because, unless we're talking about something like a pure 1 on 1 situation, this could still prevent other friendly units from being spotted.

So as you can see it's a PGI invention that ECM should mess up BAP and maybe even TAG that are not inside the radius. Right now one of the problems with ECM is that it effects these much further away than 180m.

I'm not trying to cut you down here, just to point out that what PGI has implemented is way better than what we had on tabletop, yet they haven't put in *any* counterbalancing drawback.

Also, because of the way they've made the guardian ECM mess with streak when only the much more advanced Angel ECM should, it's another upgrade, and because of the way LRMs need a lock combined with the way ECM here is acting like a null signature system is again another huge buff for the ECM.

Additionally ECM doesn't stop a mech that is out in the open from being reported to all allies on the team, C3 or no C3. This happens because in mechwarrior a single commander controls the mechs on each side of the table. If one of his units sees an enemy standing in the open, that enemy shows up for all his units and they can converge on it. ECM as it is implemented here is ridiculously interfering with situational awareness, and again with zero balancing drawbacks.

edit: I am not trying to say that the game shouldn't play somewhat like it is now, what I am trying to say is that the ECM is doing way too many good things for the team that is using it (or has N+1 nearby, while the enemy only has N or N-1) for only a 1.5 ton 2 slot item. Also I don't like being deprived of situational awareness which inhibits PUG teamwork, I also don't like how LRMs are not worth the tonnage right now.

Edited by Tolkien, 14 December 2012 - 12:14 PM.

[Darwins Dog]

I think we can all agree that this is not, and never will be, the table top battletech. I know that it was the starting point, but things have had to change in order to fit a real time game, and to fit a new audience of gamers.

I like the what ECM is capable of doing right now. Here are some things that I think should be changed:
-shorten the invisible range (maybe half of what is now).
-allow NARC to work through the bubble (this would also help to make NARC worth taking)
-Keep the counter ECM the way it is (as in it can counter from farther away than it can disrupt)

There need to be tweaks, and there will be tweaks (this was announced in the patch notes), but I think that PGI needs to wait a little longer and collect more data. When the FOTM aspect wears off things ma look different.

[Vasces Diablo]

A lot of people are gonna be unhappy when they read the last section of this.....

http://m.pcgamer.com...st-mode-release

[steelblueskies]

stjobe, on 14 December 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

Let's have a look at that list, shall we?
But first, let's see what a Guardian ECM does in TT:



Let's also remember that in MWO LRMs are guided weapons (they are unguided ballistic weapons in TT).

So, let's go over that list:

Artemis - "Affected systems include Artemis IV"
BAP - "A Guardian can jam a Beagle Active Probe"
TAG - Outside 180m it's the hard counter to ECM, I don't know why you mention it in this list?
NARC - "Affected systems include [...] Narc Missile Beacons"
other ECMs - "Designed to interfere with guided weaponry, targeting computers, and communication systems"
LRM locks - LRMs in MWO are guided weapons, "Designed to interfere with guided weaponry"
SRM locks - Streaks are guided weapons, "Designed to interfere with guided weaponry"
general targeting info - "Designed to interfere with [...] targeting computers, and communication systems"
relegate AMS to almost pointlessness - Really? Last I checked AMS still works as well as ever against missiles.
have no exploding ammo - Irrelevant.
generate no heat - Irrelevant.
cost less than a module by a factor of 15 - this might actually be an issue. ECM should probably cost a bit more.

So that list boils down to two items once you understand that there are some differences between TT and MWO:
1. TAG, should it be affected inside the bubble or not? At the moment I'm leaning towards yes, it should, since it's the hard counter to ECM outside it.
2. ECM might be too cheap.

1- artemis. affected the ec system in the missiles or the ec system on the firing mech, whichever was inside or passing through the guardian bubble. note that firing srms while in an ecm bubble or into an ecm bubble should be negating your tight spread as well, but isn't.

2- bap. can neutralize baps range increase vs affected units while making the bap equipped unit aware of the issue at range, neutralize its hidden unit detection radius(ie stealth/powerdown/nolos radius of four hexes) or neutralize the system completely if equipped unit inside the guardian bubble.

3-tag. aside from being equipment, not a weapon for anything beyond a single point of infantry, it's certainly a countermechanic.
the problem here is that it is now classed as an energy weapon, and that it is supplanting the mechanics of a proper implementation of indirect fire. not to mention 450-200=250m 250m/120kph and the time to encapsulate a tagging unit and cut it off with an ecm carrier is now well below the lock plus flight time for missiles, and worse, well below the time to get inside lrm min distance if tagging unit is also lrm firing unit.

4-narc. the beacon is the system more or less, and when inside the bubble suffers the worst side of the ecm effects at all times.

5- counter ecm. the rock>rock argument. also 360 like disrupt mode, but unlike all other sensor systems here.

6-lrm locks. an artificial whole cloth creation that is not only wrong, but breaks indirect fire vs direct fire rules, and basic mechanics, especially when combined with self guided as the default munition. a toggle mode switch with different rules and mechanics for direct vs indirect fire with an eye to future ammunition types and upgrades is needed. not to mention flight trajectories. arguably too much time was spent getting what ultimately should have been a placeholder system "tuned".

7- ssrm. explicitly left off the table until angel ecm, which counts as 2 guardians in disrupt. in other words you'd need two guardian ecm's in counter to beat one angel ecm in disrupt mode, and one angel in counter could beat two guardians in disrupt. see there was a method to the madness in the rules.

further on your citation. targeting computers are a specific piece of equipment that explicitly improves direct fire weapons accuracy, not missiles. the point that should be clear is your ever increasing ballistic and energy performance should be seen as lining up the systems so they can be innacurate in a controllable and predictable manner and affected by other new tech not yet in, not as a flat and permanent buff to twitch accuracy with direct fire. if you continue to glaze over the implicit result of the details, then when the tech and implementation swats your "leet" twitch direct fire skills finally, you will cry hard. get it all right the first time instead, rather than advantage grabbing.

you also missed how it disables more than half the piloting modules effects unless the ecm is countered out first. target info gathering, sensor range, 360 target tracking.


so that alone is what 6mill+2 mill+4mill cbills and around 30k gxp. so 12 million cbills and ~30k gxp worth of piloting modules??? add in the weapon hardpoint neutering of needing tag to try to counter it and buffing tag(so its even nastier when no ecm is present to boot) and that's actually a pretty bad scenario just to work around the rift between los locks and sensor locks, while going beyond it's intended functionality.

i will agree it should interfere with things passing through the bubble. but then, as noted by others, the implementation at present is not compatible with the requirements for adding future tech and systems, and is even incompatible with many of the implementations now, and that without delving into the performance and game engine issues that complicate it further.(low setting object detail mechs become visual targets at half the range of high setting for example).

if the game as it stands now, was all that would be, and we did not have a guidebook for other features and functions from the franchises' canon, then sure one could suggest how to retool it for right now only. plenty of people are doing that, and frankly after hitting this issue i find i've made assumptions about missing features and tech coming down the pipe when redressing past issues.

but no longer. a tag range increase is a bandaid and a bad one for the future. ostensibly ecm data should be collected and the system pulled or cut back, whichever is easier until more of the other systems come online. ams should be made to work properly vs all missile types. impulse rocking added to the accuracy of all weapons instead of a purely cosmetic visual effect, and added to the firing of all weapons as well in a rational fashion. then lock ons for ALL weapons to increase accuracy of fire come online. the netcode gets repaired so matches with fast movers do not always resemble
.
the direct fire of long range missiles without guidance, and the same for indirect fire gets worked.
and giving a few days to the ecm impact of each. then when we have the basics covered we go full on ecm and try to work it. at that point we might not need to change much with it, even if it's not quite canonical. until then however its presenting completely inconsistent experiences, and rarely proving a positive element without both luck and skill lending a hand.

[Tex Arcana]

"Specialized Mechs still have their place on the battlefield but they are going to need the assistance of their teammates to succeed. If you plan on taking specialized Mech into a match, plan wisely and have alternate weapon systems that will help you with mid to long-range combat. People are thinking we need to severely 'nerf' the ECM. This is not the case at all. There is already 1 counter-ECM item in the game (TAG), and likely there will be a couple more involving modules and weapon effects."
Sorry Paul. Thou doth faileth.
Apparently using LRM's make a Mech "Specialised".
What a load of bs.
Taking LRMs into a PuG is nearly pointless now.
And if You want to see specialisation that has gone crazy: How many Mechs are now BRAWLING Specialised since the introduction of ECM?
I know I have removed LRM's from my Mechs; I tried packing an LRM15 in my SP; but after 10 PuGs in a row where I came out with less than 50% of my LRM ammo used (I don't use the 75% reload; I like packing plenty of sandwiches); I gave up.
Better to have twin SRM 6's these days.
Add to that the fact that Conquest mode is going to be just another take on the "chasing an invisible tail" scenario.
"Light, fast Mechs will have the ability to swing the tide of the game while the heavier Mechs have the ability to defend and hold points behind their defensive lines. The brawler medium or heavy Mechs will mostly be fighting it out over contested collection points."
PuGs are heading toward 100% Brawl already...so what is going to be different? Not much.

Edited by Tex Arcana, 14 December 2012 - 12:36 PM.

[Tolkien]

From that article:

Quote

People are thinking we need to severely 'nerf' the ECM. This is not the case at all. There is already 1 counter-ECM item in the game (TAG), and likely there will be a couple more involving modules and weapon effects."

So he's saying they don't need to nerf ECM, but the TAG that they will be buffing and the new PPC effects, and some modules will work against ECM.

Seems like he's saying it won't be nerfed out of one side of his mouth, but saying that it will be nerfed by buffing/adding to its counters.... hoookay.... last Candian I knew who talked out the side of his mouth like this was Jean Chretien, and he had a medical condition.

P.S. I am Canadian

I think I'm going to take a break from the forums for a while - now that the lead of the project has stated that the future slightly nerfed (even if he's not going to admit it's getting toned down) ECM is going to look like what is in the game now, there's no point in trying to explain the "this thing does too damn much for what it requires" point of view.

I hope that the game turns out better than I can possibly imagine, with or without he current ECM.

Edited by Tolkien, 14 December 2012 - 12:57 PM.

[Garrath]

Ok well finally we at least have proof that their intention is to make a completely one dimensional brawler game. They should entirely remove the forum sections relating to so called 'role warfare' and stop pretending. Also they've already said what the tag 'buff' is, extending the range.

On the upside to all this, the mech selection process is a lot simpler and there's no need to buy more than the ECM capable variants, if you bring anything else into conquest you're a detriment. We will have to see if they release the stalker that is supposed to have ECM, that would add one mech worth having, maybe.

[Lupus Aurelius]

“I also asked Inoye if Piranha is happy with the recent implementation of the ECM (electronic counter-measures) system to MWO, which allows some mechs to equip radar and lock-on jamming equipment. "The effect [of ECM] is working as intended and forces players to play a lot smarter," he said. "Specialized Mechs still have their place on the battlefield but they are going to need the assistance of their teammates to succeed. If you plan on taking specialized Mech into a match, plan wisely and have alternate weapon systems that will help you with mid to long-range combat. People are thinking we need to severely 'nerf' the ECM. This is not the case at all. There is already 1 counter-ECM item in the game (TAG), and likely there will be a couple more involving modules and weapon effects."”
PCGamer, 14th Dec 2012 | 19:55

We have had a variety of posts that pretty much say the same thing, so I will omit the background details. It has been clearly established that Guardian ECM implementation in MWO DOES NOT match Guardian ECM from TT, and that instead represents a synthesis of Guardian ECM, Angel ECM, and Null Signature Armor, at a minimum.

Added to this has been the relation of the effects it has been having on gameplay, mostly negative statements, involving a lessening of tactics that revolve around base rush under ECM cloak or turtling under ECM cloak. In 8v8, this is accompanied by a trend to maximizing the use of heavy numbers of Atlas D-DC with ECM, pretty much weighing bouts heavily towards whoever has the most ECM and assaults will most likely win. Under those circumstances, a sole light with a tag will not be able to stay on target with tag long enough for missiles to impact without becoming an easy target, and if a squad tries to push in with less ECM than the opponent, will not be able to counter ECM.

Added to that, the features that replicate Null Sig would actually require alot of crits, and would generate heat, and you have all the advantages of that system with none on the drawbacks.

All of this has been amply covered in the preceding 84 pages. For it’s weight an functionality, it totally wipes out the checks and balances crafted in BattleTech so as to give, not only counters, but disadvantages to use of the multiple ECM packages that currently are contained in 1 system that weighs 1.5 tons and takes up 2 crits of space. And Paul Inoye’s response –
“People are thinking we need to severely 'nerf' the ECM. This is not the case at all. There is already 1 counter-ECM item in the game (TAG), and likely there will be a couple more involving modules and weapon effects”
-is astounding on several levels. It totally ignores all the above points, ignores and does not address at all any of the issues brought up.

More importantly, was this response here on the forums? Was this response to the community? NO, IT WAS IN PCGAMER MAGIZINE. It addressed none of the concerns, it does not address what it has done to gameplay. Instead it minimizes to the outside public the obvious concern that players in this community have.

There has been data and input from this community as to how ECM has been implemented in MWO by this community, combining all the posts and you have hundreds of pages of input, with a clear indication that ECM is currently overpowered. Paul, we deserved a response here on the MWO forums, we deserve a response that actually addresses concerns, we deserve a response that actually tells us what will be done to balance ECM in MWO, and what the short term and longterm solutions are.

This may be beta, this may be F2P, but you have asked us to give input to balance the game. We have done so. If you are going to minimalize it, ignore it, mis-represent it to the public, why should we even continue to support MWO?

Edited by Lupus Aurelius, 14 December 2012 - 02:09 PM.

[Not a Number]

You pretty much said it, man.

[StalaggtIKE]

Lupus Aurelius, on 14 December 2012 - 01:21 PM, said:

It has been clearly established that Guardian ECM implementation in MWO DOES NOT match Guardian ECM from TT, and that instead represents a synthesis of Guardian ECM, Angel ECM, and Null Signature Armor, at a minimum.

I can live with this. However, I feel that if it is going to function at this capacity, it should have a cost and penalty that reflect its abilities. I know for one that Stealth Armor generates 10 heat. Also the Angel ECM functions as two units. Based on TT what should be it's total cost to equip and use?


Edit: List of some of the technologies and disadvantages that MWO's ECM mimics.

• Stealth Armor:

  Quote

  BattleMech Stealth Armor provides as much protection as standard armor. It takes up two critical slots in each arm, leg, and side torso. To work, it also requires the 'Mech to carry a Guardian ECM Suite. When active the system builds up 10 heat points, and is affected as if it is in range of an enemy ECM Suite. The Stealth Armored BattleMech cannot be a secondary target while the system is active.
  
  
• Null Signature System:

  Quote

  The null signature system features heat baffles that mask the 'Mech's heat sinks and reduce its infrared signature. However, the baffles restrict the normal venting of heat, meaning the 'Mech generates an additional 10 points of heat while the system is active. The null signature system also incorporates a phased-array sensor system and a sheathed directional communication beacon. Therefore, a 'Mech with this system may not mount any special Targeting and Tracking Systems (including Targeting Computers, C3 equipment, and C3i equipment) or a Satellite Uplink system. The null signature system does not weigh a significant amount, but does take up one critical slot in each of the BattleMech'***** locations except for the head, for a total of seven critical slots. A critical hit to any of these slots will disable the entire system.

A common theme seems to be heat generation, critical slots being used and a loss of targeting and tracking system.
Source: http://www.sarna.net...te_note-tm206-0

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 14 December 2012 - 01:55 PM.

[Harrison Kelly]

Well, if Inouye and Co. really think that ECM isn't game-breaking, then this along with the realities of the economy have pretty much convinced me that 1) they're very out-of-touch with their playerbase, and 2) they're doing poorly at their job.

And no condescending post from the developer is going to change that.

Go ahead, keep alienating that playerbase. I'm a software developer, a longtime Mechwarrior fan, and have a pretty good working relationship with devs from two companies, so I was willing to be pretty understanding, but I'm sick of PGI's overall unimpressiveness on multiple levels.

[Magik0012]

Just my quick n dirty $0.02

I think ECM should have 3 basic modes and should have some kind of limitation during use..

ECM-Active - basically the current 'Disruption' mode
ECM-Passive - a lower power mode which hides only the ECM mech (scout mode)
ECCM - 'Counter' mode - neutralizes nearby hostile ECM-A/P

Possible limitations:
mech using ECM-A / ECCM can't get missile lock
mech using ECM-A / ECCM has degraded HUD functionality
mech using ECM-A / ECM-P / ECCM can't fire certain types of weapons
(or firing some weapon types temporarily drops/disrupts the field)
spin-up/down time for re-establishing ECM-A / ECM-P / ECCM field or when changing operational mode
mech using ECCM can be seen by hostile radar from 2000+m

Or not.

[Tirick Fire]

I'm torn on ECM frankly. I have no mechs that use it, and I play a lot of CAT's (and no, anyone who has played with me should know I don't hang at the sidelines, hide and rain LRM, my Med Lasers get a lot of use once my bays are dry). TAG is useless against it (despite what it should be). I've been jumped by assault mechs that just don't appear on radar and cannot be targeted. When running direct fire 'mechs like the Cataphract I am having a lot more fun, but it really makes my Founders' Cat a wasted bay. I think it is too universal, and should not be shared. I do NOT think every mech should have it - leave it for the scouts, which eventually will be balanced by the fact that they are light, and breakable. Also, 'mechs equipping ECM should not be able to lock fire either. The return signal should get bounced off the shield preventing enemy signals.

Edited by Tirick Fire, 14 December 2012 - 02:22 PM.

[multiplesanta34]

ECM needs to have drawbacks, currently there aren't any. If the drawback isn't weight, then heat perhaps? Maybe have counter, disrupt, and off, settings as trying to fight with it on could be difficult heat-wise. Or, you could break off the stealth aspects into another component and simply have ECM double lock times and scramble your radar in close proximity. I know AMS is pretty much obsolete since ECM was released and that's a shame.

[CatHerder]

Again - the only problem right now with ECM is the blanket effect in Disrupt mode - the Devs pulled this out of a hat because someone misread what "a" BattleTech wiki said the ECM did.

Counter mode does have to be in a blanket because you're countering ALL enemy ECM's in the 180m vicinity. This forces ECM users to spread out, which means that ECM is no longer a blanket under which a wall of 4 assault mechs can advance, nearly unchallenged. Now, having ECMs toghether has the drawback that a single enemy ECM mech can counter all ECMs in range.

Fix that, and the game will be fair and playable for PUGs. As it is, today, I've played a large number of matches and in at most 3, I wasn't the only ECM (Atlas) unit in the group, whilst opfor had 3-4 units (no doubt pre-made groups). 90% of the time, I was the only ECM (if we even had one, because sometimes I swapped out mechs). The true problem with ECM is that now it's an obligation to have it, it's no longer an option.

And since matchmaker doesn't take ECM count into account when picking people for a match, then PUGs are going to get short-stiffed and pre-made groups will have a truly unfair advantage. Take this group I ran into: 3 ravens with ECM running as a group. Couldn't counter because they were all disrupting and counter only knocks off one enemy ECM, so he'd fall back on his buddies' coverage. Those who say that the ECM arms race is bollocks are mistaken: you must have as many or more ECM as the enemy to stand a "normal" chance of winning. Granted, you can win with fewer ECMs, but the chances of that become slimmer and slimmer the larger the ECM-gap between teams.

Again: the only problem I see is the blanket effect in DISRUPT mode. Removing that would, in my mind, make ECM more akin to the role it's supposed to fill: give recon mechs a slight edge so they can scout better or, in the case of the Atlas, give the C&C mech a little more protection.

Cheers...

Edited by CatHerder, 14 December 2012 - 02:49 PM.

[Garrath]

CatHerder, on 14 December 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

Again - the only problem right now with ECM is the blanket effect in Disrupt mode - the Devs pulled this out of a hat because someone misread what "a" BattleTech wiki said the ECM did.

Counter mode does have to be in a blanket because you're countering ALL enemy ECM's in the 180m vicinity. This forces ECM users to spread out, which means that ECM is no longer a blanket under which a wall of 4 assault mechs can advance, nearly unchallenged. Now, having ECMs toghether has the drawback that a single enemy ECM mech can counter all ECMs in range.

Fix that, and the game will be fair and playable for PUGs. As it is, today, I've played a large number of matches and in at most 3, I wasn't the only ECM (Atlas) unit in the group, whilst opfor had 3-4 units (no doubt pre-made groups). 90% of the time, I was the only ECM (if we even had one, because sometimes I swapped out mechs). The true problem with ECM is that now it's an obligation to have it, it's no longer an option.

And since matchmaker doesn't take ECM count into account when picking people for a match, then PUGs are going to get short-stiffed and pre-made groups will have a truly unfair advantage. Take this group I ran into: 3 ravens with ECM running as a group. Couldn't counter because they were all disrupting and counter only knocks off one enemy ECM, so he'd fall back on his buddies' coverage. Those who say that the ECM arms race is bollocks are mistaken: you must have as many or more ECM as the enemy to stand a "normal" chance of winning. Granted, you can win with fewer ECMs, but the chances of that become slimmer and slimmer the larger the ECM-gap between teams.

Again: the only problem I see is the blanket effect in DISRUPT mode. Removing that would, in my mind, make ECM more akin to the role it's supposed to fill: give recon mechs a slight edge so they can scout better or, in the case of the Atlas, give the C&C mech a little more protection.

Cheers...

Too bad someone with a clue, like you, isn't on the dev team. Put in an application.