2028 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

I'd be fine with ECM if it did what it was suppose to and negate the advanced 3050 technologies such as Beagle, NARC and Artemis. It's stated in the rules that it doesn't affect scanning or targeting computers which is the big thing it does in MWO. Right now per BattleTech rules the 1.5 ton ECM works as well as Stealth Armor and a Null Signature System, both of which weigh much more and have heat drawbacks.

[Big Bad Wulf]

I am sorry but I still do not see how ECM is unbalanced.

1. Only 4 specific mechs can carry it (2 light, 1 medium and 1 assault) - so not everyone can put it in their Mech's - it's limited
2. 180m range bubble, which restricts mobility since everyone has to move with the slowest mech.
3. It announces itself if you are near one. Screen flickers
4. Can coutered with another ECM mech.

I agree with a previous post that the average ecm carrying mech in a drop is 1 - 2 on eitherside and they usually go their own way, for premades it would bepend on who is commanding on how they are employed.

I have come to realize that ECM is the only thing that is working right in this game, Gauss and PPC shots are wacked, LRM damage was reduced, Black Screens, Yellow Screens, being DCed in the middle of a game, FPS Bug, having to restart the client every 5 or so drops so you reduce the possibitiy of being affected by bugs, so forth and so on.

These are the things I would like them to fix as to have an enjoyable playing experience on my part. SSRM's LRMS's ECM are part of the game that I have to adopt to and develop means to overcome them. The Later part is what attacts me to Mechwarrior Online.


Happy Holidays and a Happy, Healthy Prospersous New Year to Everyone!!!

[Vasces Diablo]

Apparently, TAG is going to get a range buff in the next patch as an ECM counter.

So, aside from the fact that TAG takes up a hard point, lets look at how they are deployed:

The area of a circle is (Pi(r squared). (Sorry posting from my phone).
ECM has a radius ® of 180m.
180*180 = 32,400
32,400 * Pi = approx 101,787 sq meters area of effect.

TAG, which is supposedly considered a counter, requires me to hold a single point on a fast moving mech over a long period of time while exposed to fire.

So a counter to a massive AoE, is a single point, prolonged skill shot?

Pls tell me I have something wrong here.

Edited by Vasces Diablo, 17 December 2012 - 11:35 AM.

[p4r4g0n]

Moot point discussing this ... check out new Command Chair post on removal or repair & rearm cost as well as new reward structure.

We also have TDM mode now ... they just call it Assault and Conquest.

Edit: I believe it is moot because an analysis of the new reward structure leads me to the conclusion that PGI will not change ECM since it is working exactly as they intended.

Apologies for the off topic post but thought you guys might want to take a look at the CC post and factor that in your discussion.

Edited by p4r4g0n, 17 December 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

p4r4g0n, on 17 December 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Moot point discussing this ... check out new Command Chair post on removal or repair & rearm cost as well as new reward structure.

We also have TDM mode now ... they just call it Assault and Conquest.

and this makes ECM a moot point?

[Tex Arcana]

I've said it once. And I'll say it again.
ECM has turned most PuGs into close-range furballs.
NOT the Battletech Universe I grew up in. That's for sure.
I'll also say that the primary way to combat it is either get an ECM mech (I have a 3L now. So done), or (in the case of Medium Mechs primarily) equip yourself to (apparently this is not "Specialised by Paul's comment to PC Gamer) Brawl (Both my Hunchies are now short range brawlers. So done).
Seeing way to many matches with one team not having any ECM, and the other team having two or MORE ECM equipped Mechs as well.
And LRM's are so rare now as to be laughable: What should be a primary battlefield weapon (boats or not) has become nigh extinct in PuGs.

p4r4g0n, on 17 December 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Moot point discussing this ... check out new Command Chair post on removal or repair & rearm cost as well as new reward structure.

We also have TDM mode now ... they just call it Assault and Conquest.

That announcement changes nothing in regard to this Topic as far as I can tell p4r4... IJS

Edited by Tex Arcana, 17 December 2012 - 11:07 AM.

[DeaconW]

Marcus Wulf, on 17 December 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

I am sorry but I still do not see how ECM is unbalanced.

Amazing...but OK. I'll try to explain it...again.

Quote

1. Only 4 specific mechs can carry it (2 light, 1 medium and 1 assault) - so not everyone can put it in their Mech's - it's limited

So no one else can get those mechs? Whew...what was I worried about...O yeah... EVERYONE CAN GET AN ECM MECH. Your point has it exactly backwards...because it is so powerful ECM is driving people to those 4 chassis...especially in 8v8. If you are not bringing ECM to any match you are cheating your team. People are not going to keep driving other chassis that keep getting destroyed in matches where the ECM mechs outclass them.

Quote

2. 180m range bubble, which restricts mobility since everyone has to move with the slowest mech.

Again, you are looking at it backwards...it has an effect on tne ENTIRE MAP with it's jamming field. If it only had an effect within 180m I would have much less problem with it. Try looking at it from the OPFOR perspective.

Quote

3.It announces itself if you are near one. Screen flickers

Hmmm...unless the ECM driver is in counter. Also, knowing that something is within 180M of your position is helpful...but not by much.

Quote

4. Can coutered with another ECM mech.

As long as you have +1 ECM on your side you have the following advantages:


Unrestricted use of streaks and lrms
Unrestricted coordination via being able to call out target letters
Superior situational awareness via being able to see the positions of everyone
Superior targetting as they are able to see mech damage*

*Thx to a previous poster for this succinct summation.

Quote

I have come to realize that ECM is the only thing that is working right in this game,

"Right"...I don't think that word means what you think it means...

Edited by DeaconW, 17 December 2012 - 05:09 PM.

[DeaconW]

p4r4g0n, on 17 December 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Moot point discussing this ... check out new Command Chair post on removal or repair & rearm cost as well as new reward structure.

We also have TDM mode now ... they just call it Assault and Conquest.

Edit: I believe it is moot because an analysis of the new reward structure leads me to the conclusion that PGI will not change ECM since it is working exactly as they intended.

Apologies for the off topic post but thought you guys might want to take a look at the CC post and factor that in your discussion.

Thx for posting this. And it is relevant to PGI's overall perspective.

All that post does for me is fuel my worst fears for this franchise...that PGI doesn't really care about the organized units who want true tactical teamplay..they are appearing to only care about the lonewolf PUG game experience and how close to COD they can get it without copyright infringement....sigh. It's almost like I imagine it would be if Ewe Boll made a MW movie...it is just...wrong.

Merry Christmas and Happy Boxing Day from PGI to the PUG's! Units like the one I belong to who long to play balanced 8v812v12 get a lump of coal and you have to pay 250 MC for it...

Someone please explain to me why I crowd funded this again? Sorry...just really disappointed in PGI right now. I would spend so much more real money on this game if they were doing it right...

[Vasces Diablo]

I'm totally okay with ECM preventing indirect fire. That makes sense to me, in or out if the ECM range.

But i have this simple question:

Where in the Table Top rules does it say that if I have line of site on an enemy with ECM (or in the 100k+ sqr meter bubble), that I can't fire LRMs at it?

Also, you should be able to dumb fire streaks.

[Corvus Antaka]

Vasces Diablo, on 17 December 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

I'm totally okay with ECM preventing indirect fire. That makes sense to me, in or out if the ECM range.

But i have this simple question:

Where in the Table Top rules does it say that if I have line of site on an enemy with ECM (or in the 100k+ sqr meter bubble), that I can't fire LRMs at it?

Also, you should be able to dumb fire streaks.

no where. this is probably the biggest issue with ECM right now, and I'm personally unconvinced that TAG/NARC is the way to fix it.

[Garagano]

the current implementation of the ECM is a big flaw in design, and no PGI propaganda talk, like "it is work as intended" can change this fact.
My statement will be supported by the fact that this "game breaking device" will be changed in the near future, immense.

Piloting a non ECM mech, is right now a guarantee to loose a match (especial in a PUG)

[Big Bad Wulf]

Vasces Diablo, on 17 December 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

I'm totally okay with ECM preventing indirect fire. That makes sense to me, in or out if the ECM range.

But i have this simple question:

Where in the Table Top rules does it say that if I have line of site on an enemy with ECM (or in the 100k+ sqr meter bubble), that I can't fire LRMs at it?

Also, you should be able to dumb fire streaks.

Because LRM's need to lock on to the target which ECM disrupts. LRM's should be allowed to fire without lock in TT would be the same as targeting the Hex and not the mech. But how do you implement this?

Streaks do not fire if they do not have a positive lock.

Buffing TAG is not the way to go, NARC is still distrupted by ECM.

The way to go is fixing the netcode so we actually hit what we aim at and bring back collision damage, tripping and falling.

[DeaconW]

I've decided to take this in a positive vice a negative direction. Please pledge/vote in my poll to return ECM to TT parameters. Maybe PGI will listen to MC vice forum posts...

http://mwomercs.com/...ian-parameters/

[Vasces Diablo]

Marcus Wulf, on 17 December 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

Because LRM's need to lock on to the target which ECM disrupts. LRM's should be allowed to fire without lock in TT would be the same as targeting the Hex and not the mech. But how do you implement this?

Streaks do not fire if they do not have a positive lock.

Buffing TAG is not the way to go, NARC is still distrupted by ECM.

The way to go is fixing the netcode so we actually hit what we aim at and bring back collision damage, tripping and falling.

First: yes, I know that MWO works differently than TT rules, but they are a good starting point.

LRMs are supposed to be semi guided at best, there is no "lock on" rule for them in TT. Firing at the hex is basically how indirect fire worked in TT, but as soon as you had line of site, you could fire on an enemy.

Rules also specifically state that Guardian ECM negated the auto hit from steaks, but they could still dumb fire.

Some of the problems with ECM have as much to do with PGIs implementation of LRMs as anything else. ECM should disrupt advance targeting, steaks, and info from mechs in the 100k+ square meter bubble, and that's it.

If I can see you, I should be able to effectively fire LRMs at you.

I agree that TAG should not be considered a counter, and knock downs need to be brought back. NET code fix goes without saying.

[Abivard]

LRM's can be fired without a lock, why are the most outrageous lies and half truths used to support the anti-ecm positions it will only hurt you when folks with a half a brain read it.

Casting pearls again, it is so futile.

[Vasces Diablo]

Abivard, on 17 December 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

LRM's can be fired without a lock, why are the most outrageous lies and half truths used to support the anti-ecm positions it will only hurt you when folks with a half a brain read it.

Casting pearls again, it is so futile.

Can I hit the trigger and missiles will fly from my mech...yes, will they hit anything, no. Is this the first mechwarrior/BT game where ECM completely eliminates the fire support role...yes.

By being literal, you miss the point.

I'm all for ECM, just not this implementation.

[DeaconW]

Vasces Diablo, on 17 December 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

By being literal, you miss the point.

Exactly.

[DocBach]

Vasces Diablo, on 17 December 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

First: yes, I know that MWO works differently than TT rules, but they are a good starting point.

LRMs are supposed to be semi guided at best, there is no "lock on" rule for them in TT. Firing at the hex is basically how indirect fire worked in TT, but as soon as you had line of site, you could fire on an enemy.

Rules also specifically state that Guardian ECM negated the auto hit from steaks, but they could still dumb fire.

Some of the problems with ECM have as much to do with PGIs implementation of LRMs as anything else. ECM should disrupt advance targeting, steaks, and info from mechs in the 100k+ square meter bubble, and that's it.

If I can see you, I should be able to effectively fire LRMs at you.

I agree that TAG should not be considered a counter, and knock downs need to be brought back. NET code fix goes without saying.

Actually, Guardian ECM does nothing against streaks per TT rules. Angel ECM makes it so they lose their lock ability but can dumb fire.

[Vasces Diablo]

DocBach, on 17 December 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Actually, Guardian ECM does nothing against streaks per TT rules. Angel ECM makes it so they lose their lock ability but can dumb fire.

I stand pleasantly corrected good sir.

[Lupus Aurelius]

One of our company members, who runs lights and Cicadas almost exclusively, had an interesting theory about this. LRM's had basically been balanced before ECM, but there was still a significant outcry about streakcats, specifically by the lag shielded lights crowd.

His theory was that PGI could not figure an easy way to balance the issue, so instead they implemented ECM in it's current incarnation. This effectively killed the streakcat, but still allows for an ECM carrying light or Cicada to still utilize streaks, or for that mattter, the D-DC Atlas, for use against light harassers. This also would explain the lack of explanation concerning PGI's stance on ECMs, since they would have to admit that they were unable to come up with a balancing mechanism that would still allow streaks to be useful across the board.

If this is the case, it's one of the worse methods of "balancing" that I have ever seen. Regardless, the merging of Guardian ECM, Angel ECM, and Null Sig armor into a package that is 1.5 tons and 2 crits, with none of the crit space requirements and heat requirements of Null Sig armor is so totally balance changing as to boggle the mind. Also, the mantra of "use TAG", and the TAG buff coming in the patch is ludicrous. The use of an AOE being countered by a direct line of sight system, that you actually have to sacrifice a weapon slot for, and maintaining that TAG on a lag shielded fast moving target, is hardly a balance.

Statements by the whiteknighters claiming that there are more things coming down the road is also ludicrous. Logically, in order to evaluate balance, the counters should have been implemented at the same time as ECM, to allow for evaluation of the balance of those elements. Without the counters, no evaluation is possible. Instead, you have an uber item that will drive gameplay into a few set of tactics and fits that will exploit that capability.