186 replies to this topic

[Hania]

Codejack, on 20 December 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:

Obviously the system would have to be balanced; the problem right now is that they are intentionally marginalizing an entire weapon system.

ECM was aimed at streaks; sure, it hit LRMs, too, but they've tried to fix that with the TAG change. Not only was ECM never supposed to affect streaks (yea, yea, except Angel, but this isn't Angel!), streaks were never supposed to require lock-on to begin with. Add in the fact that they implemented each tier of each weapon type EXCEPT streaks...

The subtext here is that streaks are gone from any mech that can carry more than 3 of them. I WOULD HAVE HAD A LOT MORE RESPECT FOR PGI IF THEY HAD JUST COME OUT AND SAID THIS.

This ECM acts more like Angel than Guardian, meanwhile I feel they have changed the functionality of BAP away from TT and have essentially made it a sight range extention module. BAP should excel in urban environments in MWO due to its ability to detect hidden mechs but it is actually weakest there. Half the functionality of BAP isn't present in the game (360 degree spotting) and part of it is take up by a multi-million cbill module (360 targeting). Either way it feels awkward that the developers would brush aside all these interesting features on BAP but then go ahead and introduce ECM in a more advanced state then it currently exists in the time line.

As for streak tiers, the IS does not gain access to SSRM4 and SSRM6 variants until 3058. Eight years after the clan invasion, the clans have the technology earlier but it takes 8 years for the Inner Sphere to adapt the research technology from that point.

[verybad]

Definately yes. In TT, they're of relatively equal value, and the BAP can work somewhat as a counter to the ECM. In this it's only advantage is that it can be used by any mech.

Perhaps let it allow you to hold multiple shared locks at the same time, Let you see that there is an ECM carrier at full (1200m?)range, just not get a lock or information on it's type or what it's carrying.

Maybe they'll make it useful for off board artillery if that ever gets in the game *shrugs*

It's got a lot of potential for being useful...but it isn't.

[Jman5]

If you want to create an honest poll, you have to make the choices unbiased. Otherwise it skews the results and the whole thing is rendered meaningless. Also the poll question is highly biased by stating the BAP requires a "much needed buff".

I'm not disagreeing with you, but injecting your opinion into the poll question and subsequent choices makes the whole thing even more meaningless than it already was. A simple: "Should BAP be buffed to do something vs ECM?": Yes, No

[ThunderOverWater]

A BAP mech should be able to lock on to an ECM mech after a delay. ECM should make it harder for a BAP mech to lock, and perhaps negate the BAP's 360 targeting ability. That way, lights can still use cover to break lock and restart the lock delay.

The Streak A1 shouldn't be complete scrap against ECM.


Disclosure: I don't own an A1, but I'm about to get a D-DC. And probably a 3L.

Jman5, on 21 December 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

If you want to create an honest poll, you have to make the choices unbiased. "Should BAP be buffed to do something vs ECM?": Yes, No

That is actually what it says. I skimmed over the rest of the poll's text after I saw the yes/no options. Do you honestly think more people want the BAP as it stands?

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Saying the BAP is trash right now is not an "opinion". It's a statement of very obvious fact, lol.

[Ashnod]

BAP isn't supposed to counter act ECM, it only lets you know your being jammed.. But that was added to all mechs soo.. But I do believe in general BAP needs a little more something.. Just seems underwhelming currently.. Perhaps the ability to target and see mechs behind terrain or buildings could be added.. With front signatures for ECM covered mechs till your actually being jammed?


I mean shouldn't it easily be able to see the mech on the map that's spewing so much in order to jam other mechs?

Edited by Ashnod, 21 December 2012 - 12:24 PM.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Ashnod, on 21 December 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

BAP isn't supposed to counter act ECM

The thing is, the ECM does a lot of crap it isn't suppose to do either. So it's either buff this up to viability or nerf that down to reality.

[Rearick]

ECM is way to overpowered right now. One of my favorite mechs is my Cata with all STREAK SRMs, just one person with a ECM effectively takes me out of the fight completely. My cata model does not even have an energy hardpoint so I can not even equip TAG. With 6 Missle hardpoints and nothing else, swiching all LRM (a totally different play style) or SRMs ruins my game play compaired to one small light item that almost everyone could equip. Give me an effective counter, or degrade me slightly (may longer lock times) but stop taking me out of the fight!

[Bogsveigir]

BAP does not do anything to counter ECM:
http://www.sarna.net...le_Active_Probe

Angel ECM Suite (3052) counts as 2 ECM, so would overpower 1 or equal 2 standard ECMs:
http://www.sarna.net...Angel_ECM_Suite

Countering ECM is in the Tactical Operations (Optional Rules):
http://www.sarna.net...ical_Operations
I don't have my game manuals, so I can't tell you the specifics. What I remember was that only ECM countered ECM completely. TAG counters for only the TAGged mech, and only for missile lock-on. Feel free to correct my memory . . . it's getting blurry, these days.

Edit:
ECCM rules:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/ECCM
Basically, it states the current Disrupt/Counter rules in the game. 1 Disrupt + 1 Counter = Null. 2 Disrupt + 1 Counter = Disrupted. 1 Disrupt + 2 Counter = Null

Edited by Bogsveigir, 21 December 2012 - 02:40 PM.

[r4plez]

pull is biased: do you want cookie? YES, NO choose, there really no point of clicking NO, everyone loves cookies

Edited by r4plez, 21 December 2012 - 02:40 PM.

[Blue Shadow]

Zyllos, on 13 December 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

Here is my feedback on ECM, which adds BAP an ability to detect ECM mechs around you:

"Quote

Honestly, the implementation of ECM seems ok. Just the numbers seem off.

- Make 1 Counter ECM counter all Disrupt ECM in range. I personally think making 1 Counter ECM work against all Disrupt ECM a big one because then it isn't always about fielding more ECMs, but instead using your Disrupt ECM to scout and not run into another equipped ECM mech to be countered and open for locking weaponry. This also doesn't make the Atlas D-DC team (4+ ECMs) just invincible against lock-on weapons because your team didn't decide to take 5+ other ECM mechs. This is really a way to give a reason for a team to take mechs other than ECM but to take at least 1 ECM mech for disruption.

- Make ECM reduce sensor range by 50%, not 75%. ECM is ment for scouting, not keeping certain mechs locked out of firing. Even at 400m sensor range, LRM users will only have 220m worth of workable distance to lock on with missiles while SSRMs will only have 90m.

- Let the BAP display some indication that an ECM equipped mech is within normal sensor range (according to Sarna saying BAP is jammed by ECM but indication is notified). Maybe give BAP users "pings" (kinda like how Thermal Mode shows the ping sweep, which seems like to me PGI is already testing out) so they can spot where ECM mechs are physically at. Once teams start to only take 1 or 2 ECMs, having BAP which gives pings to physical locations could be used to detect where ECM mechs are located at so you could chase the ECM mechs and destroy them with direct fire weapons. Then you might see teams start to take no ECM and work together with BAP users to counter ECM.

- As many have said, fix the issues with hit detection. This will really help out in the department of having light mechs survive a disproportional amount of fire according to their weight. But this is obvious, just extremely important and I am sure PGI is working on."

--------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, i like this especially the first point makes a lot of sense.

Edit; oops didn't quote that very well sorry lol,, pls read the cut and paste bit :-)

Edited by Blue Shadow, 21 December 2012 - 03:34 PM.

[ThunderOverWater]

Bogsveigir, on 21 December 2012 - 02:35 PM, said:

BAP does not do anything to counter ECM:
http://www.sarna.net...le_Active_Probe

Angel ECM Suite (3052) counts as 2 ECM, so would overpower 1 or equal 2 standard ECMs:
http://www.sarna.net...Angel_ECM_Suite

....

ECM in MWO is a lot different than ECM in TT. I'm pretty sure ECM is here to stay, so let's find a way deal with it as it stands: buffing the BAP to have some kind of effect in the MWO e-war game.

BAP is even more pointless with the 360 targeting module available.

[Codejack]

Jetfire, on 20 December 2012 - 08:51 PM, said:

So you want streak boats back badly, I get it... and you want them to not require even so much as a lock on if I read your previous post right. I can just picture playing that game and I am glad the world ends tomorrow morning so it won't haunt me long.

I want the game balanced. How does a device that COMPLETELY neutralizes a weapon system unless you also have that device not absolutely scream, "UNBALANCED" to you? Nothing in the entire history of the franchise even came close to what this device does, and it was deliberately aimed at marginalizing a specific mech chassis.

Let's repeat that for a second: Many of us spent a lot of time earning C-bills, and some presumably even spent real money, on a mech chassis that has been intentionally rendered irrelevant to the game.

Do you have any suggestion for how to fix this? Do you care?

[mekabuser]

ecm at present allows users to sneak right up to enemies. This is due to MWO radar setup which makes ecm OP . The devs threw out the rulebook concerning radar AND ecm so DO NOT quote the damn rules concerning bap.. they are irrelevant.
as I stated above, BAP should have a toggle mode.<active ping> that lights up everything , just long enough so that they are visible on the psuedo radar we have at present.
of course, you expose your position too, but thats the tradeoff.
Would be a huge boost to scouting role, dangerous, but isnt being a scout dangerous inherently ?

[Pygar]

Codejack, on 21 December 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

I want the game balanced. How does a device that COMPLETELY neutralizes a weapon system unless you also have that device not absolutely scream, "UNBALANCED" to you? Nothing in the entire history of the franchise even came close to what this device does, and it was deliberately aimed at marginalizing a specific mech chassis.

Let's repeat that for a second: Many of us spent a lot of time earning C-bills, and some presumably even spent real money, on a mech chassis that has been intentionally rendered irrelevant to the game.

Do you have any suggestion for how to fix this? Do you care?

Here's the rub: Especially since the advent of the Stalker this week, I've seen tons of them using LRMs to fine effect in battles, and I've seen plenty of mechs using streaks...so I don't know what is so broken about your mech, other misile pilots seem to be figuring out ways to cope with ECM just fine....or, if anything I'd like to see the Devs do something with NARC to help instead of BAP. (Encourages team play, and nobody is really doing anything else with NARC from what I see, where a lot of missile mechs have already been using BAP.)

Edited by Pygar, 21 December 2012 - 09:33 PM.

[Operant]

Good idea.

PGI won't do it.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

I like it when people quote the source material to state what the BAP "shouldn't" do, while actively defending this version of the ECM, which does a whole lot more than it does in the exact same material they are quoting. In other words, stupid people. If you don't want the BAP buffed for this reason, then you should want the ECM nerfed for the exact same reason. Take your pick? Don't tell me the BAP wasn't designed for A or isn't suppose to do B when the ECM does all this crap it wasn't designed for nor suppose to either. Get it?

r4plez, on 21 December 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

pull is biased: do you want cookie? YES, NO choose, there really no point of clicking NO, everyone loves cookies

Pointless post is pointless. But I'm thankful for every free bump my thread gets, even if it came from a totally pointless trash post.

[Kasiagora]

I agree with the feeling that items such as the BAP and NARC need buffed. I don't feel like ECM should necessarily be viewed as overpowered. It certainly is a powerful game changer, and it's caused many players to change the way they think and play smarter (Negating all of the ECM/Streak Ravens running around now which don't take intelligence. But I'm not saying that as an insult, that's more like an exploit that will happen with any item in the game. People will find the most effective and efficient build possible at any moment through trial and adaptation, and the game will have to change to curb this. In many games this is an ever evolving dance that never ends between the devs and the players) but I don't think that ECM is something that should be nerfed. Just that everything else has to be brought up to its level.

That's my feeling on the current state of the game without giving a thought to the TT. As much as I love Battletech, it's as they said a long time ago, start with TT and then modify it to work in real time. You know? In tabletop everything has the same cool down rate. That would never work here. Likewise everything in MW:O has to be sculpted to work together. I just want the final product to be a higher tier of equipment through buffing up rather than dumbing down. That said I'd love to play a "Periphery" version where everything is dumbed down, like primitive armor and single use rocket launchers.

Edited by Kasiagora, 22 December 2012 - 12:16 AM.

[Silvertree]

They need to extend the range of TAG to 900m... 450m is short enough that as soon as you tag an ECM group, you're gonna be mowed down in no time. 900m gives your team time to close in and support you, or start hitting them with LRMs. Since TAG is a laser that does no damage, give it the max range of a large laser.

[Codejack]

Pygar, on 21 December 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

Here's the rub: Especially since the advent of the Stalker this week, I've seen tons of them using LRMs to fine effect in battles, and I've seen plenty of mechs using streaks

Yea, a mech that can mount 5 missiles AND 5 energy weapons doesn't have a problem, but the A1 only has missile hardpoints! The C4 only has 2 energy points, and they are in the CT, so you only have 2 slots; 1 LLAS or 2 MLAS, your choice.

Are these mechs for the exclusive use of premades who know that their teammates will have ECM?