Jump to content

Ecm Abuse


104 replies to this topic

#101 Bguk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 1,159 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:13 AM

View PostJakob Knight, on 11 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:


This is an example of how those who are defending ECM simply don't know what they are talking about. Besides the fact that there is no reason to bring up 18th century support weaponry, in canon, Guardian ECM does not stop Streaks from working, and no ECM system prevents an enemy from locking onto a target or the use of standard LRMs in the slightest.

And, I find it interesting that the people screaming 'adapt' (who have already proven they can't earlier in this thread) are the same ones who cried a river that they couldn't cope with LRMs, even with thread after thread proving that all they had to do was take one of many counteractions to do so.

No, the people who are defending ECM are simply children who don't want their new candy taken away. And nothing else.


Didn't they stop going strictly by canon when they veered away from the tt rules?

Before making sweeping statements about those defending it you should know some facts. Not everyone defending ECM plays it. I still have not loaded up an ECM module in any of my mechs yet still defend it. Am I the only one out there? No. Is there a certain percentage out there that has found a new toy and doesn't want it taken away? Of course. It's like if I said the only people wanting to take away ECM from the game are little children who want their SSRM/LRM love boats back, and nothing else. Sweeping statements solve nothing.

#102 Jakob Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,286 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:23 AM

View PostBguk, on 11 December 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:


Didn't they stop going strictly by canon when they veered away from the tt rules?

Before making sweeping statements about those defending it you should know some facts. Not everyone defending ECM plays it. I still have not loaded up an ECM module in any of my mechs yet still defend it. Am I the only one out there? No. Is there a certain percentage out there that has found a new toy and doesn't want it taken away? Of course. It's like if I said the only people wanting to take away ECM from the game are little children who want their SSRM/LRM love boats back, and nothing else. Sweeping statements solve nothing.


They did, yet the people who keep bringing it up to support their view don't seem to bother reading the material they are pushing out as proof they are right.

Regardless, the point remains that those who harp the loudest to 'adapt' are the ones who couldn't when it was their turn to do so. I have and do change my own tactics and configurations to the situations I face, but that doesn't mean that everyone can, nor that the changes are what should be required.

I am not against ECM, but I am against it in it's current form. Right now, it does far too much and locks out two weapons systems from the game. The counter system is nullified by the ECM system itself, and the models with ECM so out-class the ones without that they might as well not even be in the game. All of this is fact, not opinion, not just from canon sources (if one wishes to use that as their justification) but from the perspective of what the Devs themselves have said are supposed to be the Roles that each player can expect to be equally important in their game (if one wants to cite MWO apart from canon).

The -only- way you can defend ECM in its current form is if you have blinders on (willingly or unwillingly), or have an agenda that is completely focused on power gaming for yourself. So, yes, I think the analogy is not far off at all.

#103 MaddMaxx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 5,911 posts
  • LocationNova Scotia, Canada

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:47 AM

I jumped ahead but how about this as a solution to the issue of ECM Mechs in #'s doing base caps.

No Mech with ECM can reduce the CAP point bar. They may aid another, but if they possess ECM, they do not count against the count down timer. Thus 3-4 ECM Mechs are wasting their time standing around in the enemy base.

Certainly would add a new downside to ECM that currently does not seem to have enough. ;)

Edited by MaddMaxx, 11 December 2012 - 09:48 AM.


#104 Jakob Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,286 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:53 AM

View PostMaddMaxx, on 11 December 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

I jumped ahead but how about this as a solution to the issue of ECM Mechs in #'s doing base caps.

No Mech with ECM can reduce the CAP point bar. They may aid another, but if they possess ECM, they do not count against the count down timer. Thus 3-4 ECM Mechs are wasting their time standing around in the enemy base.

Certainly would add a new downside to ECM that currently does not seem to have enough. ;)


I'm not sure that would be a good idea, as we don't have a clear idea what the Dev's intent on ECM is. If it is ment primarily as an immunity shield from LRMs and SSRMs, then you would have a good suggestion. If, on the other hand, the idea is to give scouts better stealth to do their jobs, and flanking a force to cap the base is part of that job, then that suggestion would work against the entire point of ECM. We'll need better word on what the Devs were thinking when they put in ECM to say one way or the other, but I'd still think the most damning thing about ECM right now is that it completely shuts down two weapons systems and its supposed counter system, and this wouldn't correct that situation.

#105 Dakkath

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,980 posts
  • LocationG-14 Classified

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:54 AM

Closing this thread as its a duplicate thread about a subject that has a dedicated feedback thread which we are shuttling users to.

Please use this thread for further ECM discussions, we appreciate it VERY much. ;)

http://mwomercs.com/...4-ecm-feedback/





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users