Jump to content

If Ecm Did Not Affect The Mech It Was Deployed On..


9 replies to this topic

#1 HighlandCoo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 772 posts
  • Locationbehind you

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:33 PM

I don't own an ECM mech, so I don't know if you actually get any C-Bill/XP for assiting others whilst it is active.

But does anyone think it may be a good idea your mech is not affected by the ECM that is mounted on your chassis?

Reasons
- Light mech with ECM mounted is god-mode (bit of an overstatement.. but got your attention!), too fast to hit with normal weapons via lagshield, ECM prevents being hit with locking weapons.

Meh just a thought :lol: have at it!

#2 Mercules

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 5,136 posts
  • LocationPlymouth, MN

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:38 PM

View PostHighlandCoo, on 17 December 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

too fast to hit with normal weapons via lagshield


If this were true you would have a point.

#3 Penance

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,802 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:39 PM

not a good idea. then you'd definitely see 2+ ecm equipped mechs in every game.

Edited by Penance, 17 December 2012 - 12:40 PM.


#4 Jacmac

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:40 PM

View PostHighlandCoo, on 17 December 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:


But does anyone think it may be a good idea your mech is not affected by the ECM that is mounted on your chassis?



I don't know about the rest of them, but I think it's a silly idea. It will only encourage even more players to run ECM mechs for the overlap so that they can stay in what you like to call God-mode.

Edited by Jacmac, 17 December 2012 - 12:41 PM.


#5 Corpsecandle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 396 posts
  • LocationDenver, CO

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:42 PM

I don't think this is a solution. Essentiall, it paints the ECM carrier as the ONLY target...meaning their life span is a whole 30 seconds...and then everyone else loses ECM

#6 WardenWolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,684 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:48 PM

It would mean even more ECM mechs in-game, and less of the others, because every ECM mech would want to work with another in tandem. You'd have 4 pairs of ECM mechs per side... which I guess isn't all that much different from 8-man games now (they are a mess).

ECM really just needs to be limited to 180m range, like it is supposed to be. It shouldn't block targeting outside of that range, though it should block advanced techy stuff from affecting targets inside the 'bubble'. Its OP right now, and I am really hoping they tone it down.

#7 Penance

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,802 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 12:51 PM

best method of dealing w/ ecm is counters to the counter that counters the counter.

Savvy?

#8 EMonk

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:48 PM

ECM is a broadcast interference system that overlays static on all of the electrical signals that would normally identify a mech, or allow communication with other mechs. Why would that interference not cover the mech that was broadcasting it? Why would something outside the primary broadcast area not be affected by the signal propogation?

The better way to nerf ECM is to have it reduce the sensor strength of friendlies in the area of effect proportional to their distance from the ECM source. The better protected you are from detection, the less capable you are of detecting. The more interference there is the longer it takes for your mech's systems to communicate correctly with your teammates, so you don't get as much battlefield awareness.

I dunno. Regardless, PGI will do whatever suits them to do... probably nerf ECM completely since it confuses the new players.

#9 ReD3y3

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 480 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:06 PM

I feel if they make it so TAG works on ECM mechs regardless of what range you are from them (even inside their 180km bubble) that we will have another valid ECM counter.

If I want to hold my reticule on you to get a lock I should be able to do so. I am putting effort in and have to have Line of Sight.

This will only work for the ONE target I am tagging, with alot of effort being put in by me.

#10 Tilon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 210 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:10 PM

ECM is not a cloaking device. ECM effects enemy mechs within its range.

The problem is that ECM is acting as a cloaking device for friendly mechs. This is complete nonsense.

It's been said over and over: ECM is not a Null Signature System, but ECM is currently acting as an AOE Null Sig system in game.

This is broken, because Null Sig is supposed to have a drawback (Large heat cost in TT) Currently, the absurdly light 1.5 ton ECM system is an AOE Null Sig system with no drawbacks.

Fix it, please.


View PostReD3y3, on 17 December 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

I feel if they make it so TAG works on ECM mechs regardless of what range you are from them (even inside their 180km bubble) that we will have another valid ECM counter.

If I want to hold my reticule on you to get a lock I should be able to do so. I am putting effort in and have to have Line of Sight.


You should be able to get an LRM lock simply by hovering your mouse on them. There is no reason you should have to use TAG (Try holding TAG on a light mech with lag shield, hah!)

ECM is not a cloaking device. ECM should not prevent long range missile locks with direct line of sight.

Have it block indirect LRM fire. For a 1.5 ton system, that and denying R targeting is more than enough value.

Edited by Tilon, 17 December 2012 - 02:12 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users