1017 replies to this topic

[Volkite]

Capslock is cruise control for cool.
Tell me, what WOULD be the disadvantage, IRL, of taking an electronic warfare suite when the enemy WILL wreak havoc upon you from afar without it?
Why does it need to be a disadvantage?
Are you one of those people who only takes ERPPCs because of the extra heat so it can be more balanced thanks to some arbitrary sense of needing things to have a balancing point.
Do you even Gauss Rifles?

[ICEFANG13]

Because every other thing is balanced by disadvantages, so why would you not want to bring ECM on a mech that can do it? Because I can give a reason for every other thing in game right now.

[Volkite]

Name one REAL disadvantage to the Gauss rifle? Other than making it have half a HP thanks to wet blankets sooking about it being too powerful.
The problem wasn't the Gauss rifle, it's a superior weapon and always was. The problem was the way the K2 was designed. But nobody fixed THAT.

So, back to ECM, did you prefer that the Raidboss and various LRM boats were running rampant as the top dog?
Did you prefer no skill aimbotting for the win, causing suicide bots to go, widespread, across the servers?
Or is a single item, only available on 4 'mechs, SO game breaking so as to make more than just the Catapult a viable 'mech?
And no, the ECM suite does not make only ECM 'mechs viable; their presence allows for more builds than before it was implemented thanks to the added security from the then rampant LolRMs. They are needed, yes, but seriously, back in Battletech TT, I slapped ECM onto most everything I could because of its unrivaled utility.
They are needed but not NECESSARY. If you used a weapon that didn't require a missile lock you'd understand.

BTW I wasn't on the forum complaining about LRMs either, I was raging against the suicide bots and terrible players having a cry over the way the game was broken.

Edited by Merovigian, 29 December 2012 - 06:37 PM.

[ICEFANG13]

Gauss rifles have low HP and can blow up, a mech that uses them, and loses them, will die right afterwords. Its easy to kill a K2 that just lost his armor.

That is a disadvantage, ammo is also heavy.

Now can you name a disadvantage for ECM? Because I can name a disadvantage for everything else in game, and a reason you would not want to bring it. Why would you not want to bring ECM on a mech that can use it?

Edited by ICEFANG13, 29 December 2012 - 06:37 PM.

[Volkite]

Yeah, you can name a disadvantage for everything but your personal strawman badguy component. Big whoop.
Gauss has arbitrarily-designated-to-be low HP because of this kind of pathetic topic. People like you are to blame for that disadvantage. And if you're saying it's easy to rip apart a 'mech that carries a Gauss rifle, then maybe the Gauss Rifle isn't the problem.
And of course ammo is heavy, that's the point to Energy weapons, but they generate heat.
OH WOW DISADVANTAGES.
ECM's disadvantage is that you can only use it on 4 chassis. Now, we all know this chassis. What would a wonderful crusader like you do the moment you see some wretched vile heathen using the devil's tool?
If it's not remove the ECM carrier then I have no words for how styooooooooooopid you must be.
Having an ECM suite is like painting a big sign saying "Priority target" on yourself.

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

ICEFANG, while I agree with you in some way, I think you are looking at this the wrong way. In my opinion ECM should be restricted and compensated in matchmaking, because it is an asset to the team, not an invincible shield (although it might seem like that now). For example if enemy team has ECM, they should not fight a team with no ECM (Clan wars excluded). ECM should also be balanced - max two ECM mechs per team.

As we all know this is impossible to implement right now so I'll just wait and see what happens.

[ICEFANG13]

Merovigian, on 29 December 2012 - 06:46 PM, said:

Yeah, you can name a disadvantage for everything but your personal strawman badguy component. Big whoop.
Gauss has arbitrarily-designated-to-be low HP because of this kind of pathetic topic. People like you are to blame for that disadvantage. And if you're saying it's easy to rip apart a 'mech that carries a Gauss rifle, then maybe the Gauss Rifle isn't the problem.
And of course ammo is heavy, that's the point to Energy weapons, but they generate heat.
OH WOW DISADVANTAGES.
ECM's disadvantage is that you can only use it on 4 chassis. Now, we all know this chassis. What would a wonderful crusader like you do the moment you see some wretched vile heathen using the devil's tool?
If it's not remove the ECM carrier then I have no words for how styooooooooooopid you must be.
Having an ECM suite is like painting a big sign saying "Priority target" on yourself.

So you can't name a disadvantage, got it. I assume you're with me on the ECM is OP crowd. Thanks.

IV Amen, on 29 December 2012 - 06:46 PM, said:

ICEFANG, while I agree with you in some way, I think you are looking at this the wrong way. In my opinion ECM should be restricted and compensated in matchmaking, because it is an asset to the team, not an invincible shield (although it might seem like that now). For example if enemy team has ECM, they should not fight a team with no ECM (Clan wars excluded). ECM should also be balanced - max two ECM mechs per team.

As we all know this is impossible to implement right now so I'll just wait and see what happens.

That is illogical, why not just balance it? I mean sure every mech wants to bring BAP to a match (not as much with ECM around), but not all mechs are willing to make the sacrifice. There is no sacrifice. If it did half of what it does, we would still see a large amount of them used.

Like BAP, everyone should want to run it, but it should be balanced, so you can't add it as the focus of your mech, rather like an afterthought, like BAP. Or it has a role in warfare that means you'll be valuable to the team.

The one thing that is really flawed with limiting ECM per team. We don't do that for BAP do we? Because BAP doesn't counter BAP. ECM countering ECM is foolish and is a really bad system. If ECM wasn't countered, and perhaps just countered some other EW, it would be helpful, but not needed, and not so game changing. ECM shouldn't need to be countered, and the game right now is completely that way. The team with more ECM's wins the ECM match, and that is huge for SSRMs and LRMs, and the ability to relay what to focus fire.

[Volkite]

[Redacted]
And BAP doesn't do diddly squat even in the tabletop's long past. It allows you to detect hidden units in a something-hex radius rather than when right next to them. And hidden units had a massive list of rules and regulations that made it not worth using in the first place for most players.
That's why it's never been a big deal in the vidja, there's not much you can do for it.
And no, ECM is not overpowered. I will never say that, ESPECIALLY if it means agreeing with these statements you make. Doubly so now that you're resorting to flat-out ignoring a point I make and then saying I must agree with you because my statements don't meet your criteria for valid points.

So, what entails a disadvantage to you? Does being targeted as much as the enemy can find you, thus having a short life unless you're actually capable (something I am willing to admit I am not totally) of playing shadow games, count?
So your teammates are in an ECM bubble, when you die they aren't.

>Why not just balance it?
Ok, now since you're the one making the claim, the burden of proof lies upon you. How, pray tell, noble erudite, do we 'balance' ECM?
inb4 it does nothing.

Edited by Niko Snow, 31 December 2012 - 11:48 AM.
Code of Conduct

[ICEFANG13]

I've offered facts why everything asked of me is balanced with some disadvantages, you cannot for ECM. It is unbalanced. This is not COD, no matter how badly you may want that. Things in this game have disadvantages and reasons to use them and to not use them.

If I were to balance ECM, I would make it counter all electronic equipment currently in game (TAG, NARC, BAP, Artemis, anything else I forgot), and have it effect teammates within 180 (to encourage teamwork), and have it jam at least 2 (so that bringing more than the enemy team isn't an auto-ECM), and probably slightly increase SSRM and LRM lockons, so that it makes it easier and beneficial to move with ECM cover..

[Volkite]

So wait, I can see you've actually put thought into your idea, good on you.
However, some of your ideas are not right; TAG in particular shouldn't be affected. Tag being a targeting laser, not a passive electronic device. It functions to give a tight-beam firing solution for LRMs and Streak SRMs, and as such a 'mech with ECM won't be able to scramble it unless the 'mech was using the ECM to power a Stealth system. The laser is a "What I'm looking at! Shoot it!" Beacon.

It's also meant to screw up C3 networks. How would you implement C3? I would implement it with the same kind of pre-ECM everyone-in-the-unit-can-target-each-others'-seen-foes function we had as standard before.
I'm glad that such an easy way to play is finally not guaranteed anymore.

And having more countermeasures always does mean you out-countermeasure the enemy. Be thankful that, in anticipation for abuse, the system only ever allowed one suite and thus one layer per 'mech carrying it.
You're making some ideas, but they are not good enough. Negating NARC, BAP, ARTEMIS is a good thing. Streaks could also stand to be stopped in their track. Again, Raidboss online was terrible.
And as for the nature of our auto-shared targeting, it just feels like C3 to me.

And again, I have offered a disadvantage ECM gives. Nothing exists within a void, so being a carrier makes you a high priority, and therefore an early kill unless your enemy is bad and you're not (in which case, ECM is the far from the worst of their worries). If dying before you can contribute in a meaningful manner is no disadvantage, then you and I have different ways of tallying the advantages.

[Dirus Nigh]

DocBach, on 27 December 2012 - 09:32 PM, said:

Copy pasting this write up a lot tonight


List I made on what I think Information Warfare should look like in the game from a different post:
SNIP stuff on EW that I agree with.

DocBach this is very close to how I think the EW equipment should work in the game.

[StalaggtIKE]

@Merovigian: If your whole team is able to focus on a speeding light ECM mech without sacrafise, then you're battling bads. I am really looking forward to phase 3 matchmaking. There are too many pug stomping heroes with success stories.

[ICEFANG13]

That disadvantage makes no sense. Its like saying that every ECM mech starts off dead, and the team with less ECM wins. So ECM mechs are the priority target? What about 8 mans that literally run with 8 ECM mechs? All of your ECM is worthless (unless you have 8), because they can counter them all, and then have some left over. This is a complete arms race, and nothing else in game works like it.

Streaks should be stopped in their tracks? Why? There is no logic to this? Streakcats are a problem? That mech is full of disadvantages, ECM makes a half streak cat you cannot streak back (Commando-2Ds).

You can't tell me that it should do this, this and this. Why should it not effect TAG? Because that makes no sense? Sorry, neither do LRMs that can only fire 1000 meters. Neither does ECM effecting your electronics outside of its area of effect. Not everything in game is perfect on real life, and neither is it for TT. In TT, ECM did nothing close to what it does. There is no real life reason or TT reason to have it balanced like you said, or like how it is. I balanced my way, for pure balance. It does something, but can do nothing as well. Its effects are balanced for its weight, and its desirable but not amazing.

Edited by ICEFANG13, 29 December 2012 - 08:03 PM.

[steelblueskies]

i'm glad this merovigian(couldn't get a lol matrix direct merovingian??) actually took the time to learn exactly what each bit of equipment actually is. like tag is "just a laser", which while partially accurate, only covers the designator system used in some forms. if i click on a mech image in my viewscreen to mark it instead of fire a laser at it, this universes tag functionality would treat it the same, so long as i had means of passing the data to others as well, say via c3. in fact the rules for a c3 master unit grant it tag functions without the laser designator explicitly.

see when you read enough about the universe to properly understand it's mechanics, you can either throw them to the wind, or, y'know, respect those mechanics.

ecm wasn't a be all end all.
it also wasn't available to everyone at this point.

double blind rules cover all the standard mech sensors and their ranges, as well as the effect of every ew/stealth system on each sensor type and upgrade.

lock on as a fix for indirect fire is a broken mechanic. it needs to be redone.

lrm speed needs to be fixed. ams consequently needs to be retuned around the new lrm speed. lock on via ir sensors at greater than radar range needs to be implemented, but only when using thermal vision. with radar range locks only with standard.

target information detail levels need to be cut down for basic locks, cut down to dirt for ecm affected locks, and scaled up for improved sensor system locks. bap would give you much better than the color code, it owuld specify revealing the enemy units mech datasheet including damage tracking bubble by bubble. plain visual lock and information ranges are also covered and modified by weather, smoke, range, etc.

still not sure where to fit magscan and mech seismic sensor modes. tha latter is only 90m so might be worth baking in full time as a 360 sensor type, that only gives a map point, not a target with greater or lesser degrees of target info.

and lets not forget, you should be suffering targeting accuracy loss with direct fire when affected by many ecm/ew systems.

can you mech no longer properly compensate for recoil/firing heat/lens focusing to a target at a given range because of ecm? if not this only further underscores the lock on system is a nasty core culprit problem begging to be put to sleep and replaced with a proper direct fire and indirect fire system.

ssrms get left then. honestly they should simply be fire if will hit, eat cooldown if fired when will not hit. sadly with the state of the game, i think this will 1- leave them unused as they will frequently just go on cooldown instead of firing(with all the server-client disagreement and leading targets making them generally junk. it was ammo conservation, not magic bullets), 2-leave fast machines in a more prolifically nasty place if collision, knockdown, clientside movement prediction, and the netcode that drives it all don't get some upgrades online.

i say all these things, as without them it leaves little room for many bits of tech to come. it also continues a broken line between direct fire and missile systems. some people will enjoy anything. battletech, and its subsidiary franchise mechwarrior are not "anything" they are a specific combination of things. you can fudge the specifics fairly well so long as you do it in a consistent fashion and maintain the spirit of the thing. when that goes, you no longer deserve permission to use the title.

"[color=#959595]And again, I have offered a disadvantage ECM gives. Nothing exists within a void, so being a carrier makes you a high priority, and therefore an early kill unless your enemy is bad and you're not (in which case, ECM is the far from the worst of their worries). If dying before you can contribute in a meaningful manner is no disadvantage, then you and I have different ways of tallying the advantages."[/color]

by dropping in one you determine what any enemy team will focus first, instead of it depending on what their setup and array is most vulnerable to specifically? so you just argued that it IS the most hazardous thing on the field, because it must be focused first irregardless of other factors. that's a pretty big advantage you are putting out there. unless you were deliberately feeling the zen of the logical fallacy as a weapon when presenting that method of argumentation?

[Volkite]

8 mans that run 8 ECM 'mechs are only gonna fight 8-mans. Synch drop more.
Not syaing it's dead at the start, I'm saying you gotta play different because if you go into the fray with that ECM marker... You might be a red neck.

The raidboss may have been full of disadvantages on paper, but why then was it so common and successful?
And I'm agreeing on your idea to make it disrupt BAP, ArtIV, and NARC, which it does.
But saying it needs to allow missile targeting to the point it was before is basically saying to take it out. Also, taking TAG out of the picture is a superfluous change that invalidates TAG two ways; missile locks can be achieved without it despite ECM, and it won't work when it's needed anyway.

EDIT
@SteelBlueSkies:
Newp, I went by the French royal dynasty name, not how the Matrix spelled it, but I like your reasoning.
Also, yes. It is the most hazardous piece of equipment out right now, or at least, if you read the 9001 threads about it being so you could easily think so.
I see about as much in-game messages saying "OHNOES ECM KILL IT" as I did with whatever the OP of the previous patches were. It's this patch's boogeyman. I'm not saying it needs to stay as it is, I'm saying it's a good piece of equipment. And I am very aware of my bias toward it since TT. Funny thing is I don't use it on any of my 'mechs other than a Raven... which deserves that awesome electronic warfare capability seeing as before it was nothing of the sort.

Indirect fire has always been a terrible thing when it comes to accuracy, and in this game we get it immediately with no loss in fidelity and accuracy unless they step out of LOS. Which, if you were using a brawler wouldn't happen... but good luck with that in Trench warfare online.

Edited by Merovigian, 29 December 2012 - 08:23 PM.

[DeaconW]

Rocket2Uranus, on 27 December 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

.
ECM OP? No.

It's only unfair when your team has no ECM and the enemy has some.

These two sentences are contradictory. Respectfully request you make up your mind.

[ICEFANG13]

Why does ECM run so commonly and successfully? Because it has no disadvantages.

ECM countering TAG for balance allows mechs to run towards a LRM mech with TAG equipped and not die, otherwise, it could completely overpower whatever run to it. 8 mans are a perfect example of balance, before ECM, who would run 8 gauss cats, 8 streak cats, 8 SRM-6 cats? No one, because that doesn't work, as they have (wait for it) disadvantages. 8 mans are all about the ECM, and that shows how OP it is.

I have first hand seen ECM lights run into the fray and not die, because not every mech is immediately aware of it being there. They are immune to streaks, and LRMs that would have killed it if it ran straight to you like it can.

[BerryChunks]

A tag will get your missiles a target lock even if your comp is out of range or ECM jammed, so no.

I'll post a SC if you want. Running Tag+LRM 15 and the missile lock appears on an ECM atlas even when I cant actually target them hammering R.

I had a lot of success last match hammering slow atlases that were carrying ECMs with ER laser and ER ppc in addition to the clean fast locks of TAGging. Just sayin.

Edited by BerryChunks, 29 December 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[Marcus Tanner]

MadaO, on 28 December 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

They said ECM would be a "Game Changer". Indeed, i could not agree more. I am currently installing Hawken, have AVA and Planetside2 on my list too. Gonna finish up X-COM and check out some of the exciting new mods for Skyrim.

I'll probably be getting games of the tabletop in before the next patch instead of playing this.

---

When I have a good ECM-equipped spotter or a spotter good at finding stragglers I do just fine in terms of kills and stuff, but my Atlas D-DC can't be making other people enjoy the game any more. PUGing just isn't worth my time and I won't go within gauss range of 8v8 games (they look about as healthy as a Double Down sandwich).

[StalaggtIKE]

steelblueskies, on 29 December 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

by dropping in one you determine what any enemy team will focus first, instead of it depending on what their setup and array is most vulnerable to specifically? so you just argued that it IS the most hazardous thing on the field, because it must be focused first irregardless of other factors. that's a pretty big advantage you are putting out there. unless you were deliberately feeling the zen of the logical fallacy as a weapon when presenting that method of argumentation?

This. Time and time again, these pug stomping heroes keep claiming ECM's weakness is being a priority target. No, sh*t! That's just proof of how broken the ECM system currently is.