1017 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

StUffz, on 06 January 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Ehm, as soon as you have an enemy marked with TAG, you can hit with LRM even without waiting for a target lock regardless of ECM or not. But your problem is not the ECM on the light but the light mech itself (Assault counter and laggshield).

Untrue, you have to use your own TAG or another person's TAG, and then get the TAG lock, and then wait 4 seconds for radar lock, and then a second for LRM lock, and you have to hold TAG the entire time.

[ExAstris]

ICEFANG13, on 06 January 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

Untrue, you have to use your own TAG or another person's TAG, and then get the TAG lock, and then wait 4 seconds for radar lock, and then a second for LRM lock, and you have to hold TAG the entire time.

If its suppose to work this way, its bugged. You can R a target that just had the TAG sweep over it and start the LRM lock before the animation comes up or the targeting brackets show. However, it still takes the fully delayed time to obtain the lock (2 full seconds or so), and losing TAG at any moment requires you relock from scratch, meaning you're far more likely to lose missiles mid-flight due to a microsecond drop of TAG not being held on your target.

Its insanely hard to pull off against any light mech with half a brain. But incredibly satisfying to stuff 60 LRMs into one that got too cocky or was dropped via sheer skill of TAG application.

Nobody in their right mind would call this a balanced counter. The only counter to ECM is ECM. And even then, you still have to get within 180m for it to work. And you have to give up your ECM for yourself and allies just to counter one enemy ECM. Meaning more is always better.

[ICEFANG13]

Don't forget that having more ECM also gives you a bubble, so in a 8 on 8 brawl fest, and one side is down an ECM, its like they have no ECM.

[Tolkien]

StUffz, on 06 January 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Just for those who aren't strong in math formulas. Does your calculation mean that about 2 mechs with ECM is the break even point for each match to keep the match balanced?

Hi there StUffz,

So far with the data collected (assuming my matches are representative of average PUG games) I can say that the statement: "The team with more ECM will tend to win more often" is true. With the amount of matches collected and following the formula from that hospital death rate document for binary outcomes (win/loss replacing survival/death) I get the 99.99% confidence that the statement is true.

What I am not sure of yet is what the over/under is on it or put another way how often the team with more will tend to win. Right now my data shows the team with more ECMs winning a whopping 80% of the matches, suggesting that the team with more ECM is 4 times more likely to win. I am not yet confident in this figure and it just looks too high, but need more data to be sure.

In terms of 2 being a magic number, it is close to the average of the number you'll tend to run against. Since I was always in an ECM mech in those tests, I'd use the average number on the enemy team which comes out to ~1.6. This means that if you are on a PUG with 2 ECMs you'll tend to do pretty well since on average you will have ECM superiority.

Edited by Tolkien, 06 January 2013 - 03:34 PM.

[Tolkien]

Bad Brad Keselowski, on 06 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

This little set of data represents what you feel. More ECM = win. That's why I mostly drop in a D-DC (I'm a terrible light pilot). But I don't think ECM is that broken as the game makes it look like (Disclaimer: I only speak for PuG-games!). Looking at Tolkien's data - every time they out-ecm'd the other team by 2 or more to zero they won.

Well, have to clear a point up here - the data doesn't show more ECM = win, it shows more ECM(than enemy) = more likely to win. And it's observations, not feelings.

Also, let's be clear on the difference between my feelings and my observations. My feelings on the issue are that ECM does very many good things for 1.5 tons, the same sort of tonnage that gets you an AMS with ammo, or a machine gun with ammo, or a small laser and a heatsink. Frankly I feel ECM is the best item you can get in the game for 1.5 tons/2 slots.

My observations however are what I tabulated there. These indicate that all of these good ECM advantages, and the current mechanic that N+1 ECMs can completely shut down those advantages/benefits for the group that only has N ecms indicates that having N+1 ECMs tends to be a pretty strong advantage.

Edited by Tolkien, 06 January 2013 - 04:20 PM.

[DeaconW]

StUffz, on 06 January 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Sorry for going a bit off topic. I just wanted to correct that LRM is rather a second line weaponry depending on the lineupt of your lances.

I don't think it OT..and I think you over-read my statement about "LRM's being a major part of MW". I agree that they are primarily second line support.

[Team Leader]

Tolkien, on 06 January 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

Latest update to the data collection follows


Methodology is still the same as usual: I drop into PUG games with 1 friend on skype. - He helps me count up ECM on the enemy team during the match.

(Out of curiosity I also tried to count TAG systems on each team to get a gage of how often one can count on having a friendly TAG system around without having to take it yourself - TAGs are harder to count though since I have to notice the beam or get the target info and notice it)
Our side always has 1 ECM since I piloted a trollmando 2D or Craven 3L for the duration of the tests.
13 Games
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 1, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 2, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(2ECM each)
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(3ECM each)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Next 5 games: Done 1 January 2013 All in a craven 3L
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 4, TAG 1, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Next 11 games: Done 4 January 2013 all games in a craven 3L
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:?, TAG ?, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive (Barely saw the other team)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 1, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive (2ECM each)
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes* (we actually had a friendly disconnect but managed to pull it out anyway)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
6 January 2012: With DeaconW as wingman
Us: ECM 4, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
6 January 2012: With Alexei Karnov as wingman\
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 2?, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive




The hypothesis is that the team with more ECM systems will tend to win.

Total Games: 39
Inconclusive Games: 9 - these are games where the number of ECM systems is equal on both teams.
Conclusive games: 30
The conclusive games break down as follows:
Matching expectations: 24
Contradicted expectations: 6
Using the formula given on page 10 of this document: http://classes.soe.u...nter03/h5m3.pdf
I arrive at
Sigma=0.073 which is 2.19 matches,
To reach a neutral outcome (15/15, the results would need to be shifted by 4.11 sigmas),
Assuming the distribution is normal, this gives confidence of 99.99%
In short, the data still supports the statement that the team with more ECMs on it will tend to win.

The small amount of data makes going any further than this with the analysis a bad idea, but so far the data shows that the team with at least 1 more ECM than the other will tend to win 4x more often than the other. To be clear I do not trust this ratio as I haven't done any evaluation of the confidence interval on the standard deviation, and don`t believe I should until I have more data on hand.

Again, I have asked Garth for some data (~1000 random games) and he wrote back that he's at least going to look into it for me, though the odds of it happening seem pretty slim. Either way I appreciate that our community manager is trying to help me out.

WOW! GREAT POST!

[Kemosobe]

It is nice to know that ECM STILL remains broke as hell. The more this game remains this way means the longer me and all my friends will not play it and are actually starting to tell other people to stay away. I used to play this game religiously, now I only log on anymore to see if the game was patched and then to see if that patch un-F'ed ECM.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

Hey Tolkien,

Why don't u run 8v8 fixed premades with always 1 more ECM on one team than the other, then swap to the other team and see how things compare, just to eliminate the skill factor. It's just one more uncertainty in the mix, so I can't really comment on what the data is showing. This might at least show that the team with more ECMs have a statistically greater chance of winning. At least that's the hypothesis I'm presenting. I'd do it but just can't be arsed given PGI's lack of response in this area.

You could even run:
0 ECM vs 1 ECM
1 ECM vs 2 ECM
2 ECM vs 3 ECM

BH

PS: Saw the Hobbit on the weekend. I liked it. It really didn't feel like 3hrs at all.

Edited by Brown Hornet, 06 January 2013 - 08:48 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Tolkien, on 06 January 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

Latest update to the data collection follows


Methodology is still the same as usual: I drop into PUG games with 1 friend on skype. - He helps me count up ECM on the enemy team during the match.

(Out of curiosity I also tried to count TAG systems on each team to get a gage of how often one can count on having a friendly TAG system around without having to take it yourself - TAGs are harder to count though since I have to notice the beam or get the target info and notice it)
Our side always has 1 ECM since I piloted a trollmando 2D or Craven 3L for the duration of the tests.
13 Games
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 1, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 2, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(2ECM each)
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(3ECM each)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Next 5 games: Done 1 January 2013 All in a craven 3L
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive(1ECM each)
Us: ECM 4, TAG 1, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Next 11 games: Done 4 January 2013 all games in a craven 3L
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:?, TAG ?, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive (Barely saw the other team)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 1, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive (2ECM each)
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes* (we actually had a friendly disconnect but managed to pull it out anyway)
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:0, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No
6 January 2012: With DeaconW as wingman
Us: ECM 4, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:3, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 3, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
6 January 2012: With Alexei Karnov as wingman\
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:1, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: Inconclusive
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 2?, Outcome: We Lost Matched Expectation: Inconclusive




The hypothesis is that the team with more ECM systems will tend to win.

Total Games: 39
Inconclusive Games: 9 - these are games where the number of ECM systems is equal on both teams.
Conclusive games: 30
The conclusive games break down as follows:
Matching expectations: 24
Contradicted expectations: 6
Using the formula given on page 10 of this document: http://classes.soe.u...nter03/h5m3.pdf
I arrive at
Sigma=0.073 which is 2.19 matches,
To reach a neutral outcome (15/15, the results would need to be shifted by 4.11 sigmas),
Assuming the distribution is normal, this gives confidence of 99.99%
In short, the data still supports the statement that the team with more ECMs on it will tend to win.

The small amount of data makes going any further than this with the analysis a bad idea, but so far the data shows that the team with at least 1 more ECM than the other will tend to win 4x more often than the other. To be clear I do not trust this ratio as I haven't done any evaluation of the confidence interval on the standard deviation, and don`t believe I should until I have more data on hand.

Again, I have asked Garth for some data (~1000 random games) and he wrote back that he's at least going to look into it for me, though the odds of it happening seem pretty slim. Either way I appreciate that our community manager is trying to help me out.

Nice work. Can you test to see if ECM provides disrupt bubble even while mech is shutdown? Thanks.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 06 January 2013 - 09:17 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Brown Hornet, on 06 January 2013 - 08:47 PM, said:

Hey Tolkien,

Why don't u run 8v8 fixed premades with always 1 more ECM on one team than the other, then swap to the other team and see how things compare, just to eliminate the skill factor. It's just one more uncertainty in the mix, so I can't really comment on what the data is showing. This might at least show that the team with more ECMs have a statistically greater chance of winning. At least that's the hypothesis I'm presenting. I'd do it but just can't be arsed given PGI's lack of response in this area.

You could even run:
0 ECM vs 1 ECM
1 ECM vs 2 ECM
2 ECM vs 3 ECM

BH

PS: Saw the Hobbit on the weekend. I liked it. It really didn't feel like 3hrs at all.

I don't know how feasible this would be. 8 vs 8, typically consist of D-DCs, RVN-3Ls and a couple of snipers (gaussapults).

[Tolkien]

Brown Hornet, on 06 January 2013 - 08:47 PM, said:

Hey Tolkien,

Why don't u run 8v8 fixed premades with always 1 more ECM on one team than the other, then swap to the other team and see how things compare, just to eliminate the skill factor. It's just one more uncertainty in the mix, so I can't really comment on what the data is showing. This might at least show that the team with more ECMs have a statistically greater chance of winning. At least that's the hypothesis I'm presenting. I'd do it but just can't be arsed given PGI's lack of response in this area.

You could even run:
0 ECM vs 1 ECM
1 ECM vs 2 ECM
2 ECM vs 3 ECM

BH

PS: Saw the Hobbit on the weekend. I liked it. It really didn't feel like 3hrs at all.

Hi there,

There are a few reasons I am doing these tests in PUGs, and not testing this in a premade pair of 8 mans. The first is that getting together 16 people to help do any sort of coordinated testing would be a pain. Even when I raided in WoW I never had the stomach to even try to raid lead a 10 man group, let alone a 25 (or 16 here).

Second, in 8 man pre-mades the people will probably have a good amount of experience working together, and as Marcus Wolf suggested the team with the better coordination will probably tend to carry the day. I too would rather be on a team that works well together versus one that is mediocre even with an ECM disadvantage. So rather than deal with this effect on the data I would rather drop into the ankle (sometimes waist, or neck...) deep derp that is PUGging.


Third, I don't want individual mech selections to be too correlated between matches, while if I drop with the same pilots a few times they will probably tend to prefer a few specific mechs each. I'd rather have this factor average away over a big data set.

My ideal data would come from a true observer mode on PUG games, where you can take a look over each team and their individual equipment at your leisure. In this setup I could remove myself from the equation and just collect the data. This is another reason I've asked Garth for some random match outcome/ECM data. Both so I can get a nice big sample set and also so I can remove myself from the games in that sample set.

StalaggtIKE, on 06 January 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Nice work. Can you test to see if ECM provides disrupt bubble even while mech is shutdown? Thanks.

I'll try to remember to do a quick test. I will power down and get my wingman to see if the eye icon still appears over nearby friendlies. I think it powers off when the mech is off (or overheated) but I will try to confirm.

Edited by Tolkien, 06 January 2013 - 11:38 PM.

[Sudden Reversal]

Pan Damonium, on 02 January 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

Easily observed evidence that the majority of players don't feel ECM to be the end-all-be-all is that people, more often than not, will drop in non-ECM mechs. I have yet to be in a single match with more than 3 ECM equipped mechs. With human nature being what it is - we will try to take advantage of any opportunity we have to be more powerful than other players in a competitive setting - everyone, or most of us, would be in ECM mechs if it mattered as drastically as people imagine.

You're right. Not the best comparison.

I run in my Founder's CAT because,

• It was and still is my preferred Mech for my playstyle
  
• Master level in it
  
• Using ECM feels like cheating
  
• Running a Raven with ECM is akin to exploiting
  
• I'm not a scumbag cheating exploiter!

I do own mechs with ECM but I very rarely play them, it makes me feel dirty and I believe is doing this game a disservice.

You can thank people with morals and a good sense of proportion for having any sort of diversity in drops. As it currently stands with ECM and game balance, those that prefer the path of least resistance take it and play ezymode.

[Tolkien]

Sudden Reversal, on 06 January 2013 - 11:59 PM, said:

I run in my Founder's CAT because,

• It was and still is my preferred Mech for my playstyle
  
• Master level in it
  
• Using ECM feels like cheating
  
• Running a Raven with ECM is akin to exploiting
  
• I'm not a scumbag cheating exploiter!

I do own mechs with ECM but I very rarely play them, it makes me feel dirty and I believe is doing this game a disservice.


You can thank people with morals and a good sense of proportion for having any sort of diversity in drops. As it currently stands with ECM and game balance, those that prefer the path of least resistance take it and play ezymode.

I agree with some of your sentiment since my raven 3L does more damage, gets more kills, and lives longer than my founders hunchback ever did, but at the same time I don't know if the problems will be addressed until a critical mass of the playerbase has figured out the the holes.

It might be idealistic to say it, but I hope some day we will have a game where you can take what ever build you feel comfortable piloting/enjoy aesthetically and not feel shut down because there is a lag shielded ECM carrier somewhere within the surrounding hills.

[Sudden Reversal]

I don't even bother targeting a Raven 3L any more if there is another enemy mech within range. It is just a waste of time that will lose you the game more surely than finding another target that can actually be felled.

When in a brawl and one starts wailing on me, I start the internal clock on countdown to my inevitable demise praying that he re-targets to someone else or that I can at least do significant damage/get a kill in to assist my team.

The Raven 3L is an acid grenade that once thrown will eat through your chassis with inexorable doom.

I fail to see how the pilot isn't half bored to death playing it.

[Tolkien]

Sudden Reversal, on 07 January 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

I don't even bother targeting a Raven 3L any more if there is another enemy mech within range. It is just a waste of time that will lose you the game more surely than finding another target that can actually be felled.

When in a brawl and one starts wailing on me, I start the internal clock on countdown to my inevitable demise praying that he re-targets to someone else or that I can at least do significant damage/get a kill in to assist my team.

The Raven 3L is an acid grenade that once thrown will eat through your chassis with inexorable doom.

I fail to see how the pilot isn't half bored to death playing it.

Some of us are bad people, so we play Craven 3L's :/

My new favourite saying is "the raven 3L is my favourite assault mech...", and I think DeaconW had a good one too that was "My favourite Atlas is the commando 2D..." I'm paraphrasing there so maybe DeaconW will correct me.

Personally I don't like the feel of having a light be the rock to a 100 ton mechs scissors since it goes against that instinct that bigger is better, nor do I like piloting assault mechs since I feel like a big dopey target rather than a tank that walks like a man :/ The addition of ECM to the current state of the game with lag shields intact has dramatically reduced the effectiveness of some of the counters that used to help against lag shielded lights, such as LRMs on a mech running out in the open or circle strafing a team mate.

Edited by Tolkien, 07 January 2013 - 01:10 AM.

[Gdad77]

please, please balance ECM. in terms of numbers per side, 5 games in a row today i have played with zero ECM vs 2 or more (they usually come in 3's it seems and no it's not syncing with a pre-made) all of which the no ECM team (PUG btw) got rolled usually for 0 kills, and the 6th game it was 1 ECM vs 3ECM which the 1 ECM team managed to win.

this is just my 1st 6 games in 1 sitting but it's a very familiar story, i could post pretty much the same thing from any day i PUG.
ECM vs no ECM = win mode/easy mode. an ECM in-balance where both teams at least have some and all is not necessarily lost.

[Rumrunner2]

Omni Tek, on 19 December 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

No the chances of it being nerfed /more counters put in is actually quite alright, the chances of it being removed however is about 0.1%

The chance i go on spending money and prolongate premium with actual ECM setting is much lower...0,00%.
More buffs to counter ECM will cause a big mess and destroy weaponbalance completely.

I thing the devs made ECM so powerfull to nerf LRMs and Streaks. But thats wrong way.
Just set back Guardian ECM to TableTopRules, countermeasure for Artemis, Beagle and Narc, but no stealthfunktion !!

In case LRMs and Streaks getting to powerfull again, nerf them a bit by 0,1 or 0,2 dmg/hit.

[Gulinborsti]

Rumrunner2, on 07 January 2013 - 03:50 AM, said:

The chance i go on spending money and prolongate premium with actual ECM setting is much lower...0,00%.
More buffs to counter ECM will cause a big mess and destroy weaponbalance completely.

I thing the devs made ECM so powerfull to nerf LRMs and Streaks. But thats wrong way.
Just set back Guardian ECM to TableTopRules, countermeasure for Artemis, Beagle and Narc, but no stealthfunktion !!

In case LRMs and Streaks getting to powerfull again, nerf them a bit by 0,1 or 0,2 dmg/hit.

Agreed, I also think a TT based implementation of Guardian ECM is all it needs to balance the game.

[Bad Brad Keselowski]

Sorry, if I sound stupid but now you got me very confused.

I thought it works like this:

Bad Brad Keselowski, on 06 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Another change that has to make imho is the TAG-laser. At its current state it's difficult to handle against ECM. TAG should be a counter - what you tag, can you shoot.

For example: seeing thermal shadows around and you tag at them, when they are in the ECM bubble, your missile sloooooooowwwwwwwwly lock on the target, with both mechs moving you have a very hard time trying to get the lock on. When you tag a mech under ECM protection, your lock should close as fast as normal.

Another example: being in a Stalker pestered by an ECM light, there's not much you can do but run for cover. Try to fire at another mech at this point with LRM, not possible. ECM doesn't let you lock on the missiles. So again, when you tag another target, you should be able to fire lock-on at it, no matter if you get jammed by ECM or not.

But then I was corrected:

StUffz, on 06 January 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Ehm, as soon as you have an enemy marked with TAG, you can hit with LRM even without waiting for a target lock regardless of ECM or not. But your problem is not the ECM on the light but the light mech itself (Assault counter and laggshield).

But like that it would more or less work like I thought?

ExAstris, on 06 January 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

You can R a target that just had the TAG sweep over it and start the LRM lock before the animation comes up or the targeting brackets show. However, it still takes the fully delayed time to obtain the lock (2 full seconds or so), and losing TAG at any moment requires you relock from scratch, meaning you're far more likely to lose missiles mid-flight due to a microsecond drop of TAG not being held on your target.

Its insanely hard to pull off against any light mech with half a brain. But incredibly satisfying to stuff 60 LRMs into one that got too cocky or was dropped via sheer skill of TAG application..

What is true?