1017 replies to this topic

[Taiji]

steelblueskies, on 31 December 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

as an aside, i have tried at behest of clan/guild mates, ps2. for my rig i was experiencing highly variable framerates usually in the low to useless range without extensive tweaking at reduced resolutions with mw:o. i have not experienced sub 30's at native 1920x1080 with the default medium settings with ps2. also an aside, but that being said, i do not find planetside 2 enjoyable.

performance is a variable thing.

No given the right circumstances it's consistently bad in PS2 and everyone who plays it knows this.

[steelblueskies]

Taiji, on 31 December 2012 - 08:23 AM, said:

No given the right circumstances it's consistently bad in PS2 and everyone who plays it knows this.

consistently bad with 16 players or less total in an area? no? then not even remotely comparable.

[StalaggtIKE]

Atheose, on 31 December 2012 - 08:16 AM, said:

I never use LRMs or Streaks (I like SRMs and lasers), but ECM has made gameplay unenjoyable for me too. As soon as you engage enemies your map is blank, and all strategy/teamwork falls apart. It would be different if I had a lot of friends who play the game and we could communicate on comms easier, but I usually just PUG.

Oh well, hopefully it will get a big 'ol nerf soon.

Exactly how I feel.

[Xendojo]

Nice post Tolkien, well done!

But i have to disagree about lock-on missiles being useless in PUGs. The numbers may say they are, but my HBK-4J serves me well even without TAG, and i only drop PUGs at the moment. I do find though that i take many more mid-range LRM shots than pre-ECM, and i usually wait a bit after i lock to fire, just to make sure the lock will stay. And i will say also that i do find myself forced to move out of minimum range to fire missiles very often.

Just got out of a match where i scored 2 kills and 5 assist, both kills with LRM. We had 2 ECMando's go flank and harass but our main group was fighting without ECM cover, and no TAG. They had 2 ECM mechs as well, a cicada and a raven both engaged with our main group. Was a good fight on river city night! Ended up 8-2 with my team winning.
Would like to note that the RVN-3L was the last mech standing on the enemy team, and not because of hiding either. He was mixing it up in the tussle for the whole fight.

EDIT: Yes there are matches where i don't get to fire one single LRM salvo because i can't get a lock. But those are the exception. Usually i get to use a fair chunk of my 5 tons of ammo before the match ends.

Edited by Xendojo, 31 December 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[Tolkien]

Xendojo, on 31 December 2012 - 08:52 AM, said:

Nice post Tolkien, well done!

But i have to disagree about lock-on missiles being useless in PUGs. The numbers may say they are, but my HBK-4J serves me well even without TAG, and i only drop PUGs at the moment. I do find though that i take many more mid-range LRM shots than pre-ECM, and i usually wait a bit after i lock to fire, just to make sure the lock will stay. And i will say also that i do find myself forced to move out of minimum range to fire missiles very often.

Just got out of a match where i scored 2 kills and 5 assist, both kills with LRM. We had 2 ECMando's go flank and harass but our main group was fighting without ECM cover, and no TAG. They had 2 ECM mechs as well, a cicada and a raven both engaged with our main group. Was a good fight on river city night! Ended up 8-2 with my team winning.
Would like to note that the RVN-3L was the last mech standing on the enemy team, and not because of hiding either. He was mixing it up in the tussle for the whole fight.

EDIT: Yes there are matches where i don't get to fire one single LRM salvo because i can't get a lock. But those are the exception. Usually i get to use a fair chunk of my 5 tons of ammo before the match ends.

Let me qualify my position a bit better.

You are right - you will get chances to use LRMs in the majority of matches. From the sample set of 13 there were 4 matches where the enemy had zero ECMs, and 3 more where they had only one. A smart team with 2+ ECMs will usually not present many targets though.

In terms of the SSRM guided missiles, those are actually very effective when mounted on a mech with ECM (or on my friends centurion who would run to me if set on by an enemy with streaks). LRMs though, when you factor together the weight of the launcher, the vulnerability of the ammo, and the damage potential it starts to look dicey.

Without massive data collection it's not possible to quantify to what extent that LRMs have been reduced in effectiveness by ECM numerically. Subjectively though I would say that it is to the point of LRMs not being a good value for tonnage.

All I can prove numerically (so far) is that if you want a tag on the field you have to take it yourself, or get a friend to take it - *DO NOT* rely on it to be there in a random PUG.

[Taiji]

steelblueskies, on 31 December 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

consistently bad with 16 players or less total in an area? no? then not even remotely comparable.

You've misunderstood something.

If MWO is that way for you then you can go buy yourself a good PC and you solved the problem.

Not so with PS2 - Everyone is getting bad framerates.

I hope that clears it up.

[ICEFANG13]

Tolkien, on 31 December 2012 - 06:31 AM, said:

I was curious how much this impression was true, so I decided to keep a running tally of my games and see if the perception that ECM is having a strong effect on the battle was true. The sample size is still a bit too small to be certain of the results, and it also depends on me with the help of a friend counting how many ECMs are on each team over the match.

Our side always has 1 ECM since I piloted a trollmando 2D for the duration of the tests.

The hypothesis is that the team with more ECMs will tend to win more often.

Out of curiosity I also counted TAG systems on each team to get a gage of how smart of an idea taking LRMs into a PUG match is. This was done this last thursday so this is with the upgraded TAG having been out for several days:.

• 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: No
  
• 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

Evaluation: 3 matches had equal numbers of ECM and are marked inconclusive, leaving 10 matches. Of these 3 matches went against the hypothesis while 7 were for it. This is a small sample set but using the methods for binary outcomes on page 10 of this document (dealing with binary outcomes in a finite population) http://classes.soe.u...nter03/h5m3.pdf I calculate the 1 sigma uncertainty at 1.45 matches.

This means that the outcomes could be wrong by up to 1.38 sigmas before the hypothesis would be wrong.

Assuming a normal distribution etc. this gives erf(1.38/sqrt(2))= 0.832.

I believe this means that even with this small sample set I can state that ECM is a match decider with 83.2% certainty.

I will keep track of more of my matches to tighten these bounds but so far I can state with (83.2%) confidence that the team with more ECMs will tend to win the match, all other factors being equal.

Also, some interesting notes on TAG: we had exactly zero that me or my friend noticed TAG on our team in those 13 games. On the enemy team there were exactly 3 matches with any tag systems deployed. In short, you're a fool to drop with guided missiles in a PUG game unless you are a streak/ECM boat or if you know for a fact you have TAG on a friend or yourself.

Which one is the loss to me?

[Tolkien]

ICEFANG13, on 31 December 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

Which one is the loss to me?

Grumble.... I can't recall which but I'm pretty sure that it is in that table. If I recall it was on caldera and I managed to overheat my trollmando twice... not good if you want to live.

[Xendojo]

Just would like to add....why Hawken? If you would be "driven" to Hawken in the first place then maybe MWO is not for you? If i ever find myself being driven from this game(will never happen)it for sure won't be to a console-style shooter.

ECM needs work for sure, but i am still having lots of fun driving whatever mech i feel like at the moment. And that extends to my LRM boat...yes i only have one. AND FURTHERMORE i get kills in my LRM boat and that's without TAG equipped.

MOAR PEW PEW LESS QQ
Play the game or don't, either way it's still more data for the dev team.

[ICEFANG13]

To be honest, as a Jenner-F pilot (now, after ECM, the only good Jenner), I prefer to fight Ravens, I usually hit them fine, they just take so much damage all over, but 2Ds, bleh, I did so much damage to you, and then you decided to kill me, and I had to run off, damn streakmandos.

We even had one overheat on caustic later, he overheated, with one leg left, in the dark dark red, in front of 5 teammates, and he didn't die, it was so damn funny to watch.

[Gaussguy]

Game Rules
The Angel ECM Suite represents a great advance in ECM technology from the standard Guardian model. Within its 6 hex radius of effect, the Angel suite completely blocks the following systems on enemy units: Artemis IV, Artemis V, Beagle Active Probes, Bloodhound Active Probes and their Clan equivalents, C3 Master Computers and C3 Slaves, Streak Missile Launchers and Narc missile beacons. Streak missiles may be fired at units affected by the device, but they function as standard missiles.

This is from the Angel ECM discription. Notice how even though streaks are unable to lock on, they can still be fired as normal SRMS. Even though PGIs ECM is functioning more like Angel ECM, if they made the streaks and LRMs to atleast be fired at ECM mechs as direct fire weapons, then people wouldnt be completely nullified.

Oh and another thing that doesnt make sense, if this halo interupts enemy target, how the heck does it not interupt friendly targeting as well? ECM mechs should be scouts, using their ECM to hide so they can report enemy locations back to the group. Not a magical shield that blocks missile locks completely for the entire group.

[ltwally]

Willie Sauerland, on 30 December 2012 - 10:24 PM, said:

You know, this isn't like CoD where everything is given to you. Quite frankly, I prefer a game which requires some skill. Perhaps this isn't the game for you and it certainly isn't any shame if that is true. I wish you well in whatever endeavor(s) you decide to pursue.

Huh?

This isn't about skill. It's about balance. It's about a 1.5 tonne toy that completely reshaped the game -- and not for the better.

In BattleTech, there is a system that can kill missile lock. It's called Angel ECM, and it's years in the future in the BT timeline.

Even Angel ECM does not foul basic sensors/comms. For that, you need Stealth Armour (future-tech) or Null-Signature System (lostech). Both of those system have serious trade-offs, including heat generation on par with a PPC. And that system only shields a single mech!

Now, not everything has to remain TT when moving to a first-person-shooter-giant-robot-simulator-game. But ECM does so much that its a complete no-brainer to take it. It's so awesome, people moved to different mechs just to get it. That should be like a giant neon sign in the sky to PGI that they have done a naughty-no-no, and that ECM needs a giant effin' nerf bat taken to it.

Edited by ltwally, 31 December 2012 - 09:42 AM.

[Maxx Blue]

I've been messing around with TAG on my hbk-4j, and I find that even if it is caustic valley, and there are other LRM boats around, it isn't a game changer. Still too much ECM around, and even if their isn't I end up eating several ac rounds or lasers to the hunch while I try to keep a distant target painted. I try to stay down as much as I can and mount the tag in my head slot so it is nice and high, but that damned hunch is like a huge bullseye sticking up in the sky. it has some use mid game use when folks get antsy and stray out of the ECM bubble, but I dropped one LRM launcher and only carry one ton of ammo because good shots are so hard to come by and on anything but caustic it is hard to effectively suppress anyone. Dropping in an srm6 has been more useful, and if I wasn't messing around I would drop the other LRM and tag for more srms.

Edited by Maxx Blue, 31 December 2012 - 09:44 AM.

[ltwally]

Gremlich Johns, on 31 December 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

Eric Berg, on 31 December 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

I did I bought the DDC stuck ecm on it and 3 streaks.

I guess PGI's plan worked, it IS properly implemented....

Perhaps developing/maintaining all these mechs and their variants was getting to be too much work, and this is PGI's way of trimming it down to a nice round 4 mechs. Four mechs should be enough for any game, or any player. I think Bill Gates said that.

[Aurias]

What ECM counters:
- LRM
- SSRM
- ECM
- bad communication (just because your enemy highlights you doesn't mean the rest of their team knows where you are)

What ECM doesn't counter:
- Autocannons
- Lasers
- PPC
- SRM
- teamwork and player skill

at *worst* ECM is a minor annoyance, and is a good response to LRM and SSRM boats that otherwise had no equal.

This isn't to say I don't think ECM needs rebalancing, it does, but saying it's gamebreaking just makes me want to grab your shoulders, shake you violently and scream "WHY CAN'T YOU ADAPT!?"

disclaimer required because of my signature:
I was a Raven 3L pilot before ECM was even announced. I run ECM, because it's a very valuable tool vs streak boats and LRM mechs, which are still surprisingly prevalent. I tend to dislike fotm builds, but given that this fotm build is my build, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

[Xendojo]

The Nerf Bat.

Edited by Xendojo, 31 December 2012 - 10:01 AM.

[Koniving]

I agree with the first three posts for a few reasons. None of which even need to be mentioned. However take a peek at what I've got below.


"The Guardian is typically used to shield allied units from such equipment by emitting a broad-band signal meant to confuse radar, infrared, ultraviolet, magscan and sonar sensors."
(↑ 2.0 2.1 Technical Readout: 3050, p. 197)

Okay so ECM shields nearby mechs with broad-band signals. It confuses sensors and advanced equipment. Therefore, if you're in the bubble the effect it has then expect to have a full force jamming you. That's fine. If you're outside the bubble then scanning into said bubble should be difficult. But not nil and void. That's what stealth armor is for to protect you from being scanned. In the mean time if you can see them then you should at least be able to get a confusing signal hit to team mates. One that flickers and is hard to target, but still visible.

After all it is stated to "Confuse" sensors. Not completely dismiss them.

"Sensors can sometimes override this jamming, though by that point the enemy unit is already within visual range and can track the opposition with their own eyes." (↑ 2.0 2.1 Technical Readout: 3050, p. 197)

I can visually see mechs moving at about 1,000 meters out or more. I'd say within 500 meters should be enough to cut through jamming with sensors on a direct line of sight. May not be able to lock missiles on them, but at the very least we should get a sensor node to track them with and share location info to other team mates. Tag may not have needed its boost if ECM actually confused sensors instead of dismissing them.

So, say 500 meters and the mech is in line of sight. The jamming should already be overwritten on sensors. Worst case scenario, I should be able to have at least 5 targets for 1 ECM-equipped mech, and have to sift through the false targets to fire upon the real thing with LRMs.

Now this is where tag would come in at 450 meters by helping to isolate the correct target so that team mates are not firing on dummy sensor targets created by the ECM-equipped mech.

Voila. Tag just got cooler without a buff, ECM just got reasonably more balanced, and we're all set.

Though I still agree with many of the other posters, there's absolutely no reason to carry NARC. I haven't found it even remotely useful as a scout or missile mech. Once an ECM comes along, no one can see my target. What's the point of using it?

------

Before that epiphany, however, this was my original idea for how to balance ECM. Changing which mech variants carry them to the ones with the LEAST missile slots.

http://mwomercs.com/...43#entry1679943

(And no ECM didn't drive me to Hawken, that's some whiner's thread. However my post does provide some good insight in simple changes to balance the game without changing anything about ECM.)

Edited by Koniving, 31 December 2012 - 09:56 AM.

[ltwally]

Aurias, on 31 December 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

What ECM counters:
- LRM
- SSRM
- ECM
- bad communication (just because your enemy highlights you doesn't mean the rest of their team knows where you are)

Of your list, 3/4 of it are PGI addons.

It also does what it was intended on top of all that awesome, countering
- Artemis
- Beagle
- Narc

Quote

...
at *worst* ECM is a minor annoyance, and is a good response to LRM and SSRM boats that otherwise had no equal.

If you had a problem with LRMs, that's a sign that you liked running around in the wide open, without AMS, without teammates.

Countering LRM is pretty simple:
- AMS
- Teammates with AMS
- Not running around in the wide open so they have time to lock, launch and deliver salvos
- Hide behind a big rock until lock is lost and inbounds have gone away

Really, saying that people need to adapt to ECM when you can't handle LRMs is just plain obtuse.

As to S-SRM, it's known and acknowledged by most of us that they have a problem. They're ok in low numbers (4 - 6 tubes), but when you run into a StreakCat with 12 tubes, they're suddenly quite lethal.

The solution to S-SRM is not more equipment, but to fix S-SRM. My personal recommendation is a diminishing return, where after 4 to 6 tubes it starts being less awesome with every additional tube, and the penalties accelerate as you add more tubes.

Quote

This isn't to say I don't think ECM needs rebalancing, it does, but saying it's gamebreaking just makes me want to grab your shoulders, shake you violently and scream "WHY CAN'T YOU ADAPT!?"

LOL.

I could. But too often ECM takes the fun out -- when I can't tell Friend from Foe because of it, or when I watch teammates with tonnes of LRM or S-SRM go wasted because of a 1.5 tonne component completely invalidating those weapons. That's not fun, that's frustrating and irritating. Fun is why I played MW:O. So, why should I continue when the fun gets swatted by ECM on a regular basis? I shouldn't. So I'll spend my time elsewhere, until PGI wises up.

As to why I say ECM is gamebreaking? Well, it's a 1.5 tonne toy that not only counters Artemis/Beagle/Narc (what it's supposed to do), but ALSO near-completely kills LRMs and S-SRMs, AND it disables Friend from Foe identification. All that for 1.5 tonnes? Broken beyond measure. It's so awesome that people changed mechs just to run with it. It shows up in 25-50% of PUGs, and quite a bit more in organised play. And it's only available on 4 mechs. That's pretty telling.

So, if you want to say it isn't game-breaking, fine. It only bent the game like a pretzel. There. Happy?

Whatever you want to call it, it's still horridly over-powered. It's the worst decision I've seen PGI make, and in their short history as a company they have released plenty of stuff that needed immediate nerfing. It's like they put a hyper 8yo boy in charge of things. "It should do this, and this, and this! WOW!"

[StalaggtIKE]

ltwally, on 31 December 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Perhaps developing/maintaining all these mechs and their variants was getting to be too much work, and this is PGI's way of trimming it down to a nice round 4 mechs. Four mechs should be enough for any game, or any player. I think Bill Gates said that.

LOL.

[LtPoncho]

It's really starting to wear on how many times we keep seeing threads that talk about all this 'soon to come' content while we wait in a status of a release where there are obvious inequalities in game balance and a serious lack thereof.
Yeah yeah the developers and game designers and leads and other respective titles are just CHURNING away - yet none of those who state this actually *work* on the project nor do they have so much as an insight into the product plan save for what is posted here.
What is really enlightening/frightening is when you pull your respective finger/head out of said MWO orifice and look at other F2P games to gauge where this product is at. So many excuses and defending statements (some of you should be troll lawyers) - where's the content and balance we paid for?
As a member of that same crowdfunded group that established a profit to this endeavor, I'd really like to know when this is going to be more than just an 8 man gong show. MPBT:3025 was 4vs4 - fast forward to now 12 years later where 32vs32 is par for course, and we've only doubled the match sizes. Must be the same math applied to Double Heat Sinks.

Edited by LtPoncho, 31 December 2012 - 11:54 AM.