1017 replies to this topic

[Tsula]

My comments are in bold on how i think it might be fixed


ECM is not OP or messed up as many believe it to be. It really just needs a few teaks for it to be correct and balanced from the way I see it.
ECM as it stands does this if I am wrong please correct me.
ECM has two modes: Disrupt and Counter
180 meter radius from carring unit (great works fine)
ECM can counter other ECM if switched to Counter mode (great if balanced with 1v1 or 1 vs 2 problem is sometimes you have one side with like 4, and the other has none. I really think it boils down to combat awarness thou. Given if a team realizes they are under it, I look for what is carring it and try to drop it. most do not thou hints the problem I think alot of people have. Plus alot of people don't fully understand the counter mode can change the game. I done it it works people just don't hit the J key. not reeally your alls fault its the player for not learning how to deal with it.)

When a Mech is hidden by a friendly ECM:

• Enemy Mechs will have to come within 1/4 the normal distance (200 m instead of 800 m, by default) for hidden Mechs to show up on their battlegrid and HUD. (Works but here is the problem alot of times you can see them, and by what I know you should be able to lock it up right now you can not get a read on it no matter how well they expose themself. If you are trying to follow TT you need to let us hit them if they wonder out in the open and can be seen. Yes, laser and ballistics can, but so should LRM yes lock it harder to hold, and no Artimis IV FC bonus either just like if the mech was under a ECM in the first place. TT lets you fire your LRM as thou it was a normal launcher and no Artims bonus. Even out side the ECM radius. You all said you follow TT when possible and change if need. Right now you can not get a lock even if they are out in the open and you see them a country mile away.)
  
  • The Beagle Active Probe is of no use in extending this range. (Agreed works correctly, But this is where a change is needed to BAP. BAP's real propose was to find hidden shut down mechs or mechs hiding behind something, right now its a sinsor booster and allows you to target shut down mech. It needs to help find truely hidden units like a well placed ambush. if the Ambush has ECM the BAP does not work, but if the pilot is smart should know he is being jammed aka the low signal you all have in place now. It does not give the mech hiding away, but BAP needs to beable to find units not under ECM that might be hiding behind stuff ie rock cliff under pipes around rock formation things like that. And that could be shut down and hiding behind things. This would make BAP more like BAP needs to be.

• It takes twice as long to achieve a missile lock against a hidden Mech.(Agreed but needs looked at if Target is tagged lets maybe do 1.4 times as long to lock on not twice.)
  
• Narc beacons will stick to hidden Mechs, but they won’t provide their normal bonuses until the Mech leaves the ECM’s range.(Agree nothing wrong here it just does not let the NARC signal be tracked as per TT)
  
• Artemis IV does not provide any bonuses against hidden Mechs. (Agree here again)

When your Mech is disrupted by an enemy ECM:

• You will not know where your teammates are, and they won’t know where you are, unless you have direct line of sight to each other. (Agree here to a point given you kind of made everyone have C3 system already anyhow. it working as needed right now)
  
• You cannot share any targeting data with the rest of your team, and vice versa. (Agreed)
  
• Your Beagle Active Probe ceases to function.(Agreed because of above post)
  
• You cannot achieve any missile locks. (Agree but not how it is right now. LRM should be able to Fire at another mech under the ECM bubble they get not Bonus thou be it artimis IV or NARC or TAG, its just a normal LRM launcher. And given the Min range of LRM and Radius of ECM the ECM unit is not going to be targeted anyhow given well with in Min. SSRM ok this is a crazy one, At 180 meters inside the bubble no lock. 181meter to 270meters their range you should beable to get a lock but its harder to maintain that lock.)
  
• Your TAG laser can still fire but provides no bonuses.( Agreed if inside the bubble outside it should allow FS to lock on, and fire and get bonus. TAG is a laser light that paints a target the LRM home in on that not a signal that can be jammed like NARC. Their for its not effect nor should it really be inside the bubble, but I willing to give alittle as well. Sidenote TAG needs to go back to 450 meters we now have FS role TAGGING their own targets this takes away from Scout Role. its not a counter to ECM it just makes it less likly to see a scout now who can TAG targets for FS when the FS is TAGGING their own. )
  
• Your battlegrid and targeting information will flicker (Agreed no brainer your being jammed)

Your ECM in counter mode will:

• Cancel the effect of one enemy ECM on Mechs (friendly or enemy) within range of your ECM (180 m) (Areed working as need just the mass don't know how to use it. Hell in fact I sometime just run in ECCM. I don't want the other side know I am stalking them in my raven if they get low signal they look for me. I change it over when I know my team is closing in then I drop the disrupt on them works really good too.)
  
  • However, two enemy ECMs affecting the Mech would require two counter ECMs, three would require three, etc.
• Completely cancel all effects of an ECM in disrupt mode equipped on an enemy Mech that is within range (180 m) (Agreed but sometime you have no ECM and the other side has like 4 or more again if people would spot the carriers you can change the battle really fast. not your guys problem)
  
  • You can only counter one enemy ECM in this manner.
    
    • I.e. If there are two enemy Mechs with disrupt mode ECMs in range, one will be countered while the other will function normally. But two counter ECMs will counter two disrupt ECMs, etc. (Agreed this is how it needs ot be.)

Edited by tsula, 03 January 2013 - 07:04 PM.

[Blitz Krieg]

My only thoughts on ECM are this.

• For 1.5 tons it makes far more impact than any other single piece of equipment or weaponry in the game.
  
• Ton for ton, it is the single best item you can buy, easily.
  
• For its effects people would consider running one if it weighed 2.5, 3.5, 5 or more tons.
  
• A 1.5 ton piece of kit effectively negates beagle, lrms, streaks and the default IFF systems of mechs.
  
• It's not an "I WIN" button, but its certainly the best way, ton for ton, to build a competitive mech.
  
• 8vs8s are pretty much only dropping with ECM, that should tell you just how important it is to "winning"

I think ECM would be worth its 1.5 tons if it stopped streaks, jammed IFF at short ranges, hid you from long range targeting or countered someone elses ecm. I think the fact it does all these things is WAY too much.

PS. I'm pretty much only driving my Atlas D-DC these days and am saving credits for a raven 3L. If you can't beat em......

[Tolkien]

Blitz Krieg, on 04 January 2013 - 04:57 AM, said:

My only thoughts on ECM are this.

• For 1.5 tons it makes far more impact than any other single piece of equipment or weaponry in the game.
  
• Ton for ton, it is the single best item you can buy, easily.
  
• For its effects people would consider running one if it weighed 2.5, 3.5, 5 or more tons.
  
• A 1.5 ton piece of kit effectively negates beagle, lrms, streaks and the default IFF systems of mechs.
  
• It's not an "I WIN" button, but its certainly the best way, ton for ton, to build a competitive mech.
  
• 8vs8s are pretty much only dropping with ECM, that should tell you just how important it is to "winning"

I think ECM would be worth its 1.5 tons if it stopped streaks, jammed IFF at short ranges, hid you from long range targeting or countered someone elses ecm. I think the fact it does all these things is WAY too much.


PS. I'm pretty much only driving my Atlas D-DC these days and am saving credits for a raven 3L. If you can't beat em......

I hear that. I've been running a trollmando 2D and a Craven 3L since they are too good to ignore.

I want to focus on something you said though about how ECM would still be `worth it` if it stopped streaks.
Let's take this to an absurd and see what happens if we allow other systems like this.

If it stops streaks for 1.5 tons, why not add a system that stops regular SRMs (not AMS, one that completely stops them) for 1.5 tons.
If we allow this for every system type (SSRM, SRM, LRM, Laser, Pulse Laser, PPC, Autocannon+Gauss) that's 7 items of 1.5 tons each, or 10.5 tons and 14 slots. This would fit on a hunchback no problem!

Even if you say that streak is just 1 weapon and not a whole weapon system right now remember that when the clans show up they will be brining SSRM2, SSRM4 and SSRM6's so it will block a whole system family.

In the source material even the much more advanced Angel ECM didn't stop streaks it just made them launch like normal SRMs. Likewise neither system affected LRMs on a mech standing in the open, whereas now we need to TAG it for some reason.

Anyway TLDR even 1.5 tons to disable SSRMs the way ECM does now looks a bit too powerful.

[AlexWildeagle]

Good work with ECM. It hasn't solved the whole missile fiasco but at least it is limiting to a smaller problem.

Would be nice if you just fixed the missile problem and bring them in line with what they are suppose to be.

[Tolkien]

AlexWildeagle, on 04 January 2013 - 05:26 AM, said:

Good work with ECM. It hasn't solved the whole missile fiasco but at least it is limiting to a smaller problem.

Would be nice if you just fixed the missile problem and bring them in line with what they are suppose to be.

That would be nice too... do you listen to the no guts no galaxy podcasts? http://nogutsnogalaxy.net/ They are good stuff. In mechs devs and beer 4 which I think was recorded slightly before ECM dropped in a caller who had read what ECM was going to do asked if the devs were worried that they were creating a bandaid on a bandaid type balance situation where each new piece of equipment is trumped up to address previous equipment rather than being a balanced item in its own right.

As you are saying it appears it was a bandaid type item where they tried to fix LRMs and SSRMs by adding a new trump card rather than fixing missiles then putting in a sane and balanced ECM module.

Since they went this rout and neutered the strongest counter to lights circle strafing and mechs running out in the open with impunity we have a lot more problems with light mechs and lag shields now :/

Edited by Tolkien, 04 January 2013 - 05:39 AM.

[StUffz]

Tolkien, on 04 January 2013 - 05:17 AM, said:

I hear that. I've been running a trollmando 2D and a Craven 3L since they are too good to ignore.

I want to focus on something you said though about how ECM would still be `worth it` if it stopped streaks.
Let's take this to an absurd and see what happens if we allow other systems like this.

If it stops streaks for 1.5 tons, why not add a system that stops regular SRMs (not AMS, one that completely stops them) for 1.5 tons.
If we allow this for every system type (SSRM, SRM, LRM, Laser, Pulse Laser, PPC, Autocannon+Gauss) that's 7 items of 1.5 tons each, or 10.5 tons and 14 slots. This would fit on a hunchback no problem!

Even if you say that streak is just 1 weapon and not a whole weapon system right now remember that when the clans show up they will be brining SSRM2, SSRM4 and SSRM6's so it will block a whole system family.

In the source material even the much more advanced Angel ECM didn't stop streaks it just made them launch like normal SRMs. Likewise neither system affected LRMs on a mech standing in the open, whereas now we need to TAG it for some reason.

Anyway TLDR even 1.5 tons to disable SSRMs the way ECM does now looks a bit too powerful.

To stay on streaks. This is easier to solve without making changes to ECM. Just change the coding that you can fire them same as LRMs. If fired too early it works like SRM 2. This would solve the problem of ECM vs streak and you can at least do srm damage.

[Tolkien]

StUffz, on 04 January 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

To stay on streaks. This is easier to solve without making changes to ECM. Just change the coding that you can fire them same as LRMs. If fired too early it works like SRM 2. This would solve the problem of ECM vs streak and you can at least do srm damage.

I am hoping they will do that anyway eventually. LRMs likewise would be a lot easier to use direct fire if they flew faster than 80kph - on tabletop LRMs had almost the same range envelope as the AC2 and were just as easy to hit as those.

[ExAstris]

Dikaiosyne26, on 03 January 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

This maybe slightly off-topic, but this whole discussion has reminded me of another instance in gaming, the eventual banning of Jace the Mind Scupltor and Stoneforge Mystic in Magic: The Gathering Standard about 2 years ago.

Now, I really hope that the dev team A. reads this, B. wants to learn from other games and their experiences. Here is the link to the explaination of the bannings: http://www.wizards.c...ily/feature/148

The whole article is very interesting, especially if you have a reasonable knowledge of that game, but here is the part that really stands out to me (Thank you Aaron Forsythe):

"I have seen many arguments flying around the Internet that nothing needs to be banned, as the format is very interactive and skill-testing right now. I suppose I agree with those descriptions of the format—the Top 16 in Singapore was loaded with talented names, and the same core group of guys keeps making the Top 8s of StarCity's events. As for interactivity, when you lose to Jace / Stoneforge decks, you still feel like you're playing Magic: you cast your creatures, attack and block, yet, if your opponent plays well enough, eventually fall under an avalanche of card advantage and efficient tutoring."

But then the formal complaints began pouring in, followed by a drop in attendance ... that we can't ignore. If people don't want to play the game, we need to fix it.

There exists a crowd of competitive players who pursue perfection, who have no personal attachment to any certain cards or decks save those that reward them for their great skill and dedication. I very much appreciate that mindset; in fact, much of our organized play encourages it. But there exists a larger crowd for whom decks and cards are extensions of themselves, who revel in diverse metagames wherein they can show off their creativity. They want to be able to play decks that suit their whims and personalities without feeling like they are wasting their time; they want Magic to afford them the opportunities to individualize while still taking it seriously. Standard has lost that in recent months, and we aim to bring it back.

End Quote:

That sounds very familiar and I hope that the dev team can fix this problem in weeks and not months.

Quoted because the point this is making must be read by the devs.


Yes, there is still a mechwarrior feel here.

Yes, we still drop in mechs and make pew pew.

Yes, the game is still balanced in the sense that for every mech the opposing team drops that has ECM, we could field one too.

No, this is not the state of the metagame we want.

[Pando]

This quote;

Dikaiosyne26, on 03 January 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

This maybe slightly off-topic, but this whole discussion has reminded me of another instance in gaming, the eventual banning of Jace the Mind Scupltor and Stoneforge Mystic in Magic: The Gathering Standard about 2 years ago.

Now, I really hope that the dev team A. reads this, B. wants to learn from other games and their experiences. Here is the link to the explaination of the bannings: http://www.wizards.c...ily/feature/148

The whole article is very interesting, especially if you have a reasonable knowledge of that game, but here is the part that really stands out to me (Thank you Aaron Forsythe):

"I have seen many arguments flying around the Internet that nothing needs to be banned, as the format is very interactive and skill-testing right now. I suppose I agree with those descriptions of the format—the Top 16 in Singapore was loaded with talented names, and the same core group of guys keeps making the Top 8s of StarCity's events. As for interactivity, when you lose to Jace / Stoneforge decks, you still feel like you're playing Magic: you cast your creatures, attack and block, yet, if your opponent plays well enough, eventually fall under an avalanche of card advantage and efficient tutoring."

But then the formal complaints began pouring in, followed by a drop in attendance ... that we can't ignore. If people don't want to play the game, we need to fix it.

There exists a crowd of competitive players who pursue perfection, who have no personal attachment to any certain cards or decks save those that reward them for their great skill and dedication. I very much appreciate that mindset; in fact, much of our organized play encourages it. But there exists a larger crowd for whom decks and cards are extensions of themselves, who revel in diverse metagames wherein they can show off their creativity. They want to be able to play decks that suit their whims and personalities without feeling like they are wasting their time; they want Magic to afford them the opportunities to individualize while still taking it seriously. Standard has lost that in recent months, and we aim to bring it back.

End Quote:

That sounds very familiar and I hope that the dev team can fix this problem in weeks and not months.

THIS ^

I've dropped over 2,300 times as of last night. I use to play on average 3-5 hours a day with my wife (win!). However, in the past 1-2 weeks we've been playing...maybe one hour per day. 3-5 hours on the weekends instead of "uber-gaming sessions" of 10+ hours. MWO, It's just not as fun as it use to be IMO.

Maybe we're just missing some things as indicated in http://www.pcgamer.c...t-mode-release/ 's end statement.

Edited by Pando, 04 January 2013 - 08:56 AM.

[LagomorphPrime]

Tweaked and reposted here since this is the main thread now. I really like ECM. I think it's opened up a whole new level of tactical game play, it puts more emphasis on role warfare, and it encourages teamwork even more than the game already did. The one problem I think definitely needs fixing is heavy stacks of ECM being impenetrable. To that end, and to encourage more electronic warfare and to encourage more modules, these are my suggestions for changes.

ECM
- in Counter mode, 1 ECM unit counters 2 enemy ECM units. This would help negate heavy stacks of ECM more easily, preventing some matches from turning into "who brought more?"


BAP
+ speeds up missile lock time
+ increase sensor range bonus by another 5-10%
+ a unit with BAP can target a unit under ECM protection while it's in LoS, regardless of range, though it cannot share that targeting with its team. It can also get missile lock with this targeting,

Modules:

ECCM Specialist: your ECM now negates 3 enemy ECM instead of 2

ECM Stealth Specialist: enemies with BAP can now only target you at 50% normal range

ECM Specialist: enemies targeting you with their BAP can no longer gain missile lock on you

BAP Counter ECM: if targeting a unit with ECM because you have BAP you can now share this target, though allies still cannot gain missile lock

BAP Jamming: enemies carrying ECM you target with your BAP stop sharing their ECM benefit with their allies, though they still gain the benefits themselves

BAP Specialist: enemy mechs within 200m targetable regardless of LoS (basically a short range radar now)


Just some ideas for opening up electronic warfare, making BAP useful, and encouraging modules. I like ECM how it is now but I think there does need to be a tweak somewhere to deal with groups running almost entirely with ECM. I think BAP should be the solution to some ECM problems as well as a few independent benefits. For the same crits and tonnage as ECM it may not be quite as effective but it's also usable by anyone.

[LynxFury]

I honestly haven't seen any encouragement of teamwork. If anything its completely removed much of the team work--there's little consideration to chassis to be taken, or encouragement to bring anything other than ECM chassis into drops. There's little reason to use the terrain to mask an approach on what you think might be a long range team. There's little reason to open your formations regardless how effective a medium and long range kill zone might be because risk of breaking the bubble. There's little reason to try innovation of chassis configurations.

In short, regardless of map or terrain, the winning recipe is mostly ECM with short to medium range weapons--and that sucks.

[DeaconW]

Lykaon, on 19 December 2012 - 04:15 AM, said:

FYI I just ended a night of playing 4 mans for kicks and XP grinding stalkers.we won every match we played.
Want to know what we used?

2 LRM boat stalkers and 2 ECM ravens with TAG.

That's like saying your car won the race because of the nice air freshener on the windshield (LRM's) and not the 1000HP engine (ECM)...OK, maybe I am exaggerating..a little...

Thanx for helping prove that ECM is OP. I submit that without the Raven's with ECM your LRM boating would have been a little different. You are correct tho'...ECM superiority will enable you to use LRM's as well as a bunch of other stuff. To quote another poster from several weeks ago:


ECM is too binary. The team that has the most enjoys too many benefits:
Unrestricted use of streaks and lrms
Unrestricted coordination via being able to call out target letters
Superior situational awareness via being able to see the positions of everyone
Superior targetting as they are able to see mech damage

To those who are talking about how LRM's are making a comeback, the use of LRM's in a match is pointless to discuss without discussing how many ECM mechs there were and who had more. I appreciate you posting some of this context...

Edited by DeaconW, 04 January 2013 - 12:41 PM.

[Big Bad Wulf]

LynxFury, on 04 January 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

I honestly haven't seen any encouragement of teamwork. If anything its completely removed much of the team work--there's little consideration to chassis to be taken, or encouragement to bring anything other than ECM chassis into drops. There's little reason to use the terrain to mask an approach on what you think might be a long range team. There's little reason to open your formations regardless how effective a medium and long range kill zone might be because risk of breaking the bubble. There's little reason to try innovation of chassis configurations.

In short, regardless of map or terrain, the winning recipe is mostly ECM with short to medium range weapons--and that sucks.

Hi,

If what you are saying is true then majority of drops would show a biased on ECM mechs, but this not the case (from my own experience) both in individual drops and 8 man drops.

What I am seeing are mostly Stalkers, Cataphracts, Hunchies and Cats with a dash sometimes of Altases (Founders D, D and DDC), ravens (3L and 2X), comandos and cicada's.

ECM in a pug drop is rarely - if not even used to benefit the whole group as to conclude that it was essential to wining a particular game - usually they go out on their own in the case of the (ravens,comandos and cicadas) and for the Atlas DDC the pilot is more concerned with himself than providing support to his fellow dropmates.

Nothing is going to happen to ECM because there is no data to support it. Unlike the case of LRM's (prior to reduction in damage) the the data clearly showed that the Side with the most LRM's won - consistently and is also backed up by kill data which showed a spike in LRM deaths per game. This prompted the change in the LRM stats that we see today.

ECM is a tool that has to be employed properly so the whole group benefits this requires (a little of) strategy. Effective use of ECM requires teamwork to keep the group within its 180m bubble.

From my own experience from the time ECM was deployed to now I have only encountered 1 occation where ECM played a major role in winning a game conclusively in an 8 man drop River City ( I do not kow the group but my hats off to them).

But that was it.

For me "The most organized team - with or without ECM consistently wins".

I am looking forward though to you discussing in specific drops and how ECM won the day, how it was employed to support your claim.

Happy New Year!!!

Edited by Marcus Wulf, 04 January 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[LynxFury]

Marcus Wulf, on 04 January 2013 - 01:45 PM, said:

Nothing is going to happen to ECM because there is no data to support it.

You can turn a blind eye if you want, but I think if the Devs look at the data they'll be completely overwelmed by the data suggesting ECM is OP severely unbalancing the game.

They'll see it in the weapons mix...with a serious drop of in LRMs, which as supposed to be among the most common weapons in Battletech. As well as the damage by LRM per salvo as locks are broken and TAGs unreliable and NARC unused.

They'll see it in the serious over representation of ECM equipped mech, which should be about 1 per every 10 games or so if it was battletech proportions and perhaps one per side a game if proportional to MWO mechs available.

They'll see it the vast increases in DDC Altases, which is something so expensive that they were rarely committed to battle in battletech, even by the LCAF. It should be "oww...crap...an Atlas," rather than "yawn" another lance of all atlases (hidden in plain view).

They'll see it in the drop off from of medium mechs, which are supposed to be the most common and the heart and soul of battletech.

They'll see it in the increased damage required to kill the same chassis, particularly in the kills/damage from medium and long range weapons, because direct fire mechs can't see critical parts of their enemy and use precision firepower to skillfully deliver the coup de grace -- something that's taken the heart of the mid and long range game as well as nudging the game more towards the one-big-hit box model used by just about every other FPS.

Prior to ECM, one could reasonable get a general direction from an 8x8 DC (2 snipers...every one brawl) and configure just about any chassis to fit that role--with ECM, viable chassis are now distilled to a rather small number or drop suitable mechs. I'm sure they'd see that signal pretty clear in the data of mech composition of victorious 8x8 teams as well.

I do hope they're looking at the data. I really really do. Right now their game balance is pretty ugly and a long ways from battletech.

Not to mention the nearly 200 pages of related threads filled with anecdotal examples that you apparently want more of :-)

Edited by LynxFury, 04 January 2013 - 03:02 PM.

[Thomas Covenant]

The best counter to ECM is direct line of fire weapons, lasers ballistics and so forth, and better yet if you are in a fast mech too so you can keep up with ECM lights as you fire at them. My problem is the best way to counter ECM is void on lower performance computers or internet connection. I don't get the fps to laser a light.

I feel there should be an alternative, as currently on low performance machines an ECM light to my light feels like the grim reaper, as I cannot fire Streaks but he can, and I cannot reliably hit him with lasers and ballistics. This problem is lessened but not remedied by piloting an ECM mech myself.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 04 January 2013 - 03:21 PM.

[Tolkien]

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: 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
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 Loss Matched Expectation: No
Us: ECM 2, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 0, Outcome: We Loss 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 Loss Matched Expectation: Yes
Us: ECM 1, TAG 0, Them: ECM:2, TAG 1, Outcome: We Won Matched Expectation: No

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

Total Games: 29
Inconclusive Games: 7 - these are games where the number of ECM systems is equal on both teams.
Conclusive games: 22
The conclusive games break down as follows:
Matching expectations: 16
Contradicted expectations: 6
Using the formula given on page 10 of this document: http://classes.soe.u...nter03/h5m3.pdf
I arrive at
Sigma=0.095 which is 2.09 matches,
To reach a neutral outcome (11/11, the results would need to be shifted by 2.39 sigmas),
Assuming the distribution is normal, this gives confidence of 98.3%
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 2.66x 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.

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.

Edited by Tolkien, 04 January 2013 - 03:30 PM.

[Big Bad Wulf]

Hi Lynx,

Again if what you are saying is true I should be experiencing the increase in ECM capable mechs in my own drops, which I have not. There are drops where they are even non exsitent. Therefore does not support said assumption that ECM is such a game changer that everyone has to have it.

Unlike LRM's prior to the reduction in damage value that 99% of the drops had LRM capable mechs and 50% of those drops contained LRM boats. This I saw and experienced.

I do not talk theoreticals and statistical values here but actual drops and as I have stated earlier (on PUG Drops) if there were ECM capable mechs they usually went their own way. I am not being blind but simply stating what I have experienced.

I am guessing that this is what PGI is seeing also otherwise they would caped it like what they did with LRM's and to think there was lesser complaints about it than ECM is getting.

The moment this game allowed customized mech's your so called balance flew out the window there will be mech's who can dish out more damage than others not to mention the most unbalanced part "Player Skill", unless your concept of balance is skewed to towards your favored mode of game play. I say this because most of the people complaining about ECM have been enjoying a certain advantage which made them happy, naturally when they lost that advantage they are screaming all sorts of "Bloody Hell", calling the game unbalanced and OP yet were very quiet when they had said advantage.

To me unbalanced is one team can have it and the other cannot have it. ECM is available to anyone chooses to employ it as long as they get the chassis that can carry it.

See all you have are anecdotes, why not show how you actually dropped with a majority of ECM capable mechs and how it was essential to you winning.

i.e. Dropped with all ECM capable mechs opposition had LRM boats and SSRM's only they were unable to hit us we sluaghtered them.

That is what I would like to see, but that would mean that you would have to actually coordinate the PUG's (Assuming you are doing a solo drop like what I am doing) and see how that goes.

[Fabian Wrede]

how can ecm be considerd balanced, when in pugs team with most ecm, always winns no eceptions

Edited by Wrede, 04 January 2013 - 04:42 PM.

[Big Bad Wulf]

Wrede, on 04 January 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

how can ecm be considerd balanced, when in pugs team with most ecm, always winns no eceptions

Nope the better organized team wins! with or without ECM.

[Snib]

Marcus Wulf, on 04 January 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

Nope the better organized team wins! with or without ECM.

Same thing. If you cannot see your team or the enemy on the map you cannot organize. That's why more ECM wins.

Edited by Snib, 04 January 2013 - 04:52 PM.