442 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

Alright, so let me ask you this, if all of your mechs could use ECM, how many would you not use it on?

Edited by ICEFANG13, 13 January 2013 - 09:01 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Marcus Wulf, on 13 January 2013 - 05:53 PM, said:

Nope, its not - LRM's are - have you ever gotten smothered by 2 Stalker LRM boats? Not a very nice feeling, ECM you have to pilot, shoot straight, having it does not guarantee kill or survival.

Ever ran up on a Stalker LRM boat? All they can do is turn in place and die; it's a great feeling.
Hmmm, I wasn't aware there were mechs you didn't have to pilot or aim with. Must be the ECM ones, as ECM does so much already.

Quote

Ex. pack of Raven 3L's who went straight into a prepared firing line and was stupid enough to stay or the ECM comando running straight towards an Atlas with an AC 2o.... or standing in front of a dual AC 20 CAT... (That was funny only the legs was left)

Sounds like sucky pilots.

Marcus Wulf, on 13 January 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

Hmm... because we were fighting in the open? There are very few places that can hide an Atlas-D... Tempting but no.

Pro tip, don't fight in the open. Also, go with D-DC next time.

[Araara]

The sad thing about all of this is that the current ECM implementation develops really REALLY bad behavior and habits for players, especially light mech pilots. The amount of super reckless aggressive tactics and strategies is just plain horrible to watch.

It's even starting to show in organised 8v8. There's gonna be a lot of QQ either way :

1) ECM stays the same : the eternal QQing from con-ECM due to all the points mentionned in this thread

2) ECM changes slightly and becomes more balanced : mild QQ from both pro-ECM and con-ECM because it's not exactly how people thought it would be (though i guess it's the better of all 3 choices)

3) ECM gets removed or majorly nerfed : QQ from pro-ECM because of all the bad ECM habits that players in general developped, LRM spam again, lack of electronic warfare in the game


I really think PGI is going to have to suck this up and move on, whichever choice they decide on. Personally, I vote for #2!


p.s. : for those of you who are pro or con ECM, yes there's a way to counter ECM, yes there's a way to counter LRMs. The question is : which choice makes it more interesting on the short and long run, for the health of this game?

[Thorqemada]

Araara, on 13 January 2013 - 10:39 PM, said:

The sad thing about all of this is that the current ECM implementation develops really REALLY bad behavior and habits for players, especially light mech pilots. The amount of super reckless aggressive tactics and strategies is just plain horrible to watch.

These super agressive tactics are simply the way the game is meant to be played atm.
Its adaption to the current technological battlefield environment and those who adapt the quickest survive/win more often.
When the environment changes the behavior changes again and again the quickest adaptors will gain the most.
An "Ideal of Combat" is nothing more than a fairytale...

[StalaggtIKE]

Araara, on 13 January 2013 - 10:39 PM, said:

The sad thing about all of this is that the current ECM implementation develops really REALLY bad behavior and habits for players, especially light mech pilots. The amount of super reckless aggressive tactics and strategies is just plain horrible to watch.

It is disheartening to see people just walk out in the open clumped together. Though I speculate that a lot of those players did the same prior to ECM and now have the tool to do it.

Thorqemada, on 14 January 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

These super agressive tactics are simply the way the game is meant to be played atm.
Its adaption to the current technological battlefield environment and those who adapt the quickest survive/win more often.
When the environment changes the behavior changes again and again the quickest adaptors will gain the most.
An "Ideal of Combat" is nothing more than a fairytale...

Very true, however I believe running out in the open is typically as far from ideal as any combat environment should be.

[StalaggtIKE]

InnerSphereNews said:

Dev Blog 2 - Information Warfare

In this blog we discuss some of the details about Information Warfare and what it means to MechWarrior® Online™. As always we're revealing details that are beta ready.
Contributors include Bryan Ekman, Paul Inouye, and David Bradley.

Overview

At its heart, Information Warfare is about controlling the flow of information on the battlefield.

Knowing where your enemy is.
Knowing the current status of your enemy.
Understanding your enemy’s intentions.
Sharing information between units.


BattleGrid



The core of information warfare is the BattleGrid, a combination of command center and dynamic battlefield map useable by players during gameplay. The BattleGrid is an extension of the HUD and allows players to quickly review the tactical situation at hand. Players will immediately recognize elements from other successful shooters and previous MechWarrior® products.

A scalable battlefield top-down map.
Object and waypoint markers.
Friendly and Enemy Unit Markers
Support Units
Orders


Modules – A New Concept



In order to evolve the concept of MechWarrior®, we needed a new layer of customization. After several scrapped ideas, we settled on a module concept. Modules allow players to customize their BattleMech with functionality without having to deal with the existing slots and tonnage rules.
Each BattleMech will come with a Module Board. Players can insert modules of their choice, provided they have space. Each module adds a layer of functionality. Modules are linked to the Pilot Tree and are unlocked by training various skills.
Modules are also a very important part of Role Warfare - a topic for a future blog.

Targeting Tweaks

We’ve changed how targeting has worked by layering and controlling what players see and know about the opposing force elements.
Target information is now exclusively Line of Sight/Detection (LOSD). Simply put, if you, a teammate or support unit can’t directly see or detect a target using a module, that target is invisible. Target information decays rapidly. This means if you lose LOSD, you will lose all knowledge that target’s position and current status.
Details about a target are not inclusive, and is now layered based on the type of modules and BattleMech you are piloting. The concept helps emphasizes using specific `Mech and Module combinations to gain and share enhanced targeting information.
Sharing of target information is also no longer inclusive and requires a Module or C3 Master/Slave unit.

Detection

So how do you gather LOSD information? Well there are several ways.

Direct – You can see the target directly (LOSD).
Radar – Your radar can detect a target in a predetermined arc, also LOSD.
Satellite Scan – Orbital scan of the battlefield, highly efficient however still limited to top-down LOSD.
UAV – Similar to a Sat Scan, but localized to a specific area on the battlefield.
Detectors – Dropped off on the battlefield.
Units – Any non-BattleMech present on the battlefield.


Detection Modes



Each type of detection device may also have different primary or secondary modes of detection as follows:

Night Vision – Allows players to see more detail in low light situations.
Thermal Vision – Allows players to see heat signatures that can be detected through obstacles.
Magnetometer Assisted – Allows players to detect metal and metal densities which can uncover a BattleMech hiding behind a building.

Some of these modes will not be available at launch, but I want to give you an overview of where we plan to take this concept.


Disruption/Spoofing

With such an emphasis on detection and tracking, we also needed a counter balance, something that players could equip. Using the module system, we allow players to equip Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) devices in the form of:

Spoofers – Beacons that send out a false target signatures.
Disruptors – Disrupt or block modes, communication, target acquisition and locks.
Surveillance – Allows a player to intercept and decode enemy intel.

We've opened up the Community Q&A 3 thread for your questions, so ask away!

Looking back at this, all I can think..., what happend?

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 14 January 2013 - 05:23 AM.

[StUffz]

It means that nothing changes on ECM itself but adds more modules to give a chance to counter ECM.

It can also mean that Thermal will be taken out of the current system and must be purchased with EXP.

[Tolkien]

StUffz, on 14 January 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

It means that nothing changes on ECM itself but adds more modules to give a chance to counter ECM.

It can also mean that Thermal will be taken out of the current system and must be purchased with EXP.

Along the same lines while more counters are very much needed, I personally hope that the hard-countering philosophy that's been pursued so far will be withdrawn and replaced with soft counters (along with balancing the underlying such as LRMs and SRMs). I'd like the scissors to still chip away at the rock even if they're going to get badly dulled in the process.

If more hard counters are added it will be just like that fellow on the No Guts No Galaxy podcast (number 54?) worried it would be - an ever escalating series of trump cards/bandaids rather than addressing the underlying.

Splitting the ECM into 3+ modules would also go a long way to making Information warfare deeper while also bringing some sanity back into the 1.5 ton balance of the unit.

Edited by Tolkien, 14 January 2013 - 06:48 AM.

[StUffz]

Tolkien, on 14 January 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

Along the same lines while more counters are very much needed, I personally hope that the hard-countering philosophy that's been pursued so far will be withdrawn and replaced with soft counters (along with balancing the underlying such as LRMs and SRMs). I'd like the scissors to still chip away at the rock even if they're going to get badly dulled in the process.

If more hard counters are added it will be just like that fellow on the No Guts No Galaxy podcast (number 54?) worried it would be - an ever escalating series of trump cards/bandaids rather than addressing the underlying.

Splitting the ECM into 3+ modules would also go a long way to making Information warfare deeper while also bringing some sanity back into the 1.5 ton balance of the unit.

Two things what I don't think:

- turning down from hard to soft counter. I think the game designers want to avoid that the game will be decided by LRM/Streak boating. That is why they will keep the hardcounter up.
- splitting ECM into 3 modules but more the ECCM part will be split up.

Edited by StUffz, 14 January 2013 - 07:01 AM.

[Tolkien]

StUffz, on 14 January 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

Two things what I don't think:

- turning down from hard to soft counter. I think the game designers want to avoid that the game will be decided by LRM/Streak boating. That is why they will keep the hardcounter up.
- splitting ECM into 3 modules but more the ECCM part will be split up.

That's what I meant by balancing the underlying - e.g. if LRM damage was reduced by half but they could still lock on to anyone they would still have their place - particularly useful to keep lag shielded lights from running/circle strafing in the open with impunity.

Streaks might need adjustment too since the ECM seems to be aimed squarely at neutering the streakcat more than anything else - I might be way off with this comment but old posts lead me to believe this. Amusingly the streakcat is still around it's use is just restricted to coordinated hit squads that bring pocket ECMs

The more things change the more they stay the same...

Edited by Tolkien, 14 January 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[StUffz]

Let's wait and see what they offer.

I don't think it's bad with the idea they are coming up but everybody needs to also make some changes in their personal point of view of the game and its mechanics.

Edited by StUffz, 14 January 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Ugrak]

Now I have to post in a ECM thread to.
I just had a really ******* ******** Conquest match.

Ok, granted two ppl on my team "d/c'ed" at the start, really, who do ppl who d/c at the beginning even get any MC/XP?
Then when fighting start at the first cap point, what comes from the enemy team?

Well, FOUR ECM Raven's and one ECM Atlas... How the **** on earth!?
I really REALLY hope that the newMatchmaking system will take care of some of this ECM problem.
To match the number of ECM mechs equal to both sides, and if not possible, limit it to ONE on the team that gets it.

[StalaggtIKE]

Ugrak, on 14 January 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Now I have to post in a ECM thread to.
I just had a really ******* ******** Conquest match.

Ok, granted two ppl on my team "d/c'ed" at the start, really, who do ppl who d/c at the beginning even get any MC/XP?
Then when fighting start at the first cap point, what comes from the enemy team?

Well, FOUR ECM Raven's and one ECM Atlas... How the **** on earth!?
I really REALLY hope that the newMatchmaking system will take care of some of this ECM problem.
To match the number of ECM mechs equal to both sides, and if not possible, limit it to ONE on the team that gets it.

I've heard that a lot of people are just d/c on non-ECM teams.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 14 January 2013 - 10:25 AM.

[Codejack]

I'm so sick of ECM at this point that I'm ready to say let's make it actively harmful to the mechs that carry it; like not being able to use weapons, or having it explode and kill the mech if a PPC hits is.

I'm spending all of my time either running my ECM mechs or running other variants of them to unlock the tree, and it is just B-O-R-I-N-G.

[Ugrak]

Hmm, that should be a BIG incentive to (amongst other) rethink the reward system.
You should not get rewarded for not participating.

[Tolkien]

Ugrak, on 14 January 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

Hmm, that should be a BIG incentive to (amongst other) rethink the reward system.
You should not get rewarded for not participating.

I believe you get rewards up to the point in the match you disconnect - so those people DCing when they see no ECM are hopefully already receiving no reward (they would just rather not play than endure the likely face stomping that is coming).

Once they get the 4fps bug, the yellow screen bug, and a few of the frequent black screens sorted out then hopefully there will be a system that tracks your disconnects and does something to discourage it - League of Legends gives you a 5 minute cooldown, then a 15, then 48 hours I think.

It gets pretty stiff after the first one so it tolerates accidents and incidents but it punishes people who abandon their team.

Edited by Tolkien, 14 January 2013 - 10:44 AM.

[Skyscream Sapphire]

Ugrak, on 14 January 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Well, FOUR ECM Raven's and one ECM Atlas... How the **** on earth!?
I really REALLY hope that the newMatchmaking system will take care of some of this ECM problem.
To match the number of ECM mechs equal to both sides, and if not possible, limit it to ONE on the team that gets it.

The piece of equipment is so overpowered that you shudder to think of an imbalance of even one extra ECM on a team...but you think the solution is to just have the the match maker put even amounts on each team?

Talk about treating the symptom instead of the problem.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

I hate to break it to my fellow rebels(Nice fighting with you),but you guys may as well give up.(We lost) They obviously don't care one bit at this point about any kind of logical game balance between weapons, devices, or even variants. Assuming you don't get suspended for endlessly hammering on the neglected, beaten, starved, eventually killed, then buried topic that Piranha is totally ignoring(like I did); you'll still never get them to fix it. If they cared at all, they would have done something by now or at the very least said something about it by now. You can't even get them to say anything about it in a FAQ or Command Chair; when it's one of the most biggests concerns in the community and game flaws that they could respond to.

Tomorrow we get a new patch that'll most likely have no logical balance changes in it(as usual) and another Mech no one will use or care about(Commando 2.0). Woopty do Piranha.

[StalaggtIKE]

Bluten, on 14 January 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

I hate to break it to my fellow rebels(Nice fighting with you),but you guys may as well give up.(We lost) They obviously don't care one bit at this point about any kind of logical game balance between weapons, devices, or even variants. Assuming you don't get suspended for endlessly hammering on the neglected, beaten, starved, eventually killed, then buried topic that Piranha is totally ignoring(like I did); you'll still never get them to fix it. If they cared at all, they would have done something by now or at the very least said something about it by now. You can't even get them to say anything about it in a FAQ or Command Chair; when it's one of the most biggests concerns in the community and game flaws that they could respond to.

Tomorrow we get a new patch that'll most likely have no logical balance changes in it(as usual) and another Mech no one will use or care about(Commando 2.0). Woopty do Piranha.

You got suspended? Please do not give up.

[StalaggtIKE]

One of the biggest issues with ECM is:

Radar Advantage

Due to ECM having stealth properties, the mech, on the left, without ECM must be within 200m in order to even spot the enemy. However the mech, on the right, with ECM, can spot the enemy out to 800m! That's a 600m difference. By that time he's got intel on weapons and damaged armor well before you can. In theory ECM does BAP's job better, oh and it also neutralizes it to boot. Balanced?

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 15 January 2013 - 08:15 AM.