293 replies to this topic

[Malzel]

I have to thank this thread for introducing me to this Grraarrgghh fellow. He's like the Walter Sobchack of the MWO community. He's not wrong, he's just an ***hole.

Personally, I think we need him in every thread.

[Grraarrgghh]

Malzel, on 17 January 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

I have to thank this thread for introducing me to this Grraarrgghh fellow. He's like the Walter Sobchack of the MWO community. He's not wrong, he's just an ***hole.

Personally, I think we need him in every thread.

You are technically correct - the best kind of correct.

I am a literal larger than life ******* here to give stark input to good threads and make ****** threads shittier.

[Leimrey]

This game hasn't left pre-alpha stage yet. It's so buggy, unbalanced and content limited that it's not even funny. Seriously, it's full of placeholders being just placeholders for more placeholders which will be added in the future like the current economy, matchmaking and weapon balance. Besides, beta test implies that the players get to actually test something, report the results to the devs and get some sort of reaction in the form of balance tweaks. PGI just doesn't listen to its testers and seemingly adds or removes things at random, unless the devs themselves become victims of abuse (see collisions which were removed after the players bullied the devs in game with them). We have been waiting for PPC and ER weapon buffs for 3 months now and truedubs are still untested in-game, even though the community has been asking for them and presenting logical arguments and math why we need them for months now. And I'm not even talking about the catapult torso twist and ballistic hardpoint nerf.

[DaZur]

Never understood the premise that if "X" suggestion is not implemented in "Y" time-frame, that this somehow is demonstrative of the Devs not listening and or not caring...

Nothing but self-imposed deadlines...

[Novawrecker]

ollo, on 16 January 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

Everyone that calls the players that rightfully complain about ECM babies is just rude and has absolutely no idea what the problem is.

I wouldn't worry too much about him, Ollo. He's one of the originals that cried bloody murder about ECM to begin with.

Nekki Basara, on 17 January 2013 - 05:41 AM, said:

... They are wanting to play a team-based slow paced tactical sim solo, and finding that they suck at it. Blaming ECM is easier than admitting to yourself that you are wanting something that this game is not trying to deliver. Group up, get on voice and start learning to rely on your team-mates for intel rather than trusting the minimap to give you an unkillable spysat.

Extremely well said!

[Thirdstar]

Grraarrgghh, on 17 January 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

You are technically correct - the best kind of correct.

I am a literal larger than life ******* here to give stark input to good threads and make ****** threads shittier.

See if you actually EVER did this, you'd be of more use to the forums.

[Nekki Basara]

Novawrecker, while I appreciate your support I do have to point out that Grraarrgghh was most definite pulling your leg with his hyperbolic vilification of the ECM in the way back when. He even linked to it on our forums because he couldn't believe you were missing the joke that badly.

Congzilla, on 17 January 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

On TT NARC only loses it's cluster hit bonus from ECM, not the lock on ability. The ECM we have right now is Angel ECM. It is actually clan level tech.

What is currently in game is actually more powerful than Angel.

You're right that there is a slight discrepancy between the TT and MWO implementation of NARC, but currently the games acts as if there is always a spotter as long as someone knows where the mech is. There is also no way to remove a pod that is attached. It really does need further thought to balance it, but given how critical the interplay of the ewar tech is to the stated goal of the project it would be utter foolishness to assume that the Devs don't know that it is in their best interests to hit a happy medium.

[Havyek]

Congzilla, on 17 January 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

It isn't really nerfing it, it is just allowing NARC to work the way it is supposed to. From Total Warfare pg.134:

Quote

Narc Missile Beacon: Missiles equipped to home in on an
attached Narc pod lose the Cluster Hits Table bonus for that
system if the pods themselves lie within an ECM “bubble.” The
Narc launcher itself (standard and iNarc) is not aff ected by ECM.

Which I'm taking to understand that means that the NARC launcher isn't affected by ECM, but the pod it fires is.
How is that supposed to work? The weapon itself isn't affected by ECM, but the only reason to use it, is.

[Novawrecker]

Nekki Basara, on 17 January 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Novawrecker, while I appreciate your support I do have to point out that Grraarrgghh was most definite pulling your leg with his hyperbolic vilification of the ECM in the way back when. He even linked to it on our forums because he couldn't believe you were missing the joke that badly.

He's ticked caused I've (successfully) called him out twice now. Re-read all the links on this forum and you'll see what is meant. However, nice of you covering for your bud. Kuddos for your support for him. He'll need all he can get


On a related note: I do agree that NARC needs major adjusting in this game, especially how ECM has practically snipped its <censored>, or better said its ammo.

Edited by Novawrecker, 17 January 2013 - 10:14 AM.

[Ken Fury]

Novawrecker, on 17 January 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

He's ticked caused I've (successfully) called him out twice now. Re-read all the links on this forum and you'll see what is meant. However, nice of you covering for your bud. Kuddos for your support for him. He'll need all he can get

He's quite happy I can assure you. The reason he's happy is: Undetected sarcasm.

[Grraarrgghh]

Thirdstar, on 17 January 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

See if you actually EVER did this, you'd be of more use to the forums.

Just because my posts aren't unmitigated complaining doesn't mean they aren't helpful, though I could see how that could be confusing.

[Thirdstar]

Grraarrgghh, on 17 January 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

Just because my posts aren't unmitigated complaining doesn't mean they aren't helpful, though I could see how that could be confusing.

Of course your posts are all unmitigated complaining. Complaining about complainers is still complaining ya know.

OMG Complainception!

Edited by Thirdstar, 17 January 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Rannos]

Novawrecker, on 17 January 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

He's ticked caused I've (successfully) called him out twice now.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Aw man, you pubbies sure are dense. This right here is the reason we post outside our thread. Tell us more more about being a forums detective, kolchak. :allears:

[Hubis]

Garth Erlam, on 16 January 2013 - 04:38 PM, said:

This'll be my last post on the subject, as Paul mentioned what we're doing in regards to speaking to the changes.

ECM being used on all ECM-able Mechs does show that it is overly powerful. The reason no changes have been made is it takes time to figure out what, exactly, is making that the reason. Is it the lock prevention? The 'cloak'? The range it works at? The weight? Crit space? Variants that use it? That it makes LRMs incapable of lock? SSRMs?

So while total numbers used isn't an indicator it's fine, it does mean people won't just go to ECM because it makes you instantly win. In fact, many builds aren't affected by ECM at all (my Cicada, in particular, does not discriminate.)

So we use that, suggestions, feedback, numbers gathered, watching 8v8's, etc, and eventually we come up with ideas. Then we test them. Tweak them. Test them. Tweak them. etc.

So while I'd love to tell you what changes we've made, none are in stone and until I have something to tell you that won't be wrong as of 9am the next day, I will.

I hope you all understand, we don't do this to be cruel, we do it because there is, quite literally, nothing of use to tell you yet, beyond that we've gathered our data, your suggestions, and are going through testing them now.

I would say the primary reason for the prevalence of ECM is basically meta-gaming:

• Guided Weapons (StreakSRMs, LRMs) greatly out-class Direct-Fire Weapons (Lasers, Ballistics, SRMs) at killing fast-movers due to netcode issues hurting direct-fire efficacy and the guided nature of SSRMs/LRMs making them easier to do consistent, unavoidable damage.
  
• ECM provides a hard counter to these weapons by preventing them from being used on the target, making a light mech with ECM tremendously more survivable.
  
• The only counter to this is actually more ECM, due to the jamming/counter mechanic.

The net result of this is that you end up with a positive feed-back system pushing the metagame towards more ECM:
Direct-Fire Scout < StreakSRM Scout < ECM Scout < StreakSRM + ECM Scout < More StreakSRM + ECM Scouts

To me, the cornerstone here is how effective Streaks are. Before ECM, the JR7-D and COM-2D were the kings of light-on-light combat, and very few "striker" lights were used because you would usually end up getting murdered by enemy lights anyways. Streaks were not always so dominant -- it used to be that they would not hit a target if you were both locked in tight turns, making them a much more interesting weapon, and really balancing their effectiveness against Lasers (which were easier to hit with) and SRMs (which you could lead with, and pack more damage into the same effective tonnage/hardpoints). However, Streak Improvements plus ECM have shifted the metagame completely away from this.

One simple starting point would be to nerf streaks. Since they're guided weapons, give them the same damage as LRMs (1.8-2.0) instead of SRMs (2.5). That's a BIG nerf, but it wouldn't be too crippling to light mech damage output, as now there would be a real clear benefit to packing a SRM4 launcher instead. Alternatively/additionally, implement some of the streak lock time suggestions -- make the time required to acquire a lock with SSRM2's scale with the number of launchers equipped (and likewise, make the lock easier to lose).

Unfortunately, I think that nerfing streaks right now is actually a Bad Idea ™ because of the state of the netcode. When you could counter light mech's mobility by knocking them over and blasting them when they got too aggressive, there was some semblance of balance -- light pilots needed to be aggressive to use high-efficiency close-range weapons, but they had to be very careful and highly skilled to not end up face down in the ground and getting a back full of SRMs. With knockdown suspended, they're much less fragile by default, and the effectiveness of streaks is the only thing balancing that. So to fix ECM, I'd suggest the following:

• Work on the netcode so that hitting fast-moving mechs with un-guided weapons gives you reasonable DPS as compared to slower targets.
  
• Once this happens, evaluate how effective streaks are compared to balanced direct-fire weapons, and consider re-adjusting their damage/usability
  
• Once this has been tuned, re-examine the rest of the ECM mechanic and see if it's still a problem.

[Thirdstar]

Hubis, on 17 January 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

......................snip

I completely agree with everything in this post. I think I need to go have a lie down.

[Nekki Basara]

Novawrecker, on 17 January 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

He's ticked caused I've (successfully) called him out twice now. Re-read all the links on this forum and you'll see what is meant. However, nice of you covering for your bud. Kuddos for your support for him. He'll need all he can get

I tried man, I tried.I did my best to be nice. We've been pretty amused by your failure to comprehend for a while. I'd screenshot but OPSEC and all that. You're just going to have to trust me and possibly google the phrase "capslock is cruise control for cool".

[RobinSage]

Tennex, on 16 January 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

it has been said over and over by forum users that this game is beta.

So why ignore the beta testers?


I mean if you take a A1DS test and it calls you a wh*re while you are taking it, do you ignore the test results just because it was rude?

No, that'd be denial, and ignoring the issue just ends up killing you, when you could have gotten it treated. Here is the A1DS test PGI: http://mwomercs.com/...esponse-survey/

I'm not saying its okay to be rude in these forums, but take it objectively as an indication that there are some issues in the game.

You are not a PAID Q & A tester for PGI are you? No. So therefore your opinion doesn't matter. I would just suggest sending proof of bugs by sending screenshots or video to support@pgi.com would be the best way to get YOUR concerns to the devs. Flaming the devs or other community members on the forums will definitely NOT make your voice heard.

Perhaps being tactful, direct and doing what the devs have TOLD you to do as a tester might work. Again this is a case of someone bitching about something they don't know much about because they haven't taken the time to see what they're SUPPOSED to be doing as a Beta Tester.

[Novawrecker]

Rannos, on 17 January 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Aw man, you pubbies sure are dense. This right here is the reason we post outside our thread. Tell us more more about being a forums detective, kolchak. :allears:

Nekki Basara, on 17 January 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

I tried man, I tried.I did my best to be nice. We've been pretty amused by your failure to comprehend for a while. I'd screenshot but OPSEC and all that. You're just going to have to trust me and possibly google the phrase "capslock is cruise control for cool".

Do you all come with matching sets of pompoms too? IJS

Hubis, on 17 January 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

I would say the primary reason for the prevalence of ECM is basically meta-gaming:

• Guided Weapons (StreakSRMs, LRMs) greatly out-class Direct-Fire Weapons (Lasers, Ballistics, SRMs) at killing fast-movers due to netcode issues hurting direct-fire efficacy and the guided nature of SSRMs/LRMs making them easier to do consistent, unavoidable damage.
  
• ECM provides a hard counter to these weapons by preventing them from being used on the target, making a light mech with ECM tremendously more survivable.
  
• The only counter to this is actually more ECM, due to the jamming/counter mechanic.

The net result of this is that you end up with a positive feed-back system pushing the metagame towards more ECM:
Direct-Fire Scout < StreakSRM Scout < ECM Scout < StreakSRM + ECM Scout < More StreakSRM + ECM Scouts

To me, the cornerstone here is how effective Streaks are. Before ECM, the JR7-D and COM-2D were the kings of light-on-light combat, and very few "striker" lights were used because you would usually end up getting murdered by enemy lights anyways. Streaks were not always so dominant -- it used to be that they would not hit a target if you were both locked in tight turns, making them a much more interesting weapon, and really balancing their effectiveness against Lasers (which were easier to hit with) and SRMs (which you could lead with, and pack more damage into the same effective tonnage/hardpoints). However, Streak Improvements plus ECM have shifted the metagame completely away from this.

One simple starting point would be to nerf streaks. Since they're guided weapons, give them the same damage as LRMs (1.8-2.0) instead of SRMs (2.5). That's a BIG nerf, but it wouldn't be too crippling to light mech damage output, as now there would be a real clear benefit to packing a SRM4 launcher instead. Alternatively/additionally, implement some of the streak lock time suggestions -- make the time required to acquire a lock with SSRM2's scale with the number of launchers equipped (and likewise, make the lock easier to lose).

Unfortunately, I think that nerfing streaks right now is actually a Bad Idea ™ because of the state of the netcode. When you could counter light mech's mobility by knocking them over and blasting them when they got too aggressive, there was some semblance of balance -- light pilots needed to be aggressive to use high-efficiency close-range weapons, but they had to be very careful and highly skilled to not end up face down in the ground and getting a back full of SRMs. With knockdown suspended, they're much less fragile by default, and the effectiveness of streaks is the only thing balancing that. So to fix ECM, I'd suggest the following:

• Work on the netcode so that hitting fast-moving mechs with un-guided weapons gives you reasonable DPS as compared to slower targets.
  
• Once this happens, evaluate how effective streaks are compared to balanced direct-fire weapons, and consider re-adjusting their damage/usability
  
• Once this has been tuned, re-examine the rest of the ECM mechanic and see if it's still a problem.

VERY interesting points made. This does, however, make me wonder what effect Angel ECM will have in the game if this is looked at upon CWs begining (or how ever it will be finally implemented).

[Zolthar]

I like when whinners bring their tears on Facebook, then we can notice they look like 15-18 years old.

[Hubis]

Novawrecker, on 17 January 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

VERY interesting points made. This does, however, make me wonder what effect Angel ECM will have in the game if this is looked at upon CWs begining (or how ever it will be finally implemented).

Well, to quote the Sarna articles:

Quote

Guardian ECM
Affected systems includeArtemis IV, C3 and C3i Computernetworks, and Narc Missile Beacons. A Guardian can jam a Beagle Active Probe (or its Clan equivalent), but the probe-equipped unit will be aware of the jamming. The Capellan Confederation expanded the utility of the Guardian even more with the introduction of Stealth Armor.^[3]

Quote

Angel ECM

Game Rules
[color=#000000]
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.[/color]
[color=#000000]
When using ECCM rules, the Angel ECM Suite counts as two ECM/ECCM units (depending on how it is set) for the purposes of determining the ratio of ECM to ECCM in a given area.[/color]

Aside from the "counting as 2 ECM/ECCM" units, note the fact that Angel blocks streak missile launchers, but Guardian does not. So basically, relative to the technology currently in the game, GECM is actually behaving as AECM. That's not necessarily a good or bad thing, but it is worth pointing out. Personally, I think a good "soft" fix would be removing the "jamming prevents streak locks" -- though still retaining the +50% lock time debuff. This would allow for some non-ECM light hunters like the JR7-D or the HBK-4SP to be viable again, while not totally removing the protection ECM granted.

Edited by Hubis, 17 January 2013 - 12:35 PM.