116 replies to this topic

[Titan Osis]

DocBach, on 31 January 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

The book refers to the radius as being listed along with the ECM rules on page 137 of Battletech: Master Rules. The radius is 6 hexes.

THIS ISN'T TABLETOP......

[DocBach]

PrestonCDawg, on 31 January 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:

THIS ISN'T TABLETOP......

PGI really needs to quit reinventing the wheel. Battletech has gone through several revisions for the sake of balance, and a lot of PGI's tweeking has really screwed it up, and not for the better. You might find running in thermal vision fighting at 200 meters with as much alpha strike as possible enjoyable, but there is a huge market of players that doesn't -- and the way PGI has chosen to implicate ECM are turning them away in droves. I've tried to introduce coworkers, friends, and family members to this game. None of them wanted to play more than a couple rounds after they got stealth fried by ECM every match. I tried to explain scenarios and tactics to counter it and they said "that game really isn't fun, dude."

Pretty much, if you go to the front page of MechWarrior Online and look at the trending posts, on average two or three out of seven of the most active posts are about balancing ECM. I'm admittedly not a detective, but I'd take it as a clue that the general gameplaying public here might be thinking something is wrong with
how PGI implemented ECM in this game.

To your aversion about the board game: Did you read my example scenarios on how electronic warfare worked in table top? You don't think scenarios like that would have been more fun, and allowed for more strategies besides ECM, ECM, and ECM, and oh yeah as much alpha strike as you can muster with weapons unaffected by ECM?

To bring this back on line with the current topic, the proposed "fixes" PGI is making revolve around modules. Modules not only cost more c-bills than any other equipment in the game (you can buy an entire heavy 'Mech chassis for the price of most modules), they cost a separate currency that can only be earned by either dozens of hours of play time, or real money. We've heard pay to win tossed around by alarmists before in this game, but using GXP as a means to balance out a broken game mechanic is pushing the boundaries of pay to win much further than taking the Centurion AH out of the game for Yen Lo Wang.

Edited by DocBach, 01 February 2013 - 12:12 AM.

[p4r4g0n]

If people spent all their time arguing over the rules like this, I'm glad I never played TT

Just out of curiosity, in the context of MWO, would "radar can detect 'Mechs but can't identify them" equate to there's a blip (i.e. green circle or something) on the minimap but there is no triangle in the HUD cause the blip can't be identified nor targeted using "R"? The spotting mech can share info about the blip with team through shared radar data provided its not under the ECM umbrella?

This might be something PGI could tweak.

[DocBach]

p4r4g0n, on 31 January 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

If people spent all their time arguing over the rules like this, I'm glad I never played TT

Just out of curiosity, in the context of MWO, would "radar can detect 'Mechs but can't identify them" equate to there's a blip (i.e. green circle or something) on the minimap but there is no triangle in the HUD cause the blip can't be identified nor targeted using "R"? The spotting mech can share info about the blip with team through shared radar data provided its not under the ECM umbrella?

This might be something PGI could tweak.

The way I envision the description of the rules is you hit R on a target that's 700 meters out - its too far to determine exactly visually what it is -- it could be an Awesome, a Dragon, or even a Centurion. Your trusty sensors usually tell you exactly what type of 'Mech it is and its loadout after a couple seconds. Only this time, the target is in an ECM shroud, and the empty target box you get when you first target a 'Mech is all that remains. You can still track it on map, share its location to your lancemates and launch missiles at it, but you are oblivious to its weapons read out or any damage it is taken. You don't even know what kind of chassis it is until you can visually identify it.

Edited by DocBach, 31 January 2013 - 11:52 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

no; Id remove the angel part of the Guardian ECM and go with the game's timeline like you pretend youre gonna do.

Not throwing out the timeline for the sake of balance.

Make the game in 3055 if you want Angel in the game from the start

[I R O N Patriot]

ECM is Over powered. This is fact every one agrees. It is a Tool for evading detection. If you are physically seen, then in my opinion you have failed that purpose. Consequences must be in place. "Leg humping" as a tactic has to stop and will eventually when the reactor core breach is added to the game along with splash damage from explosions. But I am very happy with the Adv. Sensor and PPC effects to be added next week. This evens out the game and requires some level of skill to use ECM properly. As it should!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Irontygr, on 31 January 2013 - 11:57 PM, said:

when the reactor core breach is added to the game

It wont be in all liklihood as thats a fictional reaction that can never occur in a real nuclear reactor according to all the people Ive ever seen on these forums

[Exoth3rmic]

DocBach, on 31 January 2013 - 11:05 PM, said:

I've tried to introduce coworkers, friends, and family members to this game. None of them wanted to play more than a couple rounds after they got stealth fried by ECM every match. I tried to explain scenarios and tactics to counter it and they said "that game really isn't fun, dude."

What mechs were you having them run from the trial mechs available that left them in a situation where they couldn't enjoy the game becuase of ECM? Why weren't you helping them with the currently available counters? I assume during all this time you were encouraging them to play you weren't "moaning" about ECM - what with wanting to promote them playing it rather than getting them to agree with your own interpretation of why its game breaking?

The poll is poorly worded so not voting in it.

Perhaps ECM should be limited to 1 a team, or one per lance but I strongly disagree with anyone that makes a claim ECM is too OP when they refer to it as ECM mech vs Boating Missile Mechs. ECM is "countered" by team work. Lock on weapons are, for the most part, easy to abuse and allow damage projection in a way all other non-targetable weapons cannot. (I.E Shooting out of line of sight when relying on teammates locks etc etc, hitting without aiming).

If ECM was watered down to simply say delaying lock time, or obfuscating target information but still allowing lock this would make no difference to steak boaters running in from range, they have plenty of time to lock while closing distance and makes no difference to LRM boaters who will, in general, be so far out of engagement range they have time to aquire lock. Then we're back at square 1 where people are asking for more ECM effects.

Edited by Exoth3rmic, 01 February 2013 - 12:26 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Give me the option to not drop lone wolf so I dont have to PUG

[Chrithu]

Are the coming new counters fair? I have to say no when it comes to the prices. Will they be effective? Against the ECM Atlas yes. Versus lights? I doubt it. A 90 m buffer doesn't help getting even one LRM volley out. On the other hand you have TAG for that, which I see proven to work VERY well on a daily basis in the matches. And hitting a fast moving small target with the PPC will allways be something exclusive to the most skilled players.

Conclusion: The counter to the light ECM's is TAG or another light ECM. The counter to the atlas ECM will soon be PPCs and TAG.

[Lykaon]

jshill78, on 31 January 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

Wait... in the same post you call ECM overpowered and call the counter to it unfair.

Cake and eat it too?

Sheesh. ECM doesn't affect a single build that I run. I could care less about it. Is it nice that a weapon I use is going to have reduced heat and a secondary effect? Yes it is.

****.

So somehow ECM does not prevent your mechs from gaining targeting info on any ECM covered enemy mech that isn't within 200m of you?

ECM doesn't jam your minimap friendlies possition indicators?

ECM doesn't prevent your mechs from gaining passive intel on enemy locations via friendlies spotting?

And the 7 other mechs on your team are not effected at all by ECM as well?

I think perhaps you are underestimating the true impact of ECM or perhaps you under utilized your HUD elements in the past.


ECM influences so many aspects of this game it's actually sickening when you really think about it.

Weapon selections: LRMs or Streaks use/don't because of ECM.PPC/ER-PPC use/don't use to counter ECM

Module selections: Take modules to enhance your play style or take what will counter ECM?

Mech selection: Take a mech based on what you really prefer or to fill the need to stack ECM to ensure ECM dominance?

Manuvering: Stick within the ECM bubble or go without?

Strategy: Group composition based on countering or maintaining ECM dominance?

Tactics: Prioritize ECM mechs or don't?

About the only thing ECM does not influence in some way is what color should I paint my mech?


I don't think most players realize how much ECM potentially effects the game and meta game currently.

Edited by Lykaon, 01 February 2013 - 01:30 AM.

[Rakashan]

Lykaon, on 01 February 2013 - 01:28 AM, said:

So somehow ECM does not prevent your mechs from gaining targeting info on any ECM covered enemy mech that isn't within 200m of you?

ECM doesn't jam your minimap friendlies possition indicators?

ECM doesn't prevent your mechs from gaining passive intel on enemy locations via friendlies spotting?

He *did* say that it doesn't affect *him*. We can probably safely assume that he makes no use of this information. He doesn't look at enemy armor and aim at weakened locations. He doesn't look at his minimap and react to the blips on the map. He also probably does not prioritize targets based on chassis and loadout either.

[DocBach]

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

[Bobzilla]

Aidan McRae, on 31 January 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

Your poll is badly worded and so I will not vote. "Fair" implies that the upcoming changes might be viewed as unfair. I think what you are looking for is -- are the upcoming changes: Enough, Not Enough, Undecided.

In which case, I would vote Not Enough. They need to stop complicating balance with checks and balances. Once they balance the core game, they can worry about RPS. (Rock Paper Scissors)

The poll, and this thread were intended to be about the use of xp/gxp to balance something that doesn't cost xp/gxp. Not so much the effectiveness of that balance. I just see it going in an unfair direction. I don't think this is a P2W game, but it is pay to gain things faster. If your a new player and see that a counter to something that can be purchased right away will take lots and lots of time and/or paying money, your probably going to see it as a bit of a P2W situation. The effects in this situation seem almost miniscule so no real complaint can be made, but whats down the road? What if mastering a chasis and getting modules is a must have to be effective? I do feel modules should be effective as they are the 'end game' content, but I also feel you shouldn't need 'end game' content to counter something that can be purchased right from the start.

I see it like the old LRM debate, if they made AMS a module (well 2 modules really), which isn't even a fair comparison as there where at least other ways to deal with LRMs and AMS helped everyone, not just yourself.

The ECM debate has been had. It changed the game from a long range stand-off to a rush and brawl. The thing is, without ECM you could still use tactics to break that long range stand-off to a rush and brawl if you wanted, with ECM its only a rush and brawl. If you liked builds that were short range, and didn't want the trouble of using tactics to get close to the enemy you like ECM. It's not impossible to use long range weapons with ECM, but it's become extremly inaffective, like bringing a knife to a gunfight. You could build a missle boat, and then have a scout devoded to you to do just ok unless the other team gets someone close to you, but why not just build a brawler and be way more affective with no downside and that scout can also focus on more important things. It seems they were attempting to please those that liked the short range game, and cudos to them for doing so, but the scale tipped completely in the opposite direction. I don't suggest they go back to how it was, but a happy medium can be found with many many great suggestions in how to do it. My view is, with tweaking, the modules could be a way to reach that happy medium, it just seems unfair to me to exclued all but veteran players from that role.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Jason Parker, on 01 February 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

Are the coming new counters fair? I have to say no when it comes to the prices. Will they be effective? Against the ECM Atlas yes. Versus lights? I doubt it. A 90 m buffer doesn't help getting even one LRM volley out. On the other hand you have TAG for that, which I see proven to work VERY well on a daily basis in the matches. And hitting a fast moving small target with the PPC will allways be something exclusive to the most skilled players.

Conclusion: The counter to the light ECM's is TAG or another light ECM. The counter to the atlas ECM will soon be PPCs and TAG.

The fact that "leading" a light/medium ECM mech is pretty much gone is a counter to ECM. Once collisions are back in you'll see a lot of crappy pilots who RELY on ECM to be competitive stop playing them. If they can't rely on said advantage then the best option (for bad pilots) is to abandon it. They're only next option is the D-DC, which falls back to the TAG/ PPC counter.

[Skoll Lokeson]

DocBach, on 31 January 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

There are plenty of ways to fix this game, and fix balance, but PGI stubbornly resists them and continues to introduce "fixes" which introduce more series of problems, like the original ECM introduction as an anti-missile system in the first place.

Agreed (again)

Before you start to look for new checks and balances to keep your checks and balanced in check you should take a step back and take a good look at the original design.

[8RoundsRapid]

p4r4g0n, on 31 January 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

If people spent all their time arguing over the rules like this, I'm glad I never played TT

I played alot of TT, I mean A LOT. And you are correct. The non stop arguments over rules, LOS, bookkeeping, and -shudder- zellbrigen, amongst other things, did indeed make playing it an exercise in frustration at times, lol.

der langsamere, on 01 February 2013 - 12:06 AM, said:

no they need to just up and out with it and stop saying this game is based on TT if theyre not going to GO with TT rules.

You know, I tend to agree with you here. If they want to use TT rules, then friggin use them. If they're not going to use them, or if they are going to change so much of the lore, they could eliminate alot of TT/vid game argument by just admitting it and moving on.

I love the TT game, and I still play it -sorta- via Megamek and Mekwars. It had balance in all facets of its design, quite elegant balance at that. If I wanted to make a game based on BT, I would use the balance already in place - some of it for 20+ years, time tested! - rather than trying to change it to do things that aren't or shouldn't be possible. Thats just me tho, I like the simple, elegant solutions.

[Apoc1138]

DocBach, on 31 January 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

I was using the average cost of the other modules to presume how much the new modules would cost, and the fact we need two of them for maximized effect, I doubled them. Average module cost now is 6,000,000 c-bills x 2 = 12,000,000.

My mistake, if your numbers are correct we only need 10x the cost of the original ECM unit to balance against it with our new, frugally cheap 4,000,000 c-bill investment for the highest tier of the modules, which gives us a whole 50 meter buffer zone!

it is 1 module, when you buy level 2 it upgrades the existing level 1 module to level 2, so it is still only 2million, not even 4 million... for a module that takes up 0 crits and 0 tons it seems like a pretty fair price to me

[MasterGoa]

I answered no simply because countering ECM is BAP's job...

And this is my opinion...

[DocBach]

Apoc1138, on 04 February 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

it is 1 module, when you buy level 2 it upgrades the existing level 1 module to level 2, so it is still only 2million, not even 4 million... for a module that takes up 0 crits and 0 tons it seems like a pretty fair price to me

So, its one module, but you have to buy a second one? What?

I haven't seen the costs for it, and I may have made the mistake to assume it would fall in line with pricing for other modules, which is ~6,000,000 c-bills a module. You are also forgetting that it has a prerequisite GXP requirement, which can only be earned through either hundreds of games, or with real money.

Yep, sounds totally fair in price.