452 replies to this topic

[Kousagi]

Codejack, on 12 February 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

Welcome to ignore. That is just the absolute stupidest thing I have ever read, and feel bad that I wasted this much time on you.

At this point, I am simply convinced that you don't care about balance, canon, rules, or anything but you being invincible in a fast, light ECM mech, so there is no more point discussing anything with you,.

Awesome! Thank you! I'm sure though that everyone would be happy if you stopped posting.

Hmmm, though one thing is, that I have yet to say a single thing about balance in MWO to you. You don't even know my stance on balance to start with. The only thing I have done so far, is telling you how things work.

[Garth Erlam]

Quote

OK, so LRMs were made worse, so ECM now makes them even worse, again?

I think what he's saying is that in the TT, LRM's were fired at a location; in MWO they can be locked on to a target.

[Codejack]

Garth Erlam, on 12 February 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

I think what he's saying is that in the TT, LRM's were fired at a location; in MWO they can be locked on to a target.

Garth, you lied to me in the other thread. If I could put you on ignore, I would, but I can't, but I am certainly not going to take anything you say seriously, especially when, like this comment, you either didn't think it through or are being disingenuous.

To everyone else, why would you NEED to lock on in a turn-based game?

[Mechteric]

Garth Erlam, on 12 February 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

I think what he's saying is that in the TT, LRM's were fired at a location; in MWO they can be locked on to a target.

Indirect fire is location based right, but if you had line of sight you would roll to hit a target?


If so here's an idea: When LRMs are going to a target that the LRM source has line of sight to, then all missiles go to the target as they do currently. But if LRMs are going to a target that is being provided indirectly without line of sight from the LRM source, then the missiles spread out a bit more and maybe half or so will hit the enemy mech even if he's an Atlas standing still, the rest will hit around him (and potentially any of his friends that are close by). This would be nice for fire saturation on an area.

That would also be where TAG and Narc would allow more pinpoint hits on the indirect target as if they had line of sight.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 12 February 2013 - 11:40 AM.

[Kousagi]

CapperDeluxe, on 12 February 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

Indirect fire is location based right, but if you had line of sight you would roll to hit a target?

Na, both get a roll, this is more of a canon thing. I think he believes LRM's guidance to be the same as what I think it is. In short in TT your mech predicts where the LRM's need to land in order to intercept a mech, and they are fired and guide to that location, not the mech itself. Which explains indirect fire of them, their wild inaccuracy, and immunity to ECM.

[Wildstreak]

Garth Erlam, on 12 February 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

I think what he's saying is that in the TT, LRM's were fired at a location; in MWO they can be locked on to a target.

Incorrect.
In TT LRMs are fired at a target even indirectly.
Swarm LRMs are fired at a location.

[deadflight84]

In any real combat scenario ecm will be used, america uses it all the time. ecm needs to stay in order to keep the real world feel. do you think iran likes americas stealth bombers? no but they exist

[Fate 6]

PrestonCDawg, on 01 February 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

It's great, it makes you diversify your load outs and makes you think. You can't just run a targeted missile boat without consequence. Also it makes people communicate and gives certain team mates roles on the battle field.

Yeah, it makes you have to think that running LRMs is a stupid idea because it's a gamble of whether or not they will even do damage in a game.

We've been over this "skill and communication and thinking" argument over and over. There could be a better way to implement that (like buffing TAG/NARC) than making lock-ons a complete gamble.

[Twisted Power]

deadflight84, on 12 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

In any real combat scenario ecm will be used, america uses it all the time. ecm needs to stay in order to keep the real world feel. do you think iran likes americas stealth bombers? no but they exist

We also have mountable tank radar that pings targets for miles.

[Mancu]

deadflight84, on 12 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

In any real combat scenario ecm will be used, america uses it all the time. ecm needs to stay in order to keep the real world feel. do you think iran likes americas stealth bombers? no but they exist

That goes along with the "real world feel" of giant walking robots right...



The bottom line is that ECM, as it exists, is unpopular with the players. In this poll (as of 683 votes) only 27% of the players "enjoy" ECM. In the other polls it has been about the same. Catering to 1/3 of the player base and ignoring the rest is not a good business model. ECM needs a major revision.

[StalaggtIKE]

Kousagi, on 12 February 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Here

Double blind rules from max tech, moved a few things around to fit it on one page, but its just dealing with sensors and ECM.

One thing taken out of context is "normal operating radius" which means on the same map. Some like to argue that point but the Guide to Solaris pretty much says the same thing.

Normal operating radius, would not mean ECM's radius of 6 hexes? If that's the case what's the point of even giving it a bubble, if its affects extended throughout the whole map?

The quote says:

Quote

To be affected, the spotting unit must be in the normal operating radius of the ECM system. This radius is not affected by LOS.

Is it also saying that the map is not affected by LOS?

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 12 February 2013 - 12:06 PM.

[Kousagi]

StalaggtIKE, on 12 February 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

Normal operating radius, would not mean ECM's radius of 6 hexes? If that's the case what's the point of even giving it a bubble, if its affects extended throughout the whole map?

This is why i said its out of context. The book talks about some from a off map perspective at times. Yes, I know their chose of words confuses people. Not much I can do about that. Though everything in that section points to it meaning "on the same map". It is level 3 rules so was never used in a official manor. Plus the guide to solaris has the same ECM rules pretty much.

Edit: to clarify the 6 hex's is for the jamming stuff, the Whole map is only for the detection rules, nothing else.

Edited by Kousagi, 12 February 2013 - 12:12 PM.

[Codejack]

StalaggtIKE, on 12 February 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

Normal operating radius, would not mean ECM's radius of 6 hexes? If that's the case what's the point of even giving it a bubble, if its affects extended throughout the whole map?

Those were from two different sets of rules; PGI took the best of both worlds, then added more on top of it.

[StalaggtIKE]

Kousagi, on 12 February 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

This is why i said its out of context. The book talks about some from a off map perspective at times. Yes, I know their chose of words confuses people. Not much I can do about that. Though everything in that section points to it meaning "on the same map". It is level 3 rules so was never used in a official manor. Plus the guide to solaris has the same ECM rules pretty much.

So if it is not official, why are its rules even being entertained?

That's like me writing a set of rules tonight and expecting them to be followed.

Edit: It's not out of context, it's just not relevant.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 12 February 2013 - 01:04 PM.

[Mawai]

LRMs and SSRMs are not balanced in my opinion (possibly SRMs too though I am not convinced). ECM reduces boating of these lock on weapons and forces weapon system diversification. This is a good thing ... but these weapons should not be balanced based on the presence of absence of ECM. If enough counters to ECM are introduced it will lose its effectiveness and the lock on missile systems will again become too effective.

LRMs and SSRMs should be balanced in line with other weapons ... then ECM can be balanced as an interesting addition ... not as a rock/paper/scissors type of counter measure.

[Kousagi]

StalaggtIKE, on 12 February 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

So if it is not official, why are its rules even being entertained?

They are official, they are just Level 3( optional rules). level 2 and level 1 were the rules used in tournaments.

[Codejack]

Mawai, on 12 February 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

LRMs and SSRMs are not balanced in my opinion (possibly SRMs too though I am not convinced). ECM reduces boating of these lock on weapons and forces weapon system diversification. This is a good thing ... but these weapons should not be balanced based on the presence of absence of ECM. If enough counters to ECM are introduced it will lose its effectiveness and the lock on missile systems will again become too effective.

I suggested just turning the tracking down, then letting Artemis, NARC and TAG be much more effective at buffing it. That way ECM would be useful just by countering Artemis, NARC and BAP.

Mawai, on 12 February 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

LRMs and SSRMs should be balanced in line with other weapons ... then ECM can be balanced as an interesting addition ... not as a rock/paper/scissors type of counter measure.

+

Edited by Codejack, 12 February 2013 - 01:13 PM.

[Shadowsword8]

How do you know for sure that something is overpowered?

You know it when everyone who can use it, does so. When "it" is a must-have, and that not using it gets you funny looks from other players.

Now, a question to my fellow players: Do you remember seeing recently even one Raven-3L or Atlas D-DC (or whatever other ECM/capable platform) going into the fight without ECM? Or even give a mechlab-related reason for not using one?

I can't remember any, and to me, that sound like a blatant proof that ECM should get a large nerf.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Take some match between two teams of relatively equal skill, and randomly add to any one mech some additional piece of equipment or weaponry. Now if it isn't ecm, that single item - even one of the larger weapons - isn't going to change that much. Sure, an extra large laser might mean the difference between victory and defeat, but what would have been a close match will probably still be a close match. Give a single mech ecm, though, and suddenly the entire dynamic of the match is altered, and what would have been a close match can suddenly become very one-sided. Now I have no trouble killing a single Raven 3L in a one-on-one fight, but in a team game if you suddenly lose all communication with your team apart from a little chat window that's hard to type in and read during the heat of battle, that's going to make all the difference. ECM is overpowered.

[Moonsavage]

ECM... Where you can see a mech in spitting range, but can't target it.
ECM... Where a mech can see and target you, without your knowledge, unless you play the game in Thermal.
ECM... Where a mech without energy Hardpoints cannot reliably use SSRM... ever.
ECM... Where a light mech can run amok with little chance of being detected or targeted.
ECM... Where all non-ECM mechs are at a disadvantage unless they run Brawler or Sniper setups.

ECM... PGI, Please make it ineffective at shrouding mechs at over 600M.