186 replies to this topic

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

If you're going to leave the ECM like this(stupidly brokenly OP), make the BAP counter its effects for the single guy using it. Make it return radar function and missile locking at some middle set distance range vs the ECM(ie 500 meters?)

SOMETHING. ANYTHING. Why does device A get the shaft and have to beg for change on the street corner while device B has everything imaginable handed to it on a silver plate? These are suppose to logically counter each other!

Edited by Bluten, 15 December 2012 - 03:25 PM.

[Taizan]

Bluten, on 05 December 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

If you're going to leave the ECM like this(stupidly brokenly OP), make the BAP counter its effects for the single guy using it. Make it return radar function and LRM locking at some middle set distance range(ie 600 meters)

SOMETHING. ANYTHING. Why does device A get the shaft while device B has everything imaginable? These are suppose to equally/logically counter each other!

BAP is treated like the unfortunate step child - also the specifics of how BAP works is unbeknownst to me. m of range increase, time of targeting data increase, how it works together with other systems etc.

[Apoc1138]

Bluten, on 05 December 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

SOMETHING. ANYTHING. Why does device A get the shaft while device B has everything imaginable? These are suppose to equally/logically counter each other!

whilst I partially agree with you on point A (personally I would make BAP increase the 200m range to say 250m with other skills and modules bringing it up to 300m)... in TT, the BAP had no effect on ECM, except that BAP would know it was being jammed, so you would know there were mechs nearby but have no idea where exactly they were... in MWO you already know there are mechs around and if you can't see them on sensor you already know you are being jammed by ECM, so it's a bit of a moot point

so no, BAP is not supposed to be an automatic counter to all ECM, otherwise ECM would be completely pointless and BAP would be OP

[Kaldor]

Make BAP show the ECM carrier on the radar and command map inside of 500m? They still cannot be targeted, but you know exactly where they are.

[Viper69]

Just give us all active radars F.F.S. I feel like I am driving a submarine that can only shoot at things it sees through its periscope. ECM should jam radar making a large blank region in your radar return masking troop numbers. The ECM field should be visible on radar but it masks everything in it from returning to the radar. Electronic jamming is not a quiet stealth running system, its a noisy violent action meant to cause overloaded sensors in an area. Anything outside of the area would see massive interference in the effected ECM area.

This is why we need functioning radar, not the bastardized system of spotting targets like its some WW2 infantry shooter.

[Orzorn]

BAP should give the user 360 degree detection (not just retention like the module does). This would help scouts out greatly.

Perhaps it could also increase the intensity of a mech's silhouette in thermal and night vision modes? Or perhaps it could outline mechs with a color to make them more visible in all modes, even if you aren't targeting them? So, with a BAP, even if you're behind a bunch of trees, enemies would be outlined in white on the other side, allowing you to attack.

The issue right now is that ECM does far too much for its small package, especially considering its basically combining three items into one (stealth armor, GECM, and even Angel ECM due to the streak blocking), as well as performing acts that it never did in the TT (stop TAG).

[Bagheera]

Well, canon got tossed out the window with current ECM implementation (since it includes null signature gear, which does exist in canon, comes later in the timeline, weighs more, takes more crits, and generates heat) I see no reason we shouldn't have BAP/NARC altered in response.

For the record. I kind of like the current ECM, and I currently own precisely zero mechs that can carry it. Do think that some fine tuning is in order, and that NARC in particular needs to be an ECM counter since it currently serves no discernible purpose anyway.

[BigJim]

Viper69, on 13 December 2012 - 07:14 AM, said:

Just give us all active radars F.F.S. I feel like I am driving a submarine that can only shoot at things it sees through its periscope

///

This is why we need functioning radar, not the bastardized system of spotting targets like its some WW2 infantry shooter.

I disagree completely with this point, personally I think the more LoS-based detection of enemies is the single best game-design decision taken by the devs, to put it over & above the other MW games.
(graphics and natural engine/technological advances aside)

LoS detection means there is a place for scouts, and scouting, it makes intel gathering a powerful thing, and the team that plays smarter can beat (and should beat) the team with more individually-skilled players that don't play as smart.

I utterly detest the radar from all the other MW games, where some super-psychic-scanner automatically knows where everyone in the map is at all times.

Edited by BigJim, 13 December 2012 - 07:36 AM.

[Heeden]

It would be nice for some of the counter-ECM abilities to be moved to the BAP, rather than have the BAP completely nullified by ECM (with additional restrictions as to who can take BAP - only Jenner K for example, not D or F).

Edit: I agree with BigJim about the "radar" (technically a complicated sensor-suite, radar wouldn't function at ground level).

Edited by Heeden, 13 December 2012 - 07:38 AM.

[Glythe]

The fact that BAP is completely diabled by ECM is unacceptable.

You might as well just introduce a module called (counter ECM) CECM that weighs 1.5 tons and completely negates anything ECM does to your mech.

The fact that BAP doesn't relay all the target info simultaneously of mechs in range also makes it undesirable.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Taizan, on 13 December 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:

BAP is treated like the unfortunate step child - also the specifics of how BAP works is unbeknownst to me. m of range increase, time of targeting data increase, how it works together with other systems etc.

Wow, I made this thread? I forgot all about it...

Logically it should counter, even if partially, for the 1 guy carrying it. Instead it does nothing. Makes no sense at all.

By the way everyone, I decided to add a poll. Cast your vote today! I'll be your friend if you do it. Unless you hit no. In which case, I won't.

Edited by Bluten, 13 December 2012 - 07:56 AM.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Glythe, on 13 December 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

The fact that BAP is completely diabled by ECM is unacceptable.

^ This, except for the error. It wasn't even that great of a device to begin with on its on and I doubt many people used it.

[Zyllos]

Here is my feedback on ECM, which adds BAP an ability to detect ECM mechs around you:

Quote

Honestly, the implementation of ECM seems ok. Just the numbers seem off.

- Make 1 Counter ECM counter all Disrupt ECM in range. I personally think making 1 Counter ECM work against all Disrupt ECM a big one because then it isn't always about fielding more ECMs, but instead using your Disrupt ECM to scout and not run into another equipped ECM mech to be countered and open for locking weaponry. This also doesn't make the Atlas D-DC team (4+ ECMs) just invincible against lock-on weapons because your team didn't decide to take 5+ other ECM mechs. This is really a way to give a reason for a team to take mechs other than ECM but to take at least 1 ECM mech for disruption.

- Make ECM reduce sensor range by 50%, not 75%. ECM is ment for scouting, not keeping certain mechs locked out of firing. Even at 400m sensor range, LRM users will only have 220m worth of workable distance to lock on with missiles while SSRMs will only have 90m.

- Let the BAP display some indication that an ECM equipped mech is within normal sensor range (according to Sarna saying BAP is jammed by ECM but indication is notified). Maybe give BAP users "pings" (kinda like how Thermal Mode shows the ping sweep, which seems like to me PGI is already testing out) so they can spot where ECM mechs are physically at. Once teams start to only take 1 or 2 ECMs, having BAP which gives pings to physical locations could be used to detect where ECM mechs are located at so you could chase the ECM mechs and destroy them with direct fire weapons. Then you might see teams start to take no ECM and work together with BAP users to counter ECM.

- As many have said, fix the issues with hit detection. This will really help out in the department of having light mechs survive a disproportional amount of fire according to their weight. But this is obvious, just extremely important and I am sure PGI is working on.

[Congzilla]

The title just sounds dirty.

[TruePoindexter]

In addition to its current features I wouldn't mind if it let you target an ECM protected mech at 400m or so. Anything past that is probably too far as anyone can mount BAP.

[Khobai]

BAP should let you detect ECM mechs at 500m and non-ECM mechs at 1000m

BAP should also have a 120m radius that gives you 360 degree sensors and lets you see enemy mechs through obstacles and terrain within that radius like in tabletop (won't work if disrupted though)

Lastly BAP should should only be equipable by certain mechs.

[TB Freelancer]

Bluten, on 05 December 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

Why does device A get the shaft and have to beg for change on the street corner while device B has everything imaginable handed to it on a silver plate? These are suppose to logically counter each other! Hello?! Did you guys forget everything about Battletech while working on the game made from Battletech?!

I'll be honest. I don't know TT rules or TROs for various mechs, nor do I give a rats behind. I got into BT because of MW2 and MW3 and stuck with it. In the older games they balanced each other out nicely, as did the three radar modes (active/passive/off), and it seems to me that BAP is a complete waste of tonnage while ECM is well, just way out of whack making mechs capable of carrying it highly attractive.

That said, I'm not sure what the development road map is like, so it might work itself out in the future. But right now, I really don't like it. That's about as far as I'll go into bashing ECM....at least while the game isn't feature complete.

[Khobai]

Yeah strangely they included everything from TT that ECM does but left out the most important thing BAP does in TT which is let you see through buildings, terrain, etc...

[Namwons]

BAP should be able to detect mechs under ECM cloaks but not the ECM specific mech itself, maybe at reduced ranges.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Namwons, on 13 December 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

BAP should be able to detect mechs under ECM cloaks but not the ECM specific mech itself, maybe at reduced ranges.

That is not a bad idea, maybe the BAP could be more effective vs enemies just under the shroud, but less so vs the actual carrier. Makes sense to me. But we'd have to convince Piranha to allow it to do anything, at all, in the first place. I'm still struggling with this part.