Jump to content

Do This: Missiles And Ecm


42 replies to this topic

Poll: Would this balance things properly? (40 member(s) have cast votes)

Would this solution balance things properly?

  1. Yes (16 votes [40.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

  2. No (24 votes [60.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Codejack

    Dezgra

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 12 February 2013 - 02:18 PM

ECM is just broken. We know this. There are other issues, some fairly major, but ECM is the 50-foot tall sign with flashing lights all over it.

Argue if you want, but when half a dozen polls all show more than half the playerbase actively dislikes how it works now, the only thing you are doing is hurting the game.

But it is part of the game, even I don't believe that it will actually be removed, and there are some legitimate problems that it could help to solve, but only if it is implemented with some sense of balance and restraint.

So, do this:

-Turn missile tracking down by about 50%; LRMs, SSRMs, even SRMs should have their spread increased.

-Artemis, TAG, and NARC should all improve tracking/spread and stack; any two should make them as good as fully buffed missiles are now (anyone who wants to carry all 3 is welcome to the super missiles).

-BAP should have its current functions, but should also partially counter ECM's reduced detection range and increased lock-on times.

-ECM SHOULD COUNTER ARTEMIS, NARC, AND BAP, REDUCE DETECTION RANGE BY 50% AND INCREASE LOCK-ON TIME BY 50%. NOTHING ELSE.

Edited by Codejack, 13 February 2013 - 04:58 AM.


#2 azov

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 59 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 12 February 2013 - 02:47 PM

If you think this is bad, wait till you get clan ECM and they activate ghost targets and your HUD goes crazy with targets.

personally, I think its fine other than you should still be able to get a lock, just at a SEVERELY increased rate.

Edited by azov, 12 February 2013 - 02:48 PM.


#3 focuspark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ardent
  • The Ardent
  • 3,180 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:04 PM

I don't even think ECM should affect lock speed. In fact I think that LRM and SSRM are broken, ECM is just a false-panacea which is equally or more broken than LRM and SSRM.

LRM need to be less accurate, why not have them launch towards a location (where the mech is you locked on to) but not redirect. Increase their flight speed from 100m/s to 500m/s and this should be pretty fair.

SSRM should have a 270m targeting laser which lasts for 2 seconds. If the laser can be kept on the target for 0.5 seconds continuously or 1.0 seconds cumulative before the 2 seconds elapses fire the missiles and have work just like they do now.

ECM should only protect friendlies within the bubble from indirect fire, and prevent enemies from sharing targeting data if they are within the bubble. Otherwise, ECM should have no impact on the game at all.

#4 Codejack

    Dezgra

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:01 AM

View Postfocuspark, on 12 February 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

LRM need to be less accurate, why not have them launch towards a location (where the mech is you locked on to) but not redirect. Increase their flight speed from 100m/s to 500m/s and this should be pretty fair.


No offense, but that would make them completely useless.


View Postfocuspark, on 12 February 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

SSRM should have a 270m targeting laser which lasts for 2 seconds. If the laser can be kept on the target for 0.5 seconds continuously or 1.0 seconds cumulative before the 2 seconds elapses fire the missiles and have work just like they do now.


And here you're just making it more complicated; I don't trust PGI not to screw it up as it is, so let's keep it simple :)


View Postfocuspark, on 12 February 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

ECM should only protect friendlies within the bubble from indirect fire, and prevent enemies from sharing targeting data if they are within the bubble. Otherwise, ECM should have no impact on the game at all.


See, I think the stealth thing would be fine, if it was just the mech carrying it; stealthing 8 mechs as they trundle across the map is silly.

Beyond that, though, it should make the missiles less accurate, but not stop them completely, and there is just no excuse for ECM countering TAG.

#5 CG Oglethorpe Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 420 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:20 AM

View PostCodejack, on 12 February 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

ECM is just broken. We know this. There are other issues, some fairly major, but ECM is the 50-foot tall sign with flashing lights all over it.


ECM is fine..
This is the part of the thread where you accuse anyone who disagrees with you as either:
1. Lying.
2. Hasn't played the game.

So get on it.

#6 Codejack

    Dezgra

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:39 AM

View PostCG Oglethorpe Kerensky, on 13 February 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:


ECM is fine..
This is the part of the thread where you accuse anyone who disagrees with you as either:
1. Lying.
2. Hasn't played the game.

So get on it.


Says the guy who claims to have no problem hitting lights with direct-fire weapons. Ha!

There are like 5 of you claiming that; everyone else is still *****ing about the lagshield.

#7 Alois Hammer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,296 posts
  • LocationHooterville

Posted 13 February 2013 - 11:12 AM

View PostCodejack, on 13 February 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:


Says the guy who claims to have no problem hitting lights with direct-fire weapons. Ha!

There are like 5 of you claiming that; everyone else is still *****ing about the lagshield.


Which is why the poll shows everyone in favor of your foaming, ranting gripes:

Yes (0 votes [0.00%]

No (9 votes [100.00%]

Oh...

Well in that case, I guess this is where you announce the poll's only going against you because people "can't follow your directions" to only vote "Yes." :P

#8 CancR

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 766 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 11:25 AM

View PostAlois Hammer, on 13 February 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Yes (0 votes [0.00%]
No (9 votes [100.00%]


Make that 10.

#9 blinkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,195 posts
  • LocationEquestria

Posted 13 February 2013 - 11:38 AM

Codejack has been reasonable in this thread. i would like to encourage more of that. he still made a comment about the developers being incompetent, but you know... baby steps.

there are a lot of changes listed. too many for me to accurately gauge how they would effect gameplay. all of the individual changes seem reasonable. i have abstained since i cannot determine how this would effect gameplay.

#10 Ordellus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 215 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:28 PM

Don't plan on anything getting changed pal. PGI is just going to cater to who ever pays the most cash, and no one that pays to win is going to want their missle immunity cheat changed. Nice idea, but welcome to pay to win.

#11 blinkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,195 posts
  • LocationEquestria

Posted 13 February 2013 - 01:04 PM

View PostOrdellus, on 13 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

Don't plan on anything getting changed pal. PGI is just going to cater to who ever pays the most cash, and no one that pays to win is going to want their missle immunity cheat changed. Nice idea, but welcome to pay to win.

i thought you left for good in a valiant effort to ward away all of those like you thus making this game environment a better place?
vv

View PostOrdellus, on 12 February 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:

I would pay for a game that was balanced, fair, and didn't kiss the *** of the almighty dollar at the exclusion of respect for it's players. Since that isn't going to happen here, I'll make sure to inform everyone I can to pass on this.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1879436

Edited by blinkin, 13 February 2013 - 01:06 PM.


#12 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:25 PM

View PostOrdellus, on 13 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

Don't plan on anything getting changed pal. PGI is just going to cater to who ever pays the most cash, and no one that pays to win is going to want their missle immunity cheat changed. Nice idea, but welcome to pay to win.


Split ECM up into modules, people who want to have full ECM coverage have to either play tons or put in MC, makes PGI cash and ECM less effective at lower levels.


Ideas to Balance ECM:

1. Split up its more advanced functions into Modules


Recently it was announced that more capabilities the Beagle Active Probe should have are going to be released to try to counter the cries for balance against ECM -- however, the extreme cost ratio of modules makes any sort of new module much more expensive in both C-bill cost. Modules also cost a large amount of another currency, GXP, which can only be earned by play time or real money.

PGI has announced that Modules are their end game equipment. By balancing a piece of equipment like ECM, that is available to all players with no cost of GXP with systems that do cost GXP, I propose a simple fix would be to strip most the ability of ECM, then make its more powerful effects available only through modules.

Guardian ECM, when originally purchased, should only have the effects that it was described to have in the base rule set, much like Beagle Active Probe. Beagle Active Probe's current implementation follows the base rules in books like Total Warfare, but it has additional uses described in books like Tactical Operations, such as 360 degree targeting, advanced target info, and sensor range, that are only available in the form of Modules.

By the base, tournament rules found on page 134 of Total Warfare, Guardian ECM would have the following effects:

An ECM suite has an effect radius of six hexes that creates a
“bubble” around the carrying unit. The ECM’s disruptive abilities
affect all enemy units inside this bubble, as well as any line of sight
traced through the bubble. It has no eff ect on units friendly to the
unit carrying the ECM.


Within its eff ect radius, an ECM suite has the following eff ects
on the following systems. The ECM suite does not aff ect other
scanning and targeting devices, such as TAG and targeting
computers.

Active Probe: Active probes cannot penetrate the ECM’s area
of effect. The probing unit would notice that it is being jammed,
however.

Artemis IV FCS: ECM blocks the eff ects of Artemis IV fi re
control systems. Artemis-equipped launchers may be fi red as
normal missiles through the ECM, but they lose the Cluster Hits
Table bonus.

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 affected by ECM.

C3 and C3i Computer: ECM has the effect of “cutting off ” any C3-
equipped unit from its network. If a C3 master unit is isolated from
the network because it ventures inside the ECM radius, the entire
portion of the network below it is eff ectively shut off (all units
subordinate to it on the diagram on p. 132). Only those C3 units able
to draw an LOS to the master unit that does not pass through the
ECM radius can access the network. If the master unit that connects
the lances of a company lies inside the ECM eff ect radius, the link
between the lances is lost, though each lance’s network functions
normally (unless the ECM also interferes with them individually).

At its basic level, ECM exists solely to counter Artemis, Narc, Beagle, and sharing information through C3.

However, much like Beagle, ECM could be improved by purchasing additional Modules based on advanced rules from Tactical Operations to further enhance its capabilities.

Sensor Obscure 1: Prevents enemies farther than 400 meters from gaining any targeting data against 'Mechs in an ECM bubble

Sensor Obscure 2: Prevents enemies farther than 200 meters from gaining any targeting data against 'Mechs in an ECM bubble

Lock Scrambler 1: Increases the lock time for units firing on 'Mechs in an ECM bubble by 50%

Lock Scrambler 2: Increases the lock time for units firing on 'Mechs in an ECM bubble by 100%

Lock Scrambler 3: Prevents locks against 'Mechs in an ECM bubble, if the firing unit is within the bubble as well

Ghost Target Mode: Allows an ECM 'Mech to switch to Ghost Target Mode. Generates false target signatures for the enemy to target to confuse the enemy

Counter: Allows an ECM 'Mech to switch to Counter Mode: Counters any other ECM effect within its radius

These modules should require the base ECM equipment to be installed on the 'Mech, or the modules have no effect. PGI has made the things ECM is suppose to counter available only in the form of end-game modules, why is ECM itself not part of those end game modules?

2. Just make it more in line with the specific lore material


-- Disrupt blocks other electronic warfare devices like Beagle, Narc, Artemis, as well as shrouds information on the chassis such as damage and weapons loadout. Also blocks units within the bubble or on the opposite side of a bubble transmit target information, so spotters need to stay out of the bubble. If a 'Mech firing on a 'Mech in an ECM bubble is inside the bubble as well, ECM will provide a penalty that increases the lock time of missiles. (ref: Total Warfare, pg 134; Technical Readout 3050, pg 196, Tactical Operations 224)

-- Counter disrupts other ECM modules in range. (ref: Tactical Operations, pg 99)

-- Ghost Target mode projects false radar signatures the enemy can lock on that makes it more difficult to employ weapons like LRMs. Missile boats will need to cycle through false targets to find the target they are actually trying to shoot, and may even be fooled into shooting at false signatures. (ref: Tactical Operations, pg 100)

-- ECM can use only one mode at a time. (ref: Tactical Operations, pg 100)

#13 Codejack

    Dezgra

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:53 PM

View PostDocBach, on 13 February 2013 - 02:25 PM, said:


Split ECM up into modules, people who want to have full ECM coverage have to either play tons or put in MC, makes PGI cash and ECM less effective at lower levels.


I think that that would help with balance, but the problem would still remain that new players are just at a hideous disadvantage. No new players = no growth = dead game.

#14 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:55 PM

View PostCodejack, on 13 February 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:


I think that that would help with balance, but the problem would still remain that new players are just at a hideous disadvantage. No new players = no growth = dead game.


If you break it up into tiers, that costs tons and tons of c-bills, and have limited modules to decide what effects you want your ECM to do, you'd probably see a whole lot less ghost fleets of 'Mechs.

#15 Ordellus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 215 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:05 PM

View Postblinkin, on 13 February 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

i thought you left for good in a valiant effort to ward away all of those like you thus making this game environment a better place?
vv

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1879436


Where exactly in there did it mention me leaving? Learn to read.

View PostDocBach, on 13 February 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:


If you break it up into tiers, that costs tons and tons of c-bills, and have limited modules to decide what effects you want your ECM to do, you'd probably see a whole lot less ghost fleets of 'Mechs.


Much better idea than what they have now. But paying players can just buy their way through all of that anyway, so we are right back to the cash gets the advantages.

#16 focuspark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ardent
  • The Ardent
  • 3,180 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:12 PM

View PostOrdellus, on 13 February 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

Much better idea than what they have now. But paying players can just buy their way through all of that anyway, so we are right back to the cash gets the advantages.

No, we're back to the cash gets to skip the grind. Basically, people willing to pay real money they've earned can play the game they want to; and those unwilling or unable to spend real money need to go earn fake money first. Real money does not impart XP or skill and since there's nothing you cannot buy with in game currency except mech bays and trivial items, there's no P2W aspect.

You are starting to sound like somebody who cannot P2P but wants all the advantages, therefore you're lashing out because you're jealous. I could be wrong here, but I thought you should know how you're coming across.

#17 blinkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,195 posts
  • LocationEquestria

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:26 PM

View PostOrdellus, on 13 February 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

Where exactly in there did it mention me leaving? Learn to read.

i suppose it was just wishful thinking on my part.

i wrongfully thought that you would quit a game that you hate.

#18 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:34 PM

View PostOrdellus, on 13 February 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:



Much better idea than what they have now. But paying players can just buy their way through all of that anyway, so we are right back to the cash gets the advantages.


The 'Mechs are limited by the amount of modules they can carry - they have to make a choice to sacrifice other modules, and if its not mastered, you won't be able to carry all of the modules to get the "full" effect

#19 Codejack

    Dezgra

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • LocationChattanooga, TN

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:49 PM

View PostDocBach, on 13 February 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:


The 'Mechs are limited by the amount of modules they can carry - they have to make a choice to sacrifice other modules, and if its not mastered, you won't be able to carry all of the modules to get the "full" effect


I could absolutely see doing this as well as my idea. Why not?

#20 roflplanes

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 83 posts
  • LocationColumbus, OH

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:40 PM

View PostCodejack, on 13 February 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:


I could absolutely see doing this as well as my idea. Why not?


For once, shockingly enough, I 100% agree with you. I'd LOVE to see these implemented. One more thought though, how would you feel about speeding missiles (at least LRMs) up a bit as well? They're somewhat slow currently (even after the last patch buff) to be any kind of effective with your proposed changes.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users