39 replies to this topic

[Unbound Inferno]

I am sick of the ECM no-missile locks within Line-Of-Sight. The last match I had is a great example of how broken it gets. My team was relatively balanced, but no ECM - a few had BAP, but not enough. Enemy had at least 5 or 6 running with ECM leaving me in my A1 with LRM/Streak useless with them teaming up. Atlas, Highlander, another Cat I think - no missiles could be used in that match at all. Most were lights right in LOS, point blank and just swarming us, easy ranges with how we were and we couldn't get a missile lock to cause damage.

The current ECM setup is in dire need of a basic overhaul at the fundamental levels. There should be no reason whatsoever that an on/off switch for the viability of half the weapons of a team to be rendered useless for the entire match and guarantees a win like that by preventing half the weapons loaded from being used at all.

ECM is intended as the counter for BAP - which should make LRMs dangerous.
Right now BAP is the counter for ECM which makes any missile lock impossible.

That is not right. I can stomach it when its a few at a time and there is another target I can shoot, but not when it works at that level of spamming it and I can't hit anything.


The ECM and information warfare fix is simple;

ECM on Disrupt blocks indirect fire and increases the duration of direct Line-Of-Sight target locks as well as reduce the detection range of the enemy - but doesn't prevent it.
ECM should only outright prevent the ARTEMIS lock speed and tighter spread.
Only another ECM on Counter in close range can jam another ECM on Disrupt.

BAP should extend sensor range and allow for indirect locks of other mechs in sight so long as they are not under an ECM on Disrupt. I would like to see BAP like a multi-target for all enemy mechs for indirect fire by allies. ECM's coverage of indirect fire would then prevent this BAP advantage.

TAG allows for indirect targeting on a target within an ECM on Disrupt so long as the mech focusing the tag is outside an ECM disrupt bubble. Just as it is now - that is fine. Maybe a bit long of a range now, but that's the idea and its okay.

NARC needs fixing. It should last the duration of the match and allow indirect fire anywhere unless the target is shielded by an ECM on Disrupt. This allows for a NARC user to drastically help the team by targeting the enemy helping to keep track of them all - a great tool along with BAP for its weight, but easily blocked by an ECM on Disrupt.


Simple, and straight to the point. BAP and NARC makes Missile support possible and easier, ECM eliminates most indirect fire and ARTEMIS advantages allowing the use of cover easier but doesn't continue to protect you if your in the open and in sight, TAG allows indirect fire on someone under an ECM on Disrupt and only an ECM on Counter can remove an ECM on Disrupt allowing multiple to still take advantage of cover.

But ECM doesn't prevent Line-Of-Sight locks, only adding time required to get that lock.


That is the balanced way to approach it. Not PPC turns off ECM for a few seconds, no BAP auto-counter of ECM and no senseless no-lock missiles from ECM. Cover works, getting out of sight saves your hide - but it doesn't let them stay in the open and expect to stay safe out there. Its a tool to counter advantages, not something that hard-counters a whole line of options.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 12 June 2013 - 12:44 PM.

[Bilbo]

Perhaps you should take at least one weapon that doesn't require lock in a world where ECM exists and you cannot determine the makeup of your team.

[Tennex]

its such a convoluted messy system at this point...

[Unbound Inferno]

Bilbo, on 12 June 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

Perhaps you should take at least one weapon that doesn't require lock in a world where ECM exists and you cannot determine the makeup of your team.

I do. My C4 and C1 runs with MLs, its just my A1 that has that risk now. If regular SRMs weren't' so horrendously useless I might use those - but Catapults for me balance better as a primary LRM support making Streaks a better choice usually. This occurrence is typically rare but its a good extreme example of how horrible it is set up now.

[General Taskeen]

Every change has been unintentional at this point and merely a way to turn off ECM with other items in order to shoot missiles rather than just RE-thinking ECM. ECM has nothing to do with Information Warfare at this point. It also completely ruins the point of classic Battle Tech designs in the game. I mean christ, just give ECM a 50-75% longer lock time as a bonus, that's all it needs in the case of vs. missiles. How about ACTUAL Information Warfare like ECM not showing your enemy what kind of loadout you have or what your armor levels are at, and being able to throw around ghost targets all over the radar map to troll the enemy. "Red Target at that location, wait... there's nothing there? Damn you ECM Ghosters!" Which would actually be VERY handy when Active/Passive is available (if they don't mess up that too). You know ACTUAL information warfare.

[Bilbo]

Unbound Inferno, on 12 June 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

I do. My C4 and C1 runs with MLs, its just my A1 that has that risk now. If regular SRMs weren't' so horrendously useless I might use those - but Catapults for me balance better as a primary LRM support making Streaks a better choice usually. This occurrence is typically rare but its a good extreme example of how horrible it is set up now.

Maybe it would be better to discuss the shortcoming of SRM's then, because it's not ECM that's causing your A1 to be just so much scrap metal. If you can't carry the equipment necessary to negate ECM, you should never build a mech that requires the negation of ECM unless you know who/what is going to be on your side going into the match.

[Unbound Inferno]

Bilbo, on 12 June 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

Maybe it would be better to discuss the shortcoming of SRM's then, because it's not ECM that's causing your A1 to be just so much scrap metal. If you can't carry the equipment necessary to negate ECM, you should never build a mech that requires the negation of ECM unless you know who/what is going to be on your side going into the match.

I have BAP. But that only counters ONE ECM. Usually, that's fine. In my example I had 3 ECM around me and 3 others on my side. Two didn't have BAP leaving one ECM running close enough near me preventing the Streaks or LRMs from being useful.

SRMs in general need work sure - but there shouldn't be a reason I can't target that guy 250m from me that isn't under the ECM. Or that Raven ECM that's right in front of me. Or help that teammate 600m from me that I can see. That ECM makes my LRMs off, my Streaks off. The problem at hand was not the SRMs or LRMs - its the ECM making it unavailable.

Besides. I wasn't intending to be in melee. I can understand the dance they forced me into - but being unable to act at all makes it ridiculous when it should have let me work at least somewhat.


Which is why I am bringing this up as to why do we have a tool that can force everyone else to have to plan around it to such extreme measures. We need TAG, NARC, BAP and a PPC as options for a single ECM that may or may not be there. That Single ECM shouldn't' keep a direct LOS target lock from ever occurring - never did in BT, and it shouldn't be like that here.

[Bilbo]

If you have LOS, you can always dumb fire the lrms, at least. You're still going to be out of luck close in though if you insist on taking the Streaks.

[CancR]

It's very sad that PGI made a big mess out of something very simple.

The problem is that they combined all three ecm suites into one, but they didn't make carry any of the penalties, or ecm as it is now would cost x3 the tonnage and slots, and cost 10 heat to run.

If guardian ecm was just guardian ecm, all it would do is increase lock on time, and at random intervals, cut out lock on for a moment,, the second would be negated by target decay.

[Unbound Inferno]

Bilbo, on 12 June 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

If you have LOS, you can always dumb fire the lrms, at least. You're still going to be out of luck close in though if you insist on taking the Streaks.

I'm willing to take that loss. Can't be helped then. But dumb-fire LRMs on a moving target doesn't pan out well usually.

CancR, on 12 June 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

It's very sad that PGI made a big mess out of something very simple.

The problem is that they combined all three ecm suites into one, but they didn't make carry any of the penalties, or ecm as it is now would cost x3 the tonnage and slots, and cost 10 heat to run.

If guardian ecm was just guardian ecm, all it would do is increase lock on time, and at random intervals, cut out lock on for a moment,, the second would be negated by target decay.

If they did that, I might stomach the no-missile locks instead by knowing they run 10 heat hotter and the thing ways 4.5 tons.

[General Taskeen]

Bilbo, on 12 June 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

Maybe it would be better to discuss the shortcoming of SRM's then, because it's not ECM that's causing your A1 to be just so much scrap metal. If you can't carry the equipment necessary to negate ECM, you should never build a mech that requires the negation of ECM unless you know who/what is going to be on your side going into the match.

Bilbo, when you hit the launch button in solo matches you literally have 0 Idea as to who you are facing. That scrutiny only holds up if PGI intended MWO to be a group only game. ECM's current implementation also invalidates classic Mech Designs that would have otherwise been able to shoot their weapons at an ECM Mech regardless (in other words, not wasted tonnage).

A mech in Battle Tech with just 4 ML, and 2 LRM15's can use all their weapons, for example, and does not require the use of any TAG/BAP/PPC etc to make weapons turn on/off.

[Unbound Inferno]

General Taskeen, on 12 June 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

Bilbo, when you hit the launch button in solo matches you literally have 0 Idea as to who you are facing. That scrutiny only holds up if PGI intended MWO to be a group only game. ECM's current implementation also invalidates classic Mech Designs that would have otherwise been able to shoot their weapons at an ECM Mech regardless (in other words, not wasted tonnage).

A mech in Battle Tech with just 4 ML, and 2 LRM15's can use all their weapons, for example, and does not require the use of any TAG/BAP/PPC etc to make weapons turn on/off.

That's also a good point - the current ECM setup automatically gives them a leg up against standard or Trial mechs. Half the issues with these steamrolling games too tends to be with them, their effectiveness is shot and ECM doesn't help.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 12 June 2013 - 02:15 PM.

[Otto Cannon]

I don't think that 'if you launch with missiles you have to accept that they might be completely unusable' is at all reasonable, especially in defence of an unnecessary and non-canon piece of equipment.

[PanzerMagier]

Unbound Inferno, on 12 June 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

I am sick of the ECM no-missile locks within Line-Of-Sight. The last match I had is a great example of how broken it gets. My team was relatively balanced, but no ECM - a few had BAP, but not enough. Enemy had at least 5 or 6 running with ECM leaving me in my A1 with LRM/Streak useless with them teaming up. Atlas, Highlander, another Cat I think - no missiles could be used in that match at all. Most were lights right in LOS, point blank and just swarming us, easy ranges with how we were and we couldn't get a missile lock to cause damage.

The current ECM setup is in dire need of a basic overhaul at the fundamental levels. There should be no reason whatsoever that an on/off switch for the viability of half the weapons of a team to be rendered useless for the entire match and guarantees a win like that by preventing half the weapons loaded from being used at all.

ECM is intended as the counter for BAP - which should make LRMs dangerous.
Right now BAP is the counter for ECM which makes any missile lock impossible.

That is not right. I can stomach it when its a few at a time and there is another target I can shoot, but not when it works at that level of spamming it and I can't hit anything.


The ECM and information warfare fix is simple;

ECM on Disrupt blocks indirect fire and increases the duration of direct Line-Of-Sight target locks as well as reduce the detection range of the enemy - but doesn't prevent it.
ECM should only outright prevent the ARTEMIS lock speed and tighter spread.
Only another ECM on Counter in close range can jam another ECM on Disrupt.

BAP should extend sensor range and allow for indirect locks of other mechs in sight so long as they are not under an ECM on Disrupt. I would like to see BAP like a multi-target for all enemy mechs for indirect fire by allies. ECM's coverage of indirect fire would then prevent this BAP advantage.

TAG allows for indirect targeting on a target within an ECM on Disrupt so long as the mech focusing the tag is outside an ECM disrupt bubble. Just as it is now - that is fine. Maybe a bit long of a range now, but that's the idea and its okay.

NARC needs fixing. It should last the duration of the match and allow indirect fire anywhere unless the target is shielded by an ECM on Disrupt. This allows for a NARC user to drastically help the team by targeting the enemy helping to keep track of them all - a great tool along with BAP for its weight, but easily blocked by an ECM on Disrupt.


Simple, and straight to the point. BAP and NARC makes Missile support possible and easier, ECM eliminates most indirect fire and ARTEMIS advantages allowing the use of cover easier but doesn't continue to protect you if your in the open and in sight, TAG allows indirect fire on someone under an ECM on Disrupt and only an ECM on Counter can remove an ECM on Disrupt allowing multiple to still take advantage of cover.

But ECM doesn't prevent Line-Of-Sight locks, only adding time required to get that lock.


That is the balanced way to approach it. Not PPC turns off ECM for a few seconds, no BAP auto-counter of ECM and no senseless no-lock missiles from ECM. Cover works, getting out of sight saves your hide - but it doesn't let them stay in the open and expect to stay safe out there. Its a tool to counter advantages, not something that hard-counters a whole line of options.

Get a bap for your A1. the variant sucks. Get a buddy to tag for you. MWO is about teamwork. I'm so ******* tired of ecm threads. almost every **** weapon has a soft counter for it and tag/bap effectively removes it.

As a player who plays a lot in his D-DC atlas, LRM boats find it pretty easy to hit me. I have no clue how or why you're complaining.

[DocBach]

ECM has nothing to do about information warfare, it's just an off switch for missiles. But then, all the players with the skill to put 5 of the same weapons on a 'Mech and shoot them at the same time over and over again would have a natural predator and the crying to punish unskilled users of such amateur weapons that are so easy to use would overpower balance, like what led us in to ECM nerfing LRM's to begin with.

[Unbound Inferno]

PanzerMagier, on 12 June 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

Get a bap for your A1. the variant sucks. Get a buddy to tag for you. MWO is about teamwork. I'm so ******* tired of ecm threads. almost every **** weapon has a soft counter for it and tag/bap effectively removes it.

As a player who plays a lot in his D-DC atlas, LRM boats find it pretty easy to hit me. I have no clue how or why you're complaining.

I have a BAP.

There were 3 ECM present. I counter 1. I had one teammate that had a BAP, he countered 1. There was 1 ECM remaining.

That ONE ECM was the reason I could do NOTHING as it would be just within range to block me. Good teamwork, a valid plan at the moment I'll give them that for the match - but it shouldn't be a complete off switch for my abilities when I had 6 other targets within LOS I couldn't shoot at for no missile lock. LRMs do nothing within 180m and in a moving brawl dumb-fire is useless anyway, and Streaks can't work currently.

A Single ECM isn't much of a threat with all of the excessive hard-counters. I drove an Atlas for a while, might get back into it and I know the feeling. Those things just scream 'shoot me' when they are around. But an Atlas isn't a Hunchback or a light sprinting faster than 90.

[CancR]

Unbound Inferno, on 12 June 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

If they did that, I might stomach the no-missile locks instead by knowing they run 10 heat hotter and the thing ways 4.5 tons.

It would be much simpler if they striped away stealth and angel ecm, and just had the two effects of Guardian:
~Longer lock on time
~missile lock loss at some intervals.

[Lumpy Gash]

Fault is with your build and the need to have weapons that aim for you, take SRMS not streaks as backups.

If you cant understand why, there is no point in anyone posting after what has been said above.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

The obvious fix to information warfare and all electronics across the board is this: soft counters.

Hard counters like current ECM, TAG, and BAP functionality are toxic to good game play. One way or another, some player somewhere has his gear entirely nullified.

Far better to give LRMs and SSRMs and sensors some base line stats. Have Artemis IV boost certain of those stats by a %, have BAP boost certain of those stats by a %, have TAG boost certain of those stats by a %, have NARC boost certain of those stats by a %, and have ECM nerf certain of those stats by a %. Careful balancing of which bonuses can stack will limit ridiculous bonus-boating builds.

Lo and behold, counters fix themselves. If ECM nerfs lock-on time by doubling it, and Artemis IV cuts it by a quarter, then ECM still hurts lock-on time but not by as much if you have Artemis IV. If ECM reduces missile tracking ability by a third, and a mech with Streaks has a BAP that increases tracking ability by half, then suddenly ECM is partially countering the enemy BAP.

Partial counters and stacking modifiers are the way to go. The soft counters enable players to reduce/enhance the effectiveness of gear without any one item entirely negating any other single item.

Simple, effective, predictable, balanced, and most importantly fun.

[Metafox]

I've always believed that ECM should provide and receive soft counters rather than the all-or-nothing hard counters that we currently have. The BAP changes make ECM manageable, but ECM has the potential to be much better.