559 replies to this topic

[Daekar]

Renders entire weapon systems useless even with BAP equipped. Not OK.

EDIT: To clarify for those new to the thread, this was prompted by a death in a Catapult A1 during which, thanks to stacked ECM, I was literally unable to fire a single shot for quite a long time despite my equipped BAP. For the LRM haters, I was not carrying many - a single LRM15 rack - and I wasn't even trying to use those. I was trying to fire my streaks.

EDIT: After some deliberation and considering the ideas of others, I have come up with this suggestion to fix LRM/SSRM/ECM mechanics:

There seems to be a good deal of miscommunication when it comes to what ECM-nerf advocates what to achieve and what game systems are involved in this rebalancing. I’m going to do my best to lay out how changes would be made to targeting, ECM, BAP, NARC, TAG, LRMs, and SSRMs. In the descriptions below, it is always assumed that a friendly is carrying the ECM unless noted otherwise.



Friendly units within the ECM bubble will now be Line-of-Sight (LoS) targetable by any enemy and appear on their personal minimap. However, friendly units within that bubble that are targeted by LoS will no longer appear on the minimap or be targetable by other enemies that do not have LoS, etc. If an enemy doesn’t have adequate sensor range and LoS, a friendly within the bubble cannot be targeted regardless of whether or not other enemies have said LoS. Exceptions for TAG and NARC noted later.



Multiple ECMs do not stack. The only benefit to bringing more than one ECM is having more than one bubble.



ECM has no effects on enemy units within its 180 meter bubble that are in addition to the effects described elsewhere.



TAG and NARC no longer function when shot at a unit protected under the ECM bubble, regardless of whether they are applied to the ECM carrier or a protected unit. Period. NARC no long disables the ECM of an ECM carrier.



LRMs can no longer be fired indirectly without TAG or NARC, regardless of whether or not the mech to be fired upon can be targeted or the presence of ECM. LRM flight speed will be sped up accordingly to reflect that they are now primarily a direct-fire weapon. When a mech is targetable they will still lock on, but that lock cannot be made without the LRM carrier having personal LoS on the target. If LoS is broken, tracking is lost regardless of whether or not units friendly to the LRM carrier have LoS. If a unit is TAGged, it is valid for targeting and for LRM locks and indirect LRM fire until it is no longer TAGged. If a unit is NARCed, it is valid for targeting and for LRM locks and indirect LRM fire until the NARC is exhausted. LRM locking mechanism will be altered so that the crosshair must remain closer to the center of the targeting box to remain locked – sort of middlish is no longer enough. This is complex enough to warrant some examples:

1) An enemy LRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover. That enemy LRM carrier may target the friendly, lock, and fire. Missiles will track until the friendly mech breaks LoS with the LRM carrier.

2) An enemy LRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover that has been NARCed. That enemy LRM carrier may target the friendly, lock, and fire. Missiles will track until the NARC is exhausted regardless of LoS.

3) An enemy LRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover that is currently TAGged by another enemy mech. That enemy LRM carrier may target the friendly, lock, and fire. Missiles will track until the friendly is no longer TAGged. If the TAG ceases but the LRM carrier still has personal LoS, missiles will continue to track until that personal LoS is broken.

4) An enemy LRM carrier sits behind a ridge without personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover. Another enemy mech crests the ridge, obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, and targets it. The enemy LRM carrier may target the friendly, but it may not lock or fire upon it.

5) An enemy LRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. That enemy LRM carrier may target the friendly, lock, and fire. Missiles will track until the friendly mech breaks LoS with the LRM carrier. Note that this is exactly the same as with no ECM (#1).

6) An enemy LRM carrier sits behind a ridge without personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech crests the ridge, obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, and targets it. The enemy LRM carrier may not target, lock, or fire upon the friendly mech. (no target sharing of targeting on ECM-protected friendlies)

7) An enemy LRM carrier sits behind a ridge without personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech crests the ridge, obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, targets and TAGs it. The enemy LRM carrier may not target, lock, or fire upon the friendly mech as long as it remains under ECM cover. If it exits ECM cover and is still TAGged, the enemy LRM carrier may fire upon it regardless of LoS (see #3). Note that whether or not the TAGging mech targets the friendly is irrelevant.

8) An enemy LRM carrier sits behind a ridge without personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech crests the ridge, obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, targets and NARCs it. The enemy LRM carrier may not target, lock, or fire upon the friendly mech as long as it remains under ECM cover. If it exits ECM cover and is still NARCed, the enemy LRM carrier may fire upon it regardless of LoS until the NARC is exhausted (see #2). Note that whether or not the NARCing mech targets or maintains LoS on the friendly is irrelevant.

9) Basically, LRMs cannot fire indirectly without TAG/NARC, ECM has no effect if the LRM carrier has personal LoS for direct fire, and it prevents TAG and NARC from allowing indirect LRM fire.

The Target Retention module will still allow targets to be retained but will no longer allow LRM locks to continue after the target has left LoS. Because TAGged and NARCed LRM targets are not directly subject to LoS restrictions to be valid for targeting or for LRM locks, they do not additionally interact with the Target Retention module in any way.



BAP will now extend sensor range by 35% and increase target acquisition speed by 35%, up from 25% each. This will make it more worth carrying. However, any friendly unit that is inside the ECM bubble is not subject to these increased detection ranges and speeds. This means that a unit inside the bubble that carries BAP will be able to target an enemy while the enemy carrying BAP will not be able to target them in return. Make note that, due to proposed changes in targeting and ECM/SSRM interaction, BAP no longer needs to interact with ECM at close ranges. BAP will still detect shutdown enemies at 120m or closer. BAP has no impact on the ability to target ECM-protected enemies within normal sensor range because within that range ECM does not prevent personal LoS targeting.



SSRMs can lock based on personal LoS or on shared targeting data from other units that have LoS. When you throw in ECM and the rest this means that if you acquire a lock on a light mech that runs behind a building, several things can happen. Note that even though the language is the same as for LRMs, SSRMs still do not have ballistic trajectories or fire indirectly, so defacto personal LoS is required.

1) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover. That enemy SSRM carrier may target the friendly, lock, and fire. Missiles will track until the friendly mech breaks LoS with the SSRM carrier.

2) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover. Another enemy mech also obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech and targets it. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech as long as it remains in the personal LoS of either of the two enemy mechs.

3) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech without ECM cover. Another enemy mech also obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, targets, and NARCs it. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech until NARC is exhausted regardless of LoS.

4) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech until the friendly mech breaks LoS with the SSRM carrier. (exactly like #1)

5) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech also obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech and targets it. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech until it breaks LoS with the enemy SSRM carrier, regardless of whether or not the second enemy mech maintains LoS. (No target sharing of ECM-protected mechs).

6) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LoS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech also obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, targets, and NARCs it. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech until it breaks LoS with the enemy SSRM carrier. If the friendly mech loses ECM cover before the NARC is exhausted, the enemy SSRM carrier may target and lock on the friendly mech regardless of LoS until the NARC is exhausted. (NARC doesn’t function under ECM, no target sharing of ECM-protected targets)

7) An enemy SSRM carrier crests a ridge and obtains personal LOS on a friendly mech with ECM cover. Another enemy mech also obtains personal LoS on the friendly mech, targets, and TAGs it. The enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly mech until it breaks LoS with the enemy SSRM carrier, regardless of whether or not it remains TAGged. If the friendly mech loses ECM cover, the enemy SSRM carrier may target, lock, and fire on the friendly as long as an enemy mech maintains LoS with the friendly. Since TAG requires LoS by default, this is exactly like #2 after the friendly loses ECM cover.

This proposal was based on the idea that the two most frustrating things about the interacting systems are the misery of being helpless under indirect LRM barrage (it's boring to be the barrager, too, if we're honest) and the frustration of being unable to fire LRMs or SSRMs when faced with ECM cover despite having clear line of sight. My feeling is, if I can see your 12 meter tall fusion powered robot, then I damn well better be able to shoot it. But that works in return - if I can't see your 12 meter tall fusion powered robot, there better be a damn good reason for you to be able to shoot me when there's nothing I can do in response. Both situations suck harder than a turbojet intake during afterburner.

[Rhaythe]

Sigh.

No, it isn't. There are plenty of counter-measures against it. If it renders your entire weapon systems useless, then you're boating LRMs and you should re-consider your build.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:13 AM, said:

Sigh.

No, it isn't. There are plenty of counter-measures against it. If it renders your entire weapon systems useless, then you're boating LRMs and you should re-consider your build.

Do you know what ECM stands for? Do you find it funny when you read your post and think about it?

And what item negates people who boat AC's or PPC's? Hmm? HMM?

[Rhaythe]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

And what item negates people who boat AC's or PPC's? Hmm? HMM?

Ammo and heat, respectively.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

Ammo and heat, respectively.

Oh so wait....missiles don't generate heat or use ammo?

That's FUNNY...I didn't know that!

What about my first question? Counter Measures...for Electronic Counter Measures....that makes sense.

[Rhaythe]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

What about my first question? Counter Measures...for Electronic Counter Measures....that makes sense.

I know you're just baiting me, but still. Why doesn't it?

Counter-counter-measures are quite common, in fact. Network Intrusion counter-measures typically involve firewalls and traffic monitoring, so hacking parties will typically imploy counter-measures against those, such as bot-networks and IP masking. Stealth countermeasures in military aircraft involve absorbant materials and low radar-profiles, so the counter-counter-measure would be heat tracking.

Just because a double-negative confuses you doesn't make it improper use.

Edited by Rhaythe, 04 April 2014 - 07:31 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

I know you're just baiting me, but still. Why doesn't it?

Counter-counter-measures are quite common, in fact. Network Intrusion counter-measures typically involve firewalls and traffic monitoring, so hacking parties will typically imploy counter-measures against those, such as bot-networks and IP masking. Stealth countermeasures in military aircraft involve absorbant materials and low radar-profiles, so the counter-counter-measure would be heat tracking.

Just because a double-negative confuses you doesn't make it improper use.

It's improper since ECM doesn't actually do it's job, it doesn't counter electronics. The Electronics counter it. Or did you not get that?

ECM was put in to counter things like NARC/Artemis/BAP and now it's the opposite.

Hence the dumbness.

And you still didn't answer, what 1.5 ton item presents my entire team with a cloud to block AC's and PPC's?

[Rhaythe]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:40 AM, said:

And you still didn't answer, what 1.5 ton item presents my entire team with a cloud to block AC's and PPC's?

Following that same logic, what item gives a boon to any ballistic or energy weapon system? Missiles have 2 systems (TAG, NARC) that stack to provide bonuses, plus a direct upgrade (Artemis) to provide better lock-on time. Since your direct comparison is simply that missiles are being "singled out" and not other weapon systems, why doesn't this game have a boon to energy and ballistics?

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:40 AM, said:

It's improper since ECM doesn't actually do it's job, it doesn't counter electronics. The Electronics counter it. Or did you not get that?

Nonsensical statement is nonsensical.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

Following that same logic, what item gives a boon to any ballistic or energy weapon system? Missiles have 2 systems (TAG, NARC) that stack to provide bonuses, plus a direct upgrade (Artemis) to provide better lock-on time. Since your direct comparison is simply that missiles are being "singled out" and not other weapon systems, why doesn't this game have a boon to energy and ballistics?


Nonsensical statement is nonsensical.

I'd argue Advanced Zoom does more for PPC's and AC's than TAG or NARC does for LRM's.

In fact. Advanced Zoom does more for PPC's and AC's than even the Adv. Decay module does for LRM's.

And in fact, had ECM not existed, you wouldn't have had to mess with TAG and NARC to do what they currently do.

Let me ask you this, do people take ECM to stop electronics?

Or do people take ECM to stop missiles?

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 04 April 2014 - 07:48 AM.

[Rhaythe]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:47 AM, said:

I'd argue Advanced Zoom does more for PPC's and AC's than TAG or NARC does for LRM's.

In fact. Advanced Zoom does more for PPC's and AC's than even the Adv. Decay module does for LRM's.

And in fact, had ECM not existed, you wouldn't have had to mess with TAG and NARC to do what they currently do.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Fact remains, missiles are the only weapons system that has several direct boons and a single direct counter to its functionality. A plus and a minus to cancel out. Add into the fact that weapons systems are not monogamous. If a single ECM is enough to overthrow an entire build, then your build is at fault. Not ECM.

[Nehkrosis]

i was in the game where you complained about this, and then left immediately.

Im going to say to you what you failed to see in that match because you left;


"its grand, BAP works only when close, not usually great with LRMs, works great with Streaks,"

[Daekar]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:13 AM, said:

Sigh.

No, it isn't. There are plenty of counter-measures against it. If it renders your entire weapon systems useless, then you're boating LRMs and you should re-consider your build.

No, made the mistake of trying to use my Catapult A1. I had a single LRM15 rack. The streaks were completely useless though, even though I had BAP fitted. Stacking ECM rendered the entire mech completely impotent. I'm just not going to bother until they fix SRMs. I resent the crap out of being left light-mech food in a mech that shouldn't be.

[Rhaythe]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Let me ask you this, do people take ECM to stop electronics?

Or do people take ECM to stop missiles?

Are you really going to keep arguing about the name? I could call the module the Carlyle Pisser-Offer (CPO), and it wouldn't change its functionality or uses.

[Daekar]

Nehkrosis, on 04 April 2014 - 07:53 AM, said:

i was in the game where you complained about this, and then left immediately.

Im going to say to you what you failed to see in that match because you left;


"its grand, BAP works only when close, not usually great with LRMs, works great with Streaks,"

You should pay more attention. I was in a streak cat with one LRM rack. And no, it doesn't work great with streaks.

EDIT: Honestly, what kind of idiot would fit only LRMs?

Edited by Daekar, 04 April 2014 - 07:57 AM.

[Madw0lf]

Seems to counter my Electronics just fine.....

[Ultimax]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

And what item negates people who boat AC's or PPC's? Hmm? HMM?

Does generating a target lock allow multiple Users of AC/PPCs to indirectly fire on that target ignoring most terrain?

In this circumstance both Target Locks & ECM function as force multipliers for or against indirect fire, or streaks.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 04 April 2014 - 07:56 AM.

[Nehkrosis]

it totally does work great with Streaks.

like....erm....tbh...i dont even know where to go with that.
it does, they do. you got beat, chill and forget about it..

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rhaythe, on 04 April 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

Are you really going to keep arguing about the name? I could call the module the Carlyle Pisser-Offer (CPO), and it wouldn't change its functionality or uses.

So you'd be cool if we made Short Range Missiles have the longest range in the game? Names do mean something.

They especially mean something when this entire game is derived from an IP where these items are already in place.

And it just so happens that MW:O is the first game to really fudge ECM completely and change it's use entirely.

Ultimatum X, on 04 April 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

Does generating a target lock allow multiple Users of AC/PPCs to indirectly fire on that target ignoring most terrain?

In this circumstance both Target Locks & ECM function as force multipliers for or against indirect fire, or streaks.

If you have issues with indirect LRM fire, you are terrible.

End of story.

[Rhaythe]

Daekar, on 04 April 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

You should pay more attention. I was in a streak cat with one LRM rack. And no, it doesn't work great with streaks.

Again, if one piece of tech invalidates your entire build, then your build is at fault. I don't care if it's canon or not; all-missile builds have their weaknesses, and they are quite glaring.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

If you have issues with indirect LRM fire, you are terrible.

End of story.

If you have constant issues with a piece of tech with multiple direct counters, you are terrible.

End of story.

(See, I can argue in absolutes too)

[Mystere]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

What about my first question? Counter Measures...for Electronic Counter Measures....that makes sense.

Directly from sarna.net:

ECCM, short for Electronic Counter-Countermeasures is an additional mode that expands upon the use of ECM suites.

And from the ever present (gasp!) wikipedia:

Electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) is a part of electronic warfare which includes a variety of practices which attempt to reduce or eliminate the effect of electronic countermeasures (ECM) on electronic sensors aboard vehicles, ships and aircraft and weapons such as missiles. ECCM is also known as electronic protective measures (EPM), chiefly in Europe. In practice, EPM often means resistance to jamming.