632 replies to this topic

[Shredhead]

ThisMachineKillsFascists, on 12 September 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Your post becomes more valid when you insult them as "the biggest jerks"

10/10

Dude, I'm two years longer here than you, and you want to berate me on these d-bags? Long time players have enough experience with them.

[Stormwolf]

Alex Warden, on 12 September 2014 - 11:59 AM, said:

before doing anything with ecm, rework the LRM system completely... blindshot streak LRM are not any more "TT style" than the ECM in mwo...

Yeah, you're lucky if you can get 12 ~ 16 LRM's to hit with a LRM 20 most of the time.

[Heffay]

I hereby nominate and elect myself as head of the Player Council. I will be taking applications for others to fill out the Council immediately. Just send a PM via these forums along with 1000 and your application will be processed in 6-8 weeks.

[Chimperator]

For drops under 8 men group, all i can say is...

If ur taged by narc u only have 5 sec. to kill ur self before these massive lrm spam does it...
No chance to get ECM cover because its narced too or just miles away because people do what they want or just dont know how to play.
And on the most maps no chance to hide (caustic, alpine) and on they other maps where are some buldings, they are not help very much because lrms from any direction and u need a high building because of this perfect flight curve.

btw. thanks for LRM cooldown moduls... makes it more balanced.

ironic on:
What we need is more buffs for lock on weapons and smaler maps so peoeple can spam there lrms over the whole map not the half without moving just on step...
and maybe a harder flightcurve so people can spam it behind every building too.

Sorry for gramma failures english isnt my mother language.

Edited by Chimperator, 12 September 2014 - 12:11 PM.

[ThisMachineKillsFascists]

Shredhead, on 12 September 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

Dude, I'm two years longer here than you, and you want to berate me on these d-bags? Long time players have enough experience with them.

Did you ever consider this could be an alt account?

Some ppl become 100 years old and they die as silly as they were

[Gwaihir]

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

I hereby nominate and elect myself as head of the Player Council. I will be taking applications for others to fill out the Council immediately. Just send a PM via these forums along with 1000 and your application will be processed in 6-8 weeks.

And you claim you aren't a goon.

[Zyllos]

This is what I am looking for in terms of ECM and how EVERYTHING else interacts: http://mwomercs.com/...weapon-changes/

Zyllos, on 13 August 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

I am going to suggest some major changes that I think this game needs to balance out how targets are shared, LRMs directly work, and other equipment related to Electronic Warfare.

I doubt this will ever get seen or implemented but this is what I think really needs to happen -

LRM -

• LRMs aim at bones (just like SSRMs) in swarms (5 LRMs).
  
• LRMs maintain lock themselves once fired but still need to be spotted (triangle/spotted target needs to be visible but lock does not need to be maintained by the firer).
  
• LRMs need higher cooldown (LRM/5 to 7.0s, LRM/10 to 8.0s, LRM/15 to 9.0s, and LRM/20 to 10.0s).
  
• LRMs need a 90m/s speed increase (to 250m/s).
  
• If LRMs are fired with no target lock on, LRMs take a low trajectory to the location.

AMS -

• Increased damage to match same performance for the new LRM speeds.

GECM -

• Does NOT block lock on.
  
• Reduces range that a target is spotted by sensors by 50% (to 400m, from 800m) for the GECM carrier only.
  
• Increases time to gain target info (loadout/damage/ect.) and lock on delay by 100% for all under GECM.
  
• NARC is blocked, even if the NARC hits the GECM carrier.
  
• Artemis IV bonuses are completely blocked if under GECM (even if the target is tagged).
  
• TAG is completely unaffected by GECM.
  
• Nullifies BAP sensor range and other bonuses.

Artillery/Air Strike -

• Increase radius of Artillery strikes by 100% (higher damage but spread out vs. air strikes, which are focused on a line but less damage).
  
• Can only be called with a mech equipped with a Command Module or to a location where a target is tagged/narced.
  
• Cooldown increased to 60s for team cooldown.

TAG -

• TAG range reduced to 450m.
  
• A target that is hit by TAG will be spotted and shared.
  
• If a target is tagged, anyone can target the mech and fire off an artillery/air strike to that target's location by selecting that target and hitting the artillery/air strike button.
  
• TAG needs to hit a target for 1.0s before it will be spotted.
  
• If TAG is not reestablished within 1.0s, the target will no longer be tagged.

Artemis IV -

• Only increases lock speed and tighter swarms for LRMs if you have direct LOS of target.
  
• Does NOT affect SSRM lock on speed or aiming.

NARC -

• Will always be countered by ECM, even if attached to an ECM equipped mech.

BAP -

• Will spot targets within 180m, regardless of LOS (ECM cancels this effect. This is also different from Seismic Sensor as Seismic will bypass ECM).
  
• Will display "ECM Detected" if within sensor range but will not overcome ECM's effects.
  
• Will display the ECM icon if targeted.

Command Module -

• Mech with a Command Module equipped can call an artillery/air strike to any visual location directly or on the map but with a longer strike delay (100% increase).

SSRM -

• Lock on delay is 0.5s.
  
• A tick is added for each lock on (meaning 5 launchers need 2.5s worth of lock on to gain 5 ticks).
  
• For each tick, a launcher is able to fire and goes on cooldown if fired.
  
• If a SSRM launcher is fired, a single tick is lost.
  
• Lose all ticks if lock is lost (same as LRM lock on).
  
• Lock only starts at the range of the SSRMs (270m for IS and 360m for Clan).

General Sensor Rules -

• Spotted mechs means YOUR sensors can see this target (triangle over it).
  
• Targeted mech means YOU have selected that mech.
  
• A target is only shared if you target a mech for 5.0s.
  
• TAG/NARC SHALL share targets to all.
  
• Separate LRM lock and SSRM lock so Artemis IV will not effect SSRMs. (use an X and a new lock noise for SSRMs).
  
• Add C3 Master and C3 Slave equipment.
  
• Add AECM.
  
• ECM icon is not displayed without BAP for enemy mechs.

C3 Master and Slave -

• At least 1 C3 Master must be present on the battlefield for a C3 Network to exist.
  
• All C3 equipped (Master and Slave) mechs automatically shares spotted and targeted mechs across the network.
  
• If no C3 Master exists, the C3 Network goes down.
  
• The network range is 800m from a C3 Master.
  
• Targets under ECM are not shared by C3.
  
• C3 Master weighs 6t and takes 6 slots.
  
• C3 Slave weighs 1t and takes 1 slot.

AECM -

• BLOCKS all lock on (SSRM and LRM).
  
• Does not reduce spotting range (unlike GECM for the carrier).
  
• Increases time to gain target info (loadout/damage/ect.) and lock on delay by 100% for all under AECM.
  
• NARC is blocked, even if the NARC hits the AECM carrier.
  
• Artemis IV bonuses are completely blocked if under AECM (even if target is tagged).
  
• TAG is completely unaffected by AECM.
  
• Nullifies BAP sensor range and other bonuses.

What this would accomplish is that LRMs either need to be locked on by the user with direct LOS, spotter with TAG/NARC, or be part of a C3 Network.



A target can be shared between players directly, without anything special, but a player has to keep an enemy mech targeted for 5.0s. This means that as players moves between cover, your mech is not immediately shared to everybody on their team unless someone was scouting/spotting for the enemy team.

LRMs will not be so spammy with the longer cooldowns, thus will most likely now be salvos from a team with repositioning in between launches (for both sides). But the LRMs will be more accurate reaching the target by not needing to maintain a lock (but still needs to be spotted) and faster speeds.

LRM damage will also be more distributed in damage due to aiming at bones like SSRMs. This will also make the damage distribution balanced between smaller/larger launchers.

ECM will be used to block NARC, Artemis IV, BAP, and C3. GECM will used to directly hide the equipped mech for scouting at range or protect it from targeting at range. But under 400m, GECM will no longer protect it from being spotted or targeted. AECM does not reduce sensor range at all, so can always be spotted and targeted but LRMs/SSRMs will never lock on.

TAG will be used by scouters to provide a way to cut through all ECM for spotting/targeting, share spotted targets to other mechs, and be used to call in artillery/air strikes on targets.

NARC will also be used to share spotted targets to other mechs and call in artillery/air strikes.

BAP has some more added effects to make it more useful. Mainly for non-LOS spots at short range and help in finding ECM mechs.

[Davegt27]

I am a 30 year fighter Avionics vet ( I retired last Dec) I know about Weapons Control Radar/Fire Control Radar and ECM and RHAW systems

what exactly is the problem with the current ECM system?

[Heffay]

Gwaihir, on 12 September 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

And you claim you aren't a goon.

I did? When?

[Vanguard319]

Heffay, on 12 September 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

I hereby nominate and elect myself as head of the Player Council. I will be taking applications for others to fill out the Council immediately. Just send a PM via these forums along with 1000 and your application will be processed in 6-8 weeks.

Hell no!

This council needs people who can be objective, unbiased, and capable of constructive criticism. In short: someone who isn't a known shill.

[MischiefSC]

Tolkien, on 12 September 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

Why would we believe you this time when you've shown utter disdain for the obvious will of 90+% of the community before?


Seriously, tell us all why this time is different? Is it because we have you by the short and curlies on your new game and you're finally realizing you need your community more than it needs you?

Unban vassago rain, unban roadbeer, unban sandpit, unban victor mason - these, standing cow of the DHB and Anders of the goons will be the player council, and you will listen to their decisions.

I really like several of those people.

I disagree, completely, with your post though. Completely and totally. That's not the 'players council'. I'd be happiest if the 'council' was people largely unaffiliated with any specific positions for/against PGI. I want an advocate, not someone who's going to want to use the premise of 'moral majority' to push their own agenda.

Not accusing any of those people of that but it's a concept I would worry about.

Unbanning them? Sure, I'm reasonably lenient on bans for forum stuff. I'd love to hear several of those voices added to the discussion.

Anyone speaking for the community though needs to be doing that - speaking for the community, not just the people they agree with and not just trying to get a personal army to take revenge/SHOW THEM I WUZ RIGHT. Even if that wasn't the intent it could easily become the perception.

No, community spokesmen need to be people you don't see arguing on the forums or telling people to eff off and the like. It needs to be people you can count on to not just speak on behalf of the community but to be perceived genuinely as speaking on behalf of the community.

[TopDawg]

Jazriel, on 12 September 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

I vote for Sean Lang, he knows what the heck he is talking about.

Otherwise we don't need no player counsel. If we followed player banter from beta, this would be worse off then what Russ envisioned for a reboot of MW.

Last thing we need is a bunch of old timers from 12 years ago telling us how awesome MW4 was.
Clanner need to be buffed, IS needs to be nerfed blah blah blah bring us are rifleman and marauder crap.

3rd person view actually helped bring players in though the community said no.
No one complained about 2x PPC and Guass boats, but they changed it and the game is better now.

Leave it to Russ, he the man.

Point proven.

As per my previous post, I am taking the time to point out when people make bad posts. You made a bad post. Was it intentional? I don't know. But I am informing you that you have added nothing to the conversation.

Thanks, and have a good day!

(A more appropriate post might have included equal representation and getting all viewpoints to be heard and considered.)

[Moomtazz]

Just make LRMs line of sight only and remove ECM.

[Helmer]

Let's please not clutter the thread with personal attacks.

Working on possibly getting an "Official" thread for this a thread about ECM and it's moving more towards a few other things (ECM, and Council, and Bans)


/Moderator off


For my $.02 . The #saveMWO individuals did a great job last year. I'm not convinced there needs to be one spokes person, however , Homeless Bill, TopDawg, and Bishop Steiner are individuals who have been tough but fair with PGI in the past.


Cheers.

Edited by Helmer, 12 September 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[Shredhead]

ThisMachineKillsFascists, on 12 September 2014 - 12:13 PM, said:

Did you ever consider this could be an alt account?

Some ppl become 100 years old and they die as silly as they were

What does it matter? With these characters in the council this thing is bound to fail. There are enough "islanders" that aren't such gigantic jerks. Choose one of them, I'll support it.

[IceGryphon]

ECM already has counters to "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
Mind you these are only against 1 ECM unit sometimes.
1. ECM can counter ECM. (There is a Key Labeled J on the keyboard)
2. TAG can Counter ECM. (Most people are to selfish to carry it. because my 1 more medium laser)
TAG IT IS THE FASTEST LOCK OPTION!
3. BAP can counter ECM. (Once again most people are too Selfish to carry it. It is in almost every mech I own)
4. NARC can counter ECM. (YET AGAIN most people are too Selfish to carry it.)
5. UAV can counter ECM. (This is seriously slow to lock down the ECM Units, But my Selfish RED smoke attacks)
This could use a buff for lock times.

LRM's are not a problem because of things like RADAR DEP and learning how to walk perpendicular.
DO NOT BACK UP against a shower of LRMS, Walk Sideways to cover.

I am not seeing how ECM is a problem here?

[DocBach]

Russ Bullock, on 12 September 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

Okay how about this, this is what many of you have been waiting for:

Well first a question: Do you think you the community can come to an agreed upon consensus? One in which if the changes are implemented everyone says great job PGI on listening to us now we feel great about ECM and your ability to listen to feedback?

If the answer is Yes then I suggest the following:

You the community decide how your going to present a proposal, nominate a peer that you feel has the best handle on this, put together your own player council whatever you like but present a proposal that your peers vote on. The vote would likely need to be far greater than just 51% in favor. Perhaps something more like 80+%

At that point PGI will analyze the proposal, if we see any technical problems or balance problems that we feel perhaps you didnt see, we will point those items out to you. Then if necessary you can adjust your proposal and put it to a vote again, if successful PGI will again analyze and repeat if necessary until we have a final design solution for implementation.

PGI will then communicate how long it will take to implement with full explanation as to why, and we will patch the changes in upon the agreed upon delivery date. Once complete if this whole process has gone smoothly and civily we will proceed with doing things like this far more frequently or at least for other areas of the product that are controversial.

What do you say?

Russ, this is the post a lot of us have been waiting for, for the last two years. Thank you for making it. Looking forward to some positive changes towards ECM and Information Warfare as a whole.

[Agelmar]

This thread is proof why this will never happen.

[Russ Bullock]

Stalkerr, on 12 September 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

Hi Russ, This is exactly what we asked for during #saveMWO last year. It looks like you're willing to work with the community, however it looks like you're still holding back and saying "only under these conditions". I get that, I do. Please respond saying you will make yourself available for clarification during this process, so that we can make sure we continue to be on the same page. The last thing anyone wants is for us to put together a player council, get 80% of what we think are the active game players to agree to something, and then have you all come back and say that's not enough. I'm not saying you would, but I think we all want to ensure that a process like this is transparent and the goals and constraints are clear and well-documented. Then we as a community have something clear to work for and we aren't operating off of any assumptions. Speaking of which, do you mean "80% of the player-elected council" or "80% of all active players" or what? We need to know what number and constraint we need to shoot for here. I would love to see a world where the community is actively working together with PGI to make a game we can all be proud of.

Yes I do want to keep these conditions in place, I think it is a good starting point. Also yes I do think it will be a good exercise for the community to truly get a sense of the vast amount of opinions within MWO and how difficult it is to listen to ideas and feedback and come up with a solution we think best meets the communities desires.

As to the 80% I am open to discussing the criteria with you. No of course it isn't 80% of entire player base, but it also can't be just the 100 most active people on the forums either which would be incredibly skewed. Units will need to make sure their player bases log into the forums at least to vote. There will need to be a continued dialogue on how we determine that the 80% is truly representative of today's active players.

I will continue to monitor the thread and situation. I can take some PM's but I encourage you to prove to PGI that you can come to consensus and work together.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

IceGryphon, on 12 September 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

ECM already has counters to "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
Mind you these are only against 1 ECM unit sometimes.
1. ECM can counter ECM. (There is a Key Labeled J on the keyboard)
2. TAG can Counter ECM. (Most people are to selfish to carry it. because my 1 more medium laser)
TAG IT IS THE FASTEST LOCK OPTION!
3. BAP can counter ECM. (Once again most people are too Selfish to carry it. It is in almost every mech I own)
4. NARC can counter ECM. (YET AGAIN most people are too Selfish to carry it.)
5. UAV can counter ECM. (This is seriously slow to lock down the ECM Units, But my Selfish RED smoke attacks)
This could use a buff for lock times.

LRM's are not a problem because of things like RADAR DEP and learning how to walk perpendicular.
DO NOT BACK UP against a shower of LRMS, Walk Sideways to cover.

I am not seeing how ECM is a problem here?

This right here is why we will never get 80%. Some people think that having 8 counters for overpowered ECM is considered Information Warfare.