9 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

It occurred to me that with the winds of change blowing on ECM, that one aspect about it sometimes gets brought up as "a problem" - which is the denial of targeting information.


Yet this is actually a positive aspect for the team that has it, with regards to improving the time it takes for an ally to be killed (TTK).


So my question is, if you feel mech targeting info denial is bad, and this is one of the reasons - why do you think this particular reason is bad when it improves survivability?


How can we roll this particular survivability tool into the game elsewhere?

[Lynx7725]

Uneven distribution, and the amount of effort that is needed to even temporarily negate the ECM is probably the primary reasons. Nobody in game is going to complain if their side had more ECM, mostly. It's usually the lopsidedness that is an issue.

[Ultimax]

Lynx7725, on 15 September 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

Uneven distribution,

Agreed. I've badgered Russ a number of times on twitter that ECM needs to be taken into account in the MM.

Lynx7725, on 15 September 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

and the amount of effort that is needed to even temporarily negate the ECM is probably the primary reasons.

And yet Active Probe only weighs 1.5 to 1 ton, has other benefits and also helps against ECM at close ranges.

Every single mech can equip it, does not require a hardpoint.


How many people are willing to equip this though?

[Lynx7725]

Ultimatum X, on 15 September 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

And yet Active Probe only weighs 1.5 to 1 ton, has other benefits and also helps against ECM at close ranges.

Every single mech can equip it, does not require a hardpoint.

How many people are willing to equip this though?

I do. To the point where on almost every non-ECM mech I try to find room for it. Damn useful little piece of equipment.

Thing is, ECM just stay on. To negate it requires quite a bit of teamwork, either to hold TAG on it, NARC it, PPC it, or counter ECM, and all except the NARC and PPC requires someone to get close enough to the ECM boat to do it. Meanwhile, ECM cover naturally draw allies closer, just by default.

I don't really mind the loss of information aspect of ECM (which as you said do prolong TTK), but my feel is that the effort needed to counter it is a bit beyond what you can reasonably expect in a Solo queue, or even a non-unit group drop. Making it a bit easier to counter is probably, IMO, what is needed, rather than a radical solution.

(Just to clarify: I rather a small tweak to the ECM, rather than a large motion that creates a lot of repercussion. But if it's needed, the hammer comes out.)

Edited by Lynx7725, 15 September 2014 - 09:11 AM.

[Ultimax]

Lynx7725, on 15 September 2014 - 09:09 AM, said:

I do. To the point where on almost every non-ECM mech I try to find room for it. Damn useful little piece of equipment.

Thing is, ECM just stay on. To negate it requires quite a bit of teamwork, either to hold TAG on it, NARC it, PPC it, or counter ECM, and all except the NARC and PPC requires someone to get close enough to the ECM boat to do it. Meanwhile, ECM cover naturally draw allies closer, just by default.

I don't really mind the loss of information aspect of ECM (which as you said do prolong TTK), but my feel is that the effort needed to counter it is a bit beyond what you can reasonably expect in a Solo queue, or even a non-unit group drop. Making it a bit easier to counter is probably, IMO, what is needed, rather than a radical solution.

(Just to clarify: I rather a small tweak to the ECM, rather than a large motion that creates a lot of repercussion. But if it's needed, the hammer comes out.)

And yet, you just listed nearly a half dozen methods to counter it. Let's go through the ones that are not NARC, because IMO that is the hardest to make work on most builds - but it also has a very strong effect in the right circumstances.

TAG is 750m, I'd hardly call that close. It's also hitscan.

PPCs are really a flash warning, letting the team know where the ECM unit is. 500m is still reliable, tougher vs. lights but that's nothing new.

BAP is also "always on".

And then ECM can be used to counter ECM - and that can be "always on".

I think "effort" to counter it is relative. It's a piece of equipment, that grants team benefits and can be countered by other forms of equipment.




How many items of equipment do we have to counter enemy information gathering?

Edited by Ultimatum X, 15 September 2014 - 09:20 AM.

[Lynx7725]

Actually here's a thought.

ECM in the current day isn't really about making things so quiet as to be invisible. It's more about putting out enough noise that the signal can't be heard. At some point, the ECM carrier is going to be so noisy, you can't help but notice it. Call it the Noisy Cricket. So if we apply that to the Btech world...

Said Noisy Cricket would be very noticeable, but not so much its not-so-noisy Cricket pals. The noise should disrupt targeting, but it would also be a bloody big pin on the map.. say it shows up like seismic markers, but with a broader radius, and not so definitively marking the position of the carrier.

So, the other side would know where there are areas of jamming/ ECM, but not specifically where; the enemy mechs under the umbrella still gets protection and concealment from sensors, but the carrier itself is more noticeable. That gives us more options for decoys and feints, rather than a ECM deathball that we get nowadays. It makes carrying an ECM more of a risk assessment/ role choice, rather than automatic go-to.

(EDIT: Well I'll still take the ECM, but I'll actually think about turning it on...)

To address your post that you put up while I was writing the above...

Ultimatum X, on 15 September 2014 - 09:18 AM, said:

And yet, you just listed nearly a half dozen methods to counter it. Let's go through the ones that are not NARC, because IMO that is the hardest to make work on most builds - but it also has a very strong effect in the right circumstances.

I think "effort" to counter it is relative. It's a piece of equipment, that grants team benefits and can be countered by other forms of equipment.

How many items of equipment do we have to counter enemy information gathering?

The problem isn't so much that we have the tools, but that the tools requires considerable effort and teamwork to make them negate one ECM, while the other side usually would automatically have friends along who would can disrupt that effort more easily than the teamwork that is required to negate.

TAG requires holding the visible laser on target for extended periods to be an effective counter.

PPC is actually best of the lot, as you can, with sufficient distance and accuracy, keep up a counter-ECM with a greater practical probability.

BAP and Counter ECM are always on, but their radius is very small, requiring you to get within the ECM umbrella (and said friends of the carrier). Whereas, effectively, the ECM effect stretches out to infinity -- because as long as you are within the halo, everywhere outside do not perceive you.

Like I said, I'm not against loss of information/ information denial. I'd love for PGI to let us use Mech Holograms/ Decoys, smokescreens, whatever skullduggery that can screw with the opponent's brains. It lets us set up tactical ambushes and all that and would really make the game more interesting (for me at least). It's just that in a way, there must be an "out" for the information denial, some way for the duped to guess that it's bait, in order to preserve some form of entertainment in this game.

Edited by Lynx7725, 15 September 2014 - 09:37 AM.

[RangerGee412]

Increase BAP range to 200 or 250.

[Lynx7725]

The more I think about it, I think at the crux of it is that there must be a risk for the ECM carrier, vs. the value the equipment brings to team.

BAP/ C-ECM/ NARC/ UAV requires you to get in close to negate ECM. That's a risk by itself.

TAG requires you to expose yourself and hold the visible laser. Risky.

PPC requires LOS/ LOF. Again, risk involved.

ECM's level of risk is not as high as the above, comparative to the team value it brings. It's IMO grossly out of line. Make the risk comparable to the value it brings, and you'd suddenly see a lot of ECM carriers ditch it out of self-preservation... which sorts out the problem simply enough.

[nehebkau]

How about we change 1 thing and 1 thing only -- make ECM single target only.

[Lynx7725]

nehebkau, on 15 September 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

How about we change 1 thing and 1 thing only -- make ECM single target only.

Well.. then you get lone Spiders and Raven snipers hiding all over the place. I hate rooting out vermin at the end of a match.

It's not impossible but in order to make it more viable under this, you'd need to unlock ECM for all mechs. Otherwise people would naturally gravitate to certain key mechs and that would cut down on build variety in game.