32 replies to this topic

[Obelus]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 15 September 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

The underlying principle of mech deployment for PGI has been to issue them via the stock variants from the lore. Each of those variants has a set of equipment that is fixed, which any change to weight or critical values would break.

RVN-3L is the stock ECM Raven. Note that its tonnage is full.

As for ECM balance, the basic mechanic is broken in concept. It is a hard counter, and hard counters are pretty much universally toxic to good gameplay. Far better would be to have ECM move to a soft counter system, where ECM and all the other electronic warfare items give penalties and bonuses that stack one with another.

Having ECM increase lock-on times, reduce detection ranges, etc., would be far closer to its lore function than the current invisibility screen and lock-on hard-counter mechanics, while also being far healthier for overall gameplay, without removing the utility in bringing an ECM to the field.

Yes players with mechs that have ECM would have to adjust their equipment to fit a heavier ECM package. This could mean having to lower the size of their engine, remove heatsinks, or weapons to fit it. Seems a fair price for radar invisibility.

However changing it so that ECM increase lock-on times, reduce detection ranges, etc is fine by me as well.

[stjobe]

Okay, so here's what's wrong with ECM from a BattleTech perspective:

* LRMs should be able to fire indirectly without any other equipment mounted, albeit at a penalty to-hit.
* LRMs should be able to hit more effectively (with more missiles) by using Artemis or Narc.
* ECM should be able to hard-counter the bonuses from Artemis or Narc, but not stop LRMs outright.
* Neither should ECM stop SSRMs at all.
* TAG hasn't got anything at all to do with LRMs, it's supposed to be a spotting tool for Arrow IV artillery rockets, not LRMs.

So how could it be changed?

* Increase the missile spread even more for indirectly fired LRMs
* Make Artemis and Narc just tighten the spread on LRMs.
* Make ECM negate these bonuses of Artemis and Narc.
* And that's all it should do as regards LRMs.
* Rework TAG to tighten the spread on Artillery and not LRMs.

I haven't touched on BAP here, but ECM counters its effect but makes the ECM unit stand out like a sore thumb to the BAP 'mech.

[Joseph Mallan]

And that is ECM 101 gentlemen.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Obelus, on 15 September 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Yes players with mechs that have ECM would have to adjust their equipment to fit a heavier ECM package. This could mean having to lower the size of their engine, remove heatsinks, or weapons to fit it. Seems a fair price for radar invisibility.

You are missing my point. Breaking current after-factory builds is fine. Breaking stock builds is not. If you can or will not understand why that's a problem, then I cannot contribute more to this thread.

[Khobai]

1) ECM stealth needs to be removed. ECM is unbalanced because its a 1.5 ton piece of equipment that hard counters many multitudes its own weight in LRM launchers. Thats not to say hard counters cant exist in MWO. however the effectiveness of the counter needs to be proportional to its weight/critslots/heat generation. The only equipment in battletech that meets that qualification is: null signature system.

2) ECM should be a soft counter to LRMs. That means ECM should weaken LRMs but not prevent them from being used. In other words increased lock times, faster lock degradation, worse missile spread and tracking, etc... all of those weaken LRMs but dont prevent their use.

3) LRMs need a balance pass so theyre not overpowered without a hard counter. Right now Indirect LRMs are way too strong as anyone whos dropped without ECM on their team has experienced. Indirect LRMs need to be weakened: They need less screen shake, more spread, less tracking, and possibly a random miss chance.

Edited by Khobai, 15 September 2014 - 11:04 AM.

[Obelus]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 15 September 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:

You are missing my point. Breaking current after-factory builds is fine. Breaking stock builds is not. If you can or will not understand why that's a problem, then I cannot contribute more to this thread.

So you're arguing a point of lore and not whether it's technically feasible? Variant x had 4 large lasers in the lore so it must have it in MWO?

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Obelus, on 15 September 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

So you're arguing a point of lore and not whether it's technically feasible? Variant x had 4 large lasers in the lore so it must have it in MWO?

Given the underlying principles under which PGI is operating, yes. If PGI were to state that they're scrapping stock builds entirely, then I'd change my position. I don't see that happening any time soon, however.

[Joseph Mallan]

Obelus, on 15 September 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

So you're arguing a point of lore and not whether it's technically feasible? Variant x had 4 large lasers in the lore so it must have it in MWO?

Actually he is arguing basic construction of Canon builds and Yes If it is built that way there it should be built that way here. Much as TT gave proper credit to Mechs brought into Canon From earlier MW titles.

[Obelus]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 15 September 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

Given the underlying principles under which PGI is operating, yes. If PGI were to state that they're scrapping stock builds entirely, then I'd change my position. I don't see that happening any time soon, however.

Why would changing 5 stock ECM variants require scrapping stock builds entirely? I'm not a purist so changing 5 mechs seems a minor change to me.

Anyway, as I mentioned previously the changes you and Khobai proposed to ECM are fine with me if that makes players happier.

I get the impression that PGI is trying to seperate changes to ECM from LRM but I don't think they can. They're too intertwined.

[Squally160]

Just add ghost heat to it. Solves all problems

[nehebkau]

FFS easiest solution is to make it SINGLE TARGET ONLY, Let ANY mech equip it like BAP.

Edited by nehebkau, 15 September 2014 - 11:31 AM.

[Scratx]

Won't even bother reading...

Can't change crits and/or tonnage without breaking stock builds, therefore PGI won't do it. They should just make it worth the 1.5t and 2 crits instead.

[Obelus]

nehebkau, on 15 September 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

FFS easiest solution is to make it SINGLE TARGET ONLY, Let ANY mech equip it like BAP.

Another solution but I'd guess that would be lore breaking as well.

Scratx, on 15 September 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

Won't even bother reading...

Can't change crits and/or tonnage without breaking stock builds, therefore PGI won't do it. They should just make it worth the 1.5t and 2 crits instead.

Fine by me. I think what Levi and Khobai suggested seems reasonable. I imagine it's something that's been suggested many times in the past. I'm wondering why PGI hasn't implemented it.

Squally160, on 15 September 2014 - 11:29 AM, said:

Just add ghost heat to it. Solves all problems

Yeah I hate that mechanic as well.

Edited by Obelus, 15 September 2014 - 11:35 AM.