116 replies to this topic

[DEN_Ninja]

Live stop making reasonable suggestions. It has been a rough two weeks but we need to go back to the hopeless vitriol that we constantly spew on this forum!.


Side note that isn't sarcastic. I agree with Live's suggestion.

[KingCobra]

[color="#b27204"]Koniving[/color]<p class="author_info">

Welcoming Committee

• 
  
• [color=#FFCB18]Legendary Founder[/color]
  
• 
  
• [color=white]The Defiant[/color]
  
• 
  
• 11,618 posts

Posted Today, 11:53 AM


DocBach, on 16 September 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:


ECM should have no additional penalties against IR/Magscan/seismic sensors according to Tactical Operations pg 223 -- those sensors each have their own penalities based on things like heat of target and weight respectively. If MegaMek has them being affected perhaps it has its spotting rules programmed incorrectly.

Sorry. Wrong quote.
Technical Readout: 3050, p. 197
Referred to the wrong book (tactical operations).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Fist thing most players on this forum need to know TT was a tabletop BattleTech game its rules and rule sets were for TableTop hex type game play.The rule sets were never meant to be played in a live action games like MechWarrior or MWO period.

Even BTMP3025 which was the closest game to Tabletop so far ever to reach production did not use TT rule sets and they did not work.So guys give up the I want TT rules in MWO once and for all its just silly thoughts.Now using the TRO's for mechs and load-outs etc. is perfectly fine.

Edited by KingCobra, 16 September 2014 - 10:04 AM.

[DocBach]

The thing about the quote in Technical Readout 3050, is even though it says ECM screws with sensors, immediately afterwards it says that sensors can still detect enemies but not identify them.

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

read that

[Sable]

I've actually been wondering what could be done to ECM for along time. Most people's suggestion nerf it into the ground but this one... i like this one. It seems reasonable and not too unreasonable for the ECM mech either.

The only other alternative i came up with was to allow only the ECM mech to not appear on radar and the "bubble" effect would no longer be effective. It would be useful for scouts and light mechs while not completely nullifying LRMs on larger targets.

Another possibility is to allow larger targets a bigger radar signature and enhanced sensors would be able to better pick up on larger mechs. Something like eve online's signature radius.

I personally didn't think ECM was "that" big of a problem until the kitfox came out with it's tripple AMS and ECM arm it make sense to be in a support roll. But it is a little too much now. I was in a game a few days ago where someone on our team manged to get a UAV up and there wasn't just 1 ECM protecting the other team but 4. It just too easy of a counter with no drawbacks.

[MercJ]

Doc Bach, I read your ECM Change Proposal (thanks for taking the time to put that together!). Am I correct in summing up your proposed changes in this way: Make MWO's ECM function more like the "Guardian" ECM than the later "Angel" ECM? I understand there were a few more tweaks to adapt to MWO's real time environment, but overall I think that is the best route to take for ECM.

(Obviously, there's more to it - everyone should give Doc's doc a good read, there's good info in there.)

[Clit Beastwood]

Livewyr, on 16 September 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

Reading lots of posts about how people do not want ECM changed for various reasons.
Chief among them is:
It is my shield against (overpowered) LRMs.
I do not think it is a priority.

Both of these concerns have some merit, but so does (I think) the binary relationship with basic LRMs. (ECM shuts off LRM usage unless they carry extra gear to make them work)

In light of that, I think the most profound change, that is yet simple in nature, to move it closer to balance is this:

Target Sharing Disruption.

ECM would block target sharing but not Line of Sight targeting and missile locks.

What this means:
If you are in your mech that has LRM tubes as part of its load-out, you would be able to shoot your LRMs at an enemy ECM mech if you personally can see it.
If you are in a mech with LRMs and you are not in Line of Sight (behind cover or blocked by terrain) and one of your allies sees the ECM mech, the target data (red box) is not transferred to you. You cannot see the ECM mech from your buddy's target sharing. (Much as it is now.)

That would be the only change. It would allow basic LRMs to be used in an ECM environment, in a direct fire capacity, but not in indirect fire capacity. It would allow ECM to maintain somewhat of the stealth capability by continuing to shield the ECM mech from having its position broadcast to everyone on the enemy team. Only the mechs that have LoS will see the "dorito." (TAG and Narc would still effect as they do now in order to allow Indirect fire LRMs.)



If I had to put the change net effect in one sentence:

"It will still be stealth against anyone who cannot directly see it on their screens."


Thoughts?

First a word on situational awareness.
Be aware of your surroundings. In the pub queue sometimes I see people get tunnel vision and chase down a single enemy, neglecting to notice several more enemies around them. This isn't the game's fault, it's the player's fault for not paying attention. Some people are less aware than others - I've had ECM and stood directly in front of people 200m out and they don't see me. If they lack the situational awareness to spot an enemy mech right in front of them, they *should* be dying until they learn to pay attention. If a mech has "radar" it is in no way going to be affected by whether or not the pilot can see it visually. Simply equip an lrm boat pilot that can *see* a cloaked target with a better way to poke the target. Changing ECM in any way is going to have a trickle-down effect, and we've already seen the "unintended consequences" changes to MWO can have. If the main concern is that LRMs are mitigated too heavily by ECM, *change LRMs*. Sometimes I run ECM, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I run an LRM boat. Sometimes I don't. There are matches where I'm annoyed that one team got 4 ECM and all the LRM boats - that sucks, but them's the breaks. It happens. If players don't like it, they should stay out of the pub queue, or learn to adapt. I *would* like to see a tonnage equivalency for ECM - if one team has 3 ECM, *try* to match a few ECM onto the other side (in the pub queue - teams should know better).

Why not just make LRMS follow the boat's TAG laser when nothing is targeted?
- Would let the... part of the player base that relies on LRMs to use them in an easy to understand direct fire way.
- Would give TAG a greater offensive role, leading to less complaining about TAG wasting an energy hardpoint.
- Would force LRM boats to participate in active combat a bit more.
- Would better reward marksmanship and situational awareness.

Net result - LRM boat can't target, so they fire a direct stream of LRMs. They can be dodged because, well, lrm's are not fast... but they're LRMs - non-guided mode should be a last resort.

Allow ssrms to dumb-fire, though with greater spread than regular SRMs.
- Would allow SSRM's to do damage even with ECM around.
- Wouldn't require a change to ECM. (and all the resulting "unintended consequences")
- Would be a simple enough mechanic to employ, basically the same as dumbfired LRMs.

Net result - SSRMs not totally mitigated by ECM. User still encouraged to learn to aim.

I'd even couple it with a change to how LRM's work...
When LRMs are used in indirect fire mode, with no NARC or TAG on the target, the LRMs impact in a radius, not upon the specific mech. More impacts clustered on the center, but not necessarily on the enemy mech. This would allow for disruption of the enemy mech (cockpit shake, etc.) and damage accrual, but would discourage LRM boats from simply parking somewhere safe and raining.
- No more new guys complaining about OP LRMs.
- More reason for the boat or it's teammates to equip "helpers" like NARC and TAG.

Net result - anyone targeted indirectly isn't automatically dead. LRMs retain indirect fire so lazyboats can still do damage.

Edited by Fierostetz, 16 September 2014 - 10:41 AM.

[LCCX]

Re: original post
This is an alright idea and IMHO would balance LRM usage on mixed-use, non-support mechs (so everything except the LRM boats -- Catapult, Stalker, etc.).

However, while it is a nerf in the right direction, it does still leave ECM as a hard counter to indirect fire (which LRMs are the only example of in MW:O right now). As such, I'd rather have a delay on targeting (and target sharing if ECM is spotted from far enough away) of 8-15 seconds (which can feel like an eternity in matches that can end in as little as 3-4 minutes).

.. going looking for DocBach's ECM opus now.

[Khobai]

Quote

However, while it is a nerf in the right direction, it does still leave ECM as a hard counter to indirect fire

Exactly. ECM cannot be a hard counter. It only weighs 1.5 tons.

As for adding additional functionality to ECM like ghost targets and making it more difficult to identify you/see detailed target info thats the kindve thing that should be handle by supplemental modules. Not ECM itself.

[DocBach]

LCCX, on 16 September 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

.. going looking for DocBach's ECM opus now.

its literally a 12 page essay on ecm, my master work.

Edited by DocBach, 16 September 2014 - 10:59 AM.

[Goose]

…

So, being about 400 pages behind, I'm just gon'a fold this in here, as I think it dovetails with the spirit of the thread.

I'd like to see the "total stealth" effect limited to the ECM-bearer only, and all 'Mechs friendly to it within coverage wind up with this flickering non-reading, sort of like how a UAV will just barely tell a team where it's opponents are, only 'cause of the flickering, the LuRM/ Lock-on bugbear is addressed.

My hang-up with ECM has always been how game-negating the team stealth aspect is; I don't "get" the But LuRMs arguments, but it's become clear that's all anyone else wants to talk about; Thus, my suggestion: Teams with unequal ECM counts can still find each other and have actual gameplay, LuRMing takes moar effort then just a mouse-click, and certain 'Mechs can still ambush if they play their cards right …

[LCCX]

Fierostetz, on 16 September 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

I'd even couple it with a change to how LRM's work...
When LRMs are used in indirect fire mode, with no NARC or TAG on the target, the LRMs impact in a radius, not upon the specific mech. More impacts clustered on the center, but not necessarily on the enemy mech. This would allow for disruption of the enemy mech (cockpit shake, etc.) and damage accrual, but would discourage LRM boats from simply parking somewhere safe and raining.
- No more new guys complaining about OP LRMs.
- More reason for the boat or it's teammates to equip "helpers" like NARC and TAG.

Net result - anyone targeted indirectly isn't automatically dead. LRMs retain indirect fire so lazyboats can still do damage.

This would be a great nerf for indirect LRMs. Not only do you reduce their Alpha lethality (longer time-to-kill), but you provide an option other than artillery/air strike to discourage excessive team balling/clumping.

[Clit Beastwood]

LCCX, on 16 September 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

This would be a great nerf for indirect LRMs. Not only do you reduce their Alpha lethality (longer time-to-kill), but you provide an option other than artillery/air strike to discourage excessive team balling/clumping.

Yup, and no changes to ECM that would have a trickle-down effect we'd work at re-balancing for 6months+

[LCCX]

DocBach, on 16 September 2014 - 10:04 AM, said:

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

read that

Yes. Exactly this.

[Tombstoner]

Livewyr, on 16 September 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

You would still have a large part of that effect.

No ECM: You show up on everyone's radar the moment someone hits "R" on your regardless of their locations.
"New" ECM: Your dorito shows up on the radar of anyone who can see you. (LOS) however, them hitting "R" does not paste you on everyone's radar.

You would not have complete stealth (which is the realm of Stealth Armor) but you would still have "effective" stealth in that even if someone hits "R" on you with LoS, they are still the only ones that see you.



Foxwalker, the problem with those counters is:
They all have to be actively followed through just to negate the ECM. (Or be in melee range with ECCM/BAP) While ECM does not have to do anything in particular. That is not nearly a balanced interaction. (And is quite silly that you have to use a TAG laser to be able to target something sitting 201 meters in front of you.

---------------
EDIT: And it would be a MASSIVE change.
No more stealth-given initiative when right in front of someone.
No more complete shut out of basic LRMs.

The nice thing is this lets PGI add in stealth armor at some point so you could conceivably get that level of functionality again. one possibility is to add that to the list of suggestions for the ECM change. I think stealth armor would be a reasonable addition.

[Livewyr]

Tombstoner, on 16 September 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

The nice thing is this lets PGI add in stealth armor at some point so you could conceivably get that level of functionality again. one possibility is to add that to the list of suggestions for the ECM change. I think stealth armor would be a reasonable addition.

Stealth Armor is a bit away, so without a Timeline Jump, it is not likely to appear, however: I would LOVE to have real stealth armor. (Heat, tonnage, and crit costs, but for real stealth- very small heat signature.)

[KamikazeRat]

DocBach, on 16 September 2014 - 10:04 AM, said:

The thing about the quote in Technical Readout 3050, is even though it says ECM screws with sensors, immediately afterwards it says that sensors can still detect enemies but not identify them.

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

read that

ok, i read it...it hurt my brain a little...but i agree. that is the best well rounded proposal i've seen. But if there are any problems, they can start tweaking the variables until they find a good balance(lock-on times, ranges of coverage, and what effects that range) as long as they keep to the principal laid out, its got my vote (when it comes to it)

Edited by KamikazeRat, 16 September 2014 - 01:50 PM.

[Cyberiad]

I would prefer if ECM/LRMs were implemented this way:
-ECM reduces detection range by 250m and does the same for friendly mechs within 180m bubble, this stacks with additional ECM down to 250m so that as long as you are within 250m of a target, you can lock on
-IS LRMs don't have a minimum range but start to get exceedingly inaccurate within 180m
-IS LRMs get ripple fire but at a much faster rate than clan mechs (why? because ripple fire is much more satisfying and fun to fire, also in previous games missiles were all ripple fire)
-Clan LRMs don't have reduced damage at short range, the way it is right now just seems silly

On a side note I would also prefer it if SRMs were ripple fire but fired with less spread, like in MW4. It is much more satisfying this way.

[Tombstoner]

Livewyr, on 16 September 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:

Stealth Armor is a bit away, so without a Timeline Jump, it is not likely to appear, however: I would LOVE to have real stealth armor. (Heat, tonnage, and crit costs, but for real stealth- very small heat signature.)

Well how important is the time line to getting ECM in better shape. you an i know the time time line but everyone else could care less, with some exceptions. I say let it slip and add the tech to the ECM change and elbo some roll warfare in at the same time. cause i for one love standing in my commando stationary in trees just south of the casuistic ridge line. spotting and tagging my brains out. The LOS change to ECM kinda does kill that.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Yeah, I'll support this.

I've been trying to describe basically the same thing lately, having Locks being an independent system from ECM.

But I was also including limits for indirect locks to only TAG'd, NARC'd and possibly also UAV revealed mechs.

[Chrithu]

This is the best suggestion about ECM I have read in a long time. Not only is it simple but it also directly addresses the LRM vs ECM balance without actually dramatically shifting it.

And it also just brought back a thought I had a while ago while pugging all weekend long for a challenge: The game would in my view benefit from a spotting system, which works similar to milsims like Operation Flashpoint or Arma, where you would hover the crosshair over a spotted (but not sensor targeted) mech and by the press of a button your team automatically gets a voice message saying "spotted [chassis] in [map sector]". For example: "Spotted Jenner in E7".

Such a system would go miles in an information warfare scenario that revolves around the ability to share targets among the team, when not all players are together on a TS3.