11 replies to this topic

[Cementi]

I realize there has been a ton of debate on every single angle to do with the state of ECM however I had some thoughts on the topic and wanted to share.

IS Sensors to obtain lock. I know that currently they are set to about 800 meters I am proposing a slight buff to that along with all the other changes.
Sensors 1000
w CC 1060
w BAP 1250
w Advanced sensors 1250
w Advanced sensors and BAP 1500
w all three 1560

Change BAP so that it no longer disables ECM and change ECM so that it can no longer toggle or stack but would still be an umbrella.
Instead make ECM a direct reduction in sensor strength by 85 %so that the above values become:
Sensors vs ECM 150
w CC vs ECM 159
w BAP vs ECM 187.5
w Advanced sensors vs ECM 187.5
w Advanced sensors and BAP 225
w all three vs ECM 234

Now for tag and narc. Again do not have them completely cancel ECM but reduce it's strength by 45% for narc and 40% for tag so that the combination totally cancles ECM but ONLY on the target. The interference is still there, but now there is something there to help cut through the interference. The ranges would be come as follows tag/narc:
Sensors 600/550
w CC 636/583
w BAP 750/687.5
w Advanced sensors 750/687.5
w Advanced sensors and BAP 900/825
w all three 936/858

UAV's could continue to work as they do now.
These changes would certainly change alot of how the game plays but I think they solve alot of the issues surrounding the ECM debate.

#1 ECM is the Jesus Box. If you look at a chassis right now if any of them have the capability to run ECM that is the one you run. To my knowelage there is no exception to that rule. By removing the ability to stack ECM it is no long beneficial to have every other mech on the team have ECM. Still wise to have a few but IMO more than 3 would become redundant. This would free up alot of variants and even other chassis IMO.

#2 Hard Counters......no one likes these. There will always be someone frustrated over something that instantly negates all effectiveness of a piece of equipment. By layering the counters so that to fully negate ECM you have to run ALOT of equipment. However if you spread the responsibility around you can stack all of that amongst your team....promoting teamwork. Even with that a team would have to work well together to completely negate ECM and then it would only be on that target instead of exposing the entire team. More often than not you would be dealing with limiting the effectiveness of ECM instead of canceling it.

#3 Boating Missles. A few points here to the good and bad. First off Missle Boats will have to have a decent amount of support to be effective but even if you did not run all the counters could still bring weapon systems to bear with some of them instead of being completely negated. On the flip side unless all the counters are used LRM boats will have a tough time bringing their weapons to bear with the reduced ranges. At these ranges indirect fire will be come less attractive and they will have to expose themselves to get a shot.

#4 SSRM. Currently to use this weapon system you HAVE to run BAP. Even then you can get hard countered by stacking ECM. With this setup you could still use streaks at really close range but if you wanted the full range you would have to use BAP.
Anyway let me know what you guys think. I expect a fair amount of hate over this but would like to see some constructive suggestions.

*edit* slight change to the hard counters section of the post.

Edited by Cementi, 11 March 2015 - 01:04 PM.

[Hans Von Lohman]

Actually, I would like all mechs to have a bit of ECM in the form of a delay from being in line of sight until you get the option to lock on. Call it a "sensor profile" that can be just a few seconds, like 3 for a light, 2 for a medium, 1 for a heavy, and none for an assault.

This can be a variable to adjust for under-performing mechs by giving them an even longer time before they can be locked on.

ECM can just extend that time even more.

However, I would also like to add a feature to LRM's to be able to guide them by manual control, similar to TOW missiles or the rocket launcher from Half Life. They chase your cross-hairs when "dead firing" them.

[Herr Vorragend]

Good Post, cementi

[Cementi]

Thank you Herr.

I like the idea of the sensor profile Hans. However my issue is it is allready more than hard enough to hold a lock on a light (I play a light or fast mediums most of the time). Especially if radar depravation is equiped.

However a sensor profile being added to the effective ranges that a mech is detectable could potentially be interesting and work well with the ideas I posted.

ie reduce the range a light is detectable by 20% a medium by 10% a heavy is normal and an assault is detectable an extra 10%

Edited by Cementi, 11 March 2015 - 01:35 PM.

[Cementi]

Oops, was working on this and did not bother to recheck the forums. Looks like someone posted something similar about an hour before I did. Which is about how long I took putting the post together on wordpad with all the afk I was doing lol.

http://mwomercs.com/...h-guardian-ecm/

Edited by Cementi, 11 March 2015 - 01:56 PM.

[Cementi]

A few things I want to bring up that I forgot to in the origional post. #1 is I am a tabletop player and I realize that the above suggestions have nothing to do with tabletop. I wont preach tabletop though I often think that had they stuck closer to how tabletop worked alot of in game issues could have been avoided. However at the same time some creative license has to be taken when converting a system to an online game like this. So I am understanding of these changes.

The other thing I forgot to mention is I like the idea of PPC hits "shorting out" ECM for a short duration and would suggest that be kept.

One of my unit brothers mentioned that he liked the idea of this but that they would never do it because the amount of coding required. However I would counter this with my recollection that PGI said in one of their posts or townhalls that they wanted to look at how ECM worked in game and possibly address it. This was back when they increased the range on BAP and I think that that was an easy change that they tried. I am unsure if it had the effect they wanted.

The fact is the change they implmented back then was another hard counter system that was super unpopular which is why the reduced the range of the BAP counter. With the reduced range it still works but often there is so much layered ECM that it does not matter. Do not get me wrong I am not complaining. I can manage with the current system. I just suspect it is something they are not happy with and will further change. I would rather they rebuild it into a working system than continue to try and adapt the current one.

Do the job right completely and correctly and you are done with it. Don't, and you will waste more time constantly trying to work around the problem. I say the system as is is acceptable for the short term and needs no immediate rework. However in the long term as more and more mech chassis are added with ECM the problem will simply compound and it will have to be addressed. Soon IS will only have the Heavy slot and the Clan an Assault slot that do not have ECM options. Once those are filled you will start to see entire drops of ECM mechs and I think at that point we will be talking about a rework of ECM. Better to start the discussions now and start working on it now rather than scrambling to make short term changes when that problem shows.

[cx5]

Hi Cementi,

Some heavy stuff up there.

There are things I do not fully grasp, which is "Target Acquisition Time" i.e. -42.5% in CC or the CLAN's targetting computer from 1 ton to 7 tons having varying reduction time. So these timeSSSSSSSS will have no effect as long as ECM is in effect right?

So the current scenario is ECM working, can't target it at all. Another ECM or BAP goes in 180 meters and negate it then suddenly BOOM target lock is superfast given above equipment is used.

So if your OP is used, ECM will no longer is ON/OFF, but reduce in sensor strength, but then I remember any mech can detect an ECM once inside 180m.

Anyway, I'm stuck and jam, need more time to think it through, ignore me for now .

Good hardcore post !!!

[LordNothing]

just do a blatant clone of the way it was done in MWLL and call it a day.

[aniviron]

If you want to read a short essay on my thoughts, go for it.

The tl;dr is that BAP needs to have some sort of active ability that makes it worth taking rather than negating ECM and providing some small buffs to a couple stats- like short-range detection through objects. Furthermore, the ability for some scout mechs to target, track, and share info with multiple friends at once would go a long way towards making scouting a real role; and it would give ECM importance to counter both the BAP and multitarget abilities instead of just being a missile shield.

[Cementi]

cx5, on 12 March 2015 - 07:07 PM, said:

Hi Cementi,

Some heavy stuff up there.

There are things I do not fully grasp, which is "Target Acquisition Time" i.e. -42.5% in CC or the CLAN's targetting computer from 1 ton to 7 tons having varying reduction time. So these timeSSSSSSSS will have no effect as long as ECM is in effect right?

So the current scenario is ECM working, can't target it at all. Another ECM or BAP goes in 180 meters and negate it then suddenly BOOM target lock is superfast given above equipment is used.

So if your OP is used, ECM will no longer is ON/OFF, but reduce in sensor strength, but then I remember any mech can detect an ECM once inside 180m.

Anyway, I'm stuck and jam, need more time to think it through, ignore me for now .

Good hardcore post !!!

Sorry I did not reply to this sooner. To the best of my understanding is that targeting computers do not affect lock on time. What they affect is how quickly you get data on the target after you get a target lock, to show armor strengths/weaknesses and weapon loadouts. So the above changes I suggested would not affect this in any way.

[Cementi]

Also liked your ideas Aniviron. Especially the skill trees. That is something I have wanted from day 1. The ability to tailor your talents to your playstyle. I personally think that the quirk system should have been in the talent trees to allow people to choose what they wanted instead of being forced into a predetermined playstyle.

Added bonus for PGI if they did skill trees like that they could charge MC to reset them for those that find they want a different path.

[Almond Brown]

Cementi, on 01 April 2015 - 07:37 AM, said:

Also liked your ideas Aniviron. Especially the skill trees. That is something I have wanted from day 1. The ability to tailor your talents to your playstyle. I personally think that the quirk system should have been in the talent trees to allow people to choose what they wanted instead of being forced into a predetermined playstyle.

Added bonus for PGI if they did skill trees like that they could charge MC to reset them for those that find they want a different path.

A Skill Tree based setup would be kinda nice but it would totally limit the flexibility PGI has with tweaking the current Quirks. Quirks are FREE whereas Skills would have to have a cost associated with them, as the current limited set we have now, do.

If players pay for stuff, then making drastic changes would be bothersome. Look at how even FREE quirks draw so much ire when players "quirk build" then get pissed off when the quirks change. Now take that ire and add in a C-Bill or XP/GXP cost as well. Scary stuff that...

Edited by Almond Brown, 01 April 2015 - 09:39 AM.