169 replies to this topic

[STEF_]

Bush Hopper, on 22 April 2015 - 07:36 AM, said:

Yeah, that would reek of prejudice and is pretty narrrow-minded.

Now...now...life can be sarcastic (see above)

LOL.

Pugville is always a lot of fun, indeed

edit: btw, we can see the effects of only one side ecm team, vs ....various scrubs.
In a previous post, did anyone that ecm saved noobs from being lurmed, and ecm makes thier lives easier?
'cause that was sarcastic, too

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 22 April 2015 - 08:30 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Stefka Kerensky, on 22 April 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:

Guess what happened here.

very, balanced match, gg close, right?




Avoid idiotic comments like "blue team should have choose some ecm mech....l2p"....
Because this is pugville. And because vs UBER quantity of ecm mech, a team MUST choose an uber quantity of ecm mech.

Someone here said that "ain't going to happen, blablaBLSA, BLABLAbla"

Let's see with cheetha, shadowcat, and black knight coming.... here a balanced match should have 5 ecm mech vs 5 ecm mechs.

A paradise game for ecm fan boyz... crap game for serious players.

There is always that "one Match" the proves it all, without a doubt. Looks like the 3 Raven's kick your sorry arses is all. The HBR never even survived. Try again please.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 22 April 2015 - 07:29 AM, said:

Stuff

Why do you think laser vomit is a thing?

I thought it was becasue LRM's and Clan AC's suck? Is there another reason we missed.?

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 22 April 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

I kinda think the matchmaker should add an ecm to each side or balance it out at least.

And while it is at it, how about the MM restrict each Team to only 2-3 Gauss Rifles each. To many Gauss rifles on 1 Team and none on the other sucks hard too? We should not discriminate... right?

Edited by Almond Brown, 22 April 2015 - 08:40 AM.

[Dawnstealer]

Yeah - no ECM "bubble" (or at least a smaller one), and it should be able to be defeated by line-of-sight.

[Mystere]

Almond Brown, on 22 April 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

There is always that "one Match" the proves it all, without a doubt. Looks like the 3 Raven's kick your sorry arses is all. The HBR never even survived. Try again please.

Heck, back in the day when PPCs were better, my Pretty Baby was configured to hunt for those pesky 3Ls. I called a 2x1 engagement bad news for the 3Ls, and a 3x1 as me having the upper hand.

I think I should take her out for a drive again.

[Mystere]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 22 April 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

I kinda think the matchmaker should add an ecm to each side or balance it out at least.

There's that 1-on-1 symmetric balancing type of request again.

Almond Brown, on 22 April 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

And while it is at it, how about the MM restrict each Team to only 2-3 Gauss Rifles each. To many Gauss rifles on 1 Team and none on the other sucks hard too? We should not discriminate... right?

Don't you even dare give PGI any ideas.

[Strum Wealh]

Khobai, on 22 April 2015 - 07:23 AM, said:

Except it doesnt work anything like real life. Real life ECM doesnt give an aircraft and all his squadron buddies stealth.

Barrage jamming would effectively do just that.

• "Barrage jamming is using a wide noise bandwidth to cover several radars with one jammer or to compensate for any uncertainty in the radar frequency." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-9.2
  
• "BARRAGE NOISE JAMMING - Noise jamming spread in frequency to deny the use of multiple radar frequencies to effectively deny range information. Although this is attractive because it enables one jammer to simultaneously jam several radars of different frequencies, it does have the inherent problem that the wider the jamming spread, the less jamming power available per radar, i.e. the watts per MHz bandwidth is low." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 10-1.3

On top of that, there is the concept of Support Electronic Attack ("EA") operations.

"Support EA is electronic transmissions radiated from one platform and is used to protect other platforms or fulfill other mission requirements, like distraction or conditioning. Figure 2 illustrates two cases of support jamming protecting a striker - stand-off jamming (SOJ) and stand-in jamming (SIJ)."
"The bottom half of Figure 1 illustrates escort jamming which is a special case of support jamming. If the escort platform is sufficiently close to the target, the J-to-S calculations are the same as for self protection EA."
(Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-7.2)

As such, being able to jam multiple opposing BattleMechs' radar systems with a single friendly Guardian suite (and, thus, rendering multiple friendly units covered by the same single Guardian suite) would be well within the realm of plausibility.

Likewise, Beagle's ability to overcome Guardian's jamming at close ranges (which is present under the advanced rules found in Tactical Operations) would be an example of what is known as "burn-through".

• "The point where the radar power overcomes the jamming signal is known as burn-through." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-8.2
  
• "A radar can be designed with higher than necessary power for earlier burn-through on jamming targets. Naturally that would also have the added advantage of earlier detection of non-jamming targets as well." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-8.2
  
• "Burn-through Range (Monostatic) is the radar to target range where the target return signal (S) can first be detected through the jamming (J). It is usually the range when the J/S just equals the minimum effective J/S." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-8.3
  
• "Burn-through Range (Bistatic) occurs when J/S just equals the minimum effective J/S." - Electronic Warfare and Radar Systems Engineering Handbook, Fourth Edition (October 2013), pg. 4-8.5

Also, Guardian's Ghost Target mode (a third mode of operation described in TacOps, not (yet?) implemented in MWO) would be an example of a "Random Range Program (RANRAP)" - "a dynamic False Target Jamming technique program to create multiple realistic targets of varying size and distance from the jamming plane."

Edited by Strum Wealh, 22 April 2015 - 12:52 PM.

[STEF_]

Almond Brown, on 22 April 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

There is always that "one Match" the proves it all, Try again please.

Not a screenshot but a fact: when I drop in Puglandia, noobs are sniped to death without they can even see where enemy mech is.
And "ecm was introduced to stop the noob-lurmapocalyse".....quite ironic, isn't it?

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 22 April 2015 - 09:32 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mystere, on 22 April 2015 - 08:51 AM, said:

There's that 1-on-1 symmetric balancing type of request again.

For ECM only, yes

Because for only 1.5 tons you too can win games

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 22 April 2015 - 10:30 AM.

[bad arcade kitty]

i don't get why people even mention tt

do you realize that with our tiny maps ecm should be powerful

[Deathlike]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 22 April 2015 - 07:29 AM, said:

Remember that player council?

DOA.

True story.

[Ghogiel]

Stefka Kerensky, on 22 April 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:

Guess what happened here.

very, balanced match, gg close, right?




Avoid idiotic comments like "blue team should have choose some ecm mech....l2p"....
Because this is pugville. And because vs UBER quantity of ecm mech, a team MUST choose an uber quantity of ecm mech.

Someone here said that "ain't going to happen, blablaBLSA, BLABLAbla"

Let's see with cheetha, shadowcat, and black knight coming.... here a balanced match should have 5 ecm mech vs 5 ecm mechs.

A paradise game for ecm fan boyz... crap game for serious players.

Basically none of the top tier mechs besides the HBR have ECM, so I don't know what you mean about serious players, as most of the time ECM is only a small part of a serious game.

posting screens of scrublord level pug matchs proves exactly what about ECM? imo all it says is bads are gon b bad.

[STEF_]

Ghogiel, on 22 April 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

Basically none of the top tier mechs besides the HBR have ECM, so I don't know what you mean about serious players,

A paradise game for ecm fan boyz... crap game for serious BT players. Better?

Edit: And, any mech, top tier mechs too, are covered by friendly ecm, right? are you sure there are no issues if a team have 5 ecm, while the other one no ecm at all?

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 22 April 2015 - 02:07 PM.

[Ghogiel]

Stefka Kerensky, on 22 April 2015 - 02:06 PM, said:

A paradise game for ecm fan boyz... crap game for serious BT players. Better?

Edit: And, any mech, top tier mechs too, are covered by friendly ecm, right? are you sure there are no issues if a team have 5 ecm, while the other one no ecm at all?

If one team is replacing their HBRs DDCs and RVNs with TBRs DWFs and FS9s there is probably a bit of an imbalance...

[FupDup]

Ghogiel, on 22 April 2015 - 02:29 PM, said:

If one team is replacing their HBRs DDCs and RVNs with TBRs DWFs and FS9s there is probably a bit of an imbalance...

Question: If TBRs, DWFs, and FS9s could mount ECM, would compies mount ECM on them?

[Ghogiel]

FupDup, on 22 April 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

Question: If TBRs, DWFs, and FS9s could mount ECM, would compies mount ECM on them?

Of course.

[Khobai]

Quote

Barrage jamming would effectively do just that.

um no. clearly you dont know what stealth means. if youre barrage jamming the enemy knows youre there. its called "offensive" jamming because it reveals your presence to the enemy. offensive jamming only occurs after stealth has already been compromised.

In the context of MWO:

Creating ghost signatures so the enemy cant discern the real signatures from the fake signatures would be offensive jamming.

Cloaking your entire team so they dont appear on radar at all is stealth.

From both a realistic and game balance standpoint, ECM should not do the latter.


However, since MWO has no other stealth equipment, ECM granting stealth to the mech its equipped would be temporarily acceptable until other stealth equipment is eventually added.

Ideally Null Signature System and Stealth Armor should be added and those should be the only two ways to gain stealth (and possibly passive sensor mode as a third way). And then Ghost Mode could also be added for ECM which would allow you to create fake radar signatures.

Edited by Khobai, 22 April 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[Mirkk Defwode]

bad arcade kitty, on 17 April 2015 - 10:35 PM, said:

what you want it's to remove a whole role from the game

it's pretty common for many games btw, people who love to do damage want to nerf supports, omg how dare they be useful not doing damage, they shouldn't be able to cover their teammates and should use their ecm only to do more damage themselves, damage, holy damage - it was your original post

Overlapping ECM fields prevent target locks entirely - even with BAP. BAP or ECCM only cancels out 1 of corresponding units. So I've had times where using a SSRM mech I can't get a lock and thus can't fire at all even within 100m range which is absurd.

[Telmasa]

Mystere, on 22 April 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

Heck, back in the day when PPCs were better, my Pretty Baby was configured to hunt for those pesky 3Ls. I called a 2x1 engagement bad news for the 3Ls, and a 3x1 as me having the upper hand.

I think I should take her out for a drive again.

It's because ECM is so overwhelmingly unbalanced (or "good", as it were), that it becomes so much fun to repeatedly dink them with PPCs. I do this all the time too (though I hate when I guess wrong as to which mech has the ECM), that doesn't mean ECM doesn't have too strong an influence on the game.

If ECM wasn't the "jesus box" it is today, I'd probably be doing something more useful with my PPCs, like focusing down the same mechs as my team. (man, if PPCs scrambled the HUDs of LRMboats......)

[Khobai]

Quote

Overlapping ECM fields prevent target locks entirely - even with BAP. BAP or ECCM only cancels out 1 of corresponding units. So I've had times where using a SSRM mech I can't get a lock and thus can't fire at all even within 100m range which is absurd.

Well ECM shouldnt prevent SSRMs from firing anyway. At the very least SSRMs should still be able to fire like regular SRMs while disrupted by ECM.

Although Im personally in favor of completely getting rid of ECM's ability to hard counter missiles because I'd like to see missile weapons used more often. ECM should only soft counter missiles by increasing lock-on time and perhaps decreasing their tracking ability.

[Mystere]

Telmasa, on 22 April 2015 - 03:53 PM, said:

It's because ECM is so overwhelmingly unbalanced (or "good", as it were), that it becomes so much fun to repeatedly dink them with PPCs. I do this all the time too (though I hate when I guess wrong as to which mech has the ECM), that doesn't mean ECM doesn't have too strong an influence on the game.

If ECM wasn't the "jesus box" it is today, I'd probably be doing something more useful with my PPCs, like focusing down the same mechs as my team. (man, if PPCs scrambled the HUDs of LRMboats......)

That "jesus box" having "too strong an influence on the game" is why I am having so much fun building hunter-killer Mechs in the first place. Why should I want that to end?

High QQ folks ruined light wolf packs for me.
High QQ folks ruined Steiner lances for me.
High QQ folks ruined LRM fire teams for me.
High QQ folks ruined splatcats for me.
High QQ folks ruined streakcats for me.
High QQ folks ruined poptarts for me.
Why should I again allow high QQ folks ruin my fun?