945 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Dracol, on 15 July 2015 - 08:36 PM, said:

It takes a 1.5 ton piece of equipment to negate a mech equipped with LRMs. That 1.5 ton investment can be countered by a 1 ton investment in TAG by the LRM equipped mech.

So, if there was no counter available I would agree with you. But there is, and overall, it costs the ECM mech .5 tons more in reduced weapons, engine size, armor, etc. than the LRM equipped mech.

One other consideration not directly related to the above quote. ECM does force a mech equipped with LRMs to act as a Direct Fire platform, which seems to be what a lot of people are looking for but without the associated counter cost in TAG in the LRM mech. I agree with the ECM / TAG counter costs and the fact the .5 ton additional investment in ECM negates the indirect fire mechanic.

Shall I remind that this hinders LRM mechs, as more mechs can use LRMs bedies assaults and heavies? Lights would be even harder pressed, and some mechs have either limited or no energy slots (one of the catapults, a Griffin can come to mind, I'm sure there are others). You also have to consider, that TAG being added in as a "necessary" is also one less energy hard point to use in another weapon system (such as a medium laser).

Also, TAG lets LRM users get a target lock, then they have to wait for a missile lock, which is also slowed down by ECM (currently). And your ECM negates locks for not just yourself, but for anyone in your bubble of influence, multiplying the effect of your ECM, over TAG which has to be direct line of sight and can only affect one person at a given time.

So.. for 1.5 tons, ECM is just amazing as it currently stands.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Bloodweaver, on 15 July 2015 - 08:45 PM, said:

There's a much simpler solution to the problems you mention.

Make ECM 'Mechs preclude target sharing.

In other words: YOU can still target, and lock on to, any ECM 'Mech you see.

But your teammates won't receive any target info from you. They won't even see that a target is present.

Ta-da! ECM is still stealthy, and you can still use LRMs and Streaks against it.

This is really the best solution in my opinion, simple, easy to understand, and, with some tweaking, balanced.

[Farnsworthiness]

So, lore and current implementations aside, has anyone actually considered what current Electronic Warfare suites do today?

• Directed Jamming: When mounted in an aircraft, the EW officer directs (points) an parabolic antenna at an enemy RADAR transmitter (Surface to Air Missile Site) and emits a large amount of energy to futz out various systems on the SAM site. This hides the EW aircraft and the other aircraft flying next to him from the RADAR sites being jammed.
  
• Indirect Jamming: When incoming threats are identified by the onboard computer, the pilot can emit broadband jamming signals to impede the lock of incoming missiles. Sometimes these signals are tailored to protect against specific enemy weapons systems.

Proposal:

• Give the pilot of an ECM mech a reticle to aim ECM. GIve the ECM a 60 degree swath so that it can jam and prevent any weapon system within that swath which requires a lock from targeting anything.
  
• The ECM carrying mech is still targetable from anywhere outside of the 60 degree arc.
  
• Limit the effective range on ECM to a certain distance - example - you can only jam out to 1000m. Remember that radio intensity is proportional inversly to the square of the distance
  
• Limit the effective targeting ability of all mechs to a certain distance (debatable)
  
• Keep broadband jamming available, but change it so that it impedes incoming guided projectiles. Anything unguided can still hit, etc. This can have a radius around the mech carrying the ECM package.

Thoughts?


https://en.wikipedia...ctronic_warfare
https://en.wikipedia...dio_propagation

[Jack Shayu Walker]

El Bandito, on 15 July 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

MWO is pretty fair. Otherwise you would see canon value Clan mechs obliterating everything in their way. If you keep blaming your team for causing you defeats then go play group queue. Leave solo-q pug matches to those who are thick skinned enough.

Precisely, but it won't be fair if my survival against heavy LRMs relies soley on what the PUGs felt like bringing to the match that day (ie enough AMS). As things are currently I have a blast in the PUG queue and it feels quite fair and balanced.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 15 July 2015 - 08:56 PM.

[Tytalyalak]

Reducing ECM range will help I approve of this change.

[El Bandito]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 15 July 2015 - 08:55 PM, said:

Precisely, but it won't be fair if my survival against heavy LRMs relies soley on what the PUGs felt like bringing to the match that day (ie enough AMS). As things are currently I have a blast in the PUG queue and it feels quite fair and balanced.

Then grab the reigns and tell you teammates to charge the enemy, if the enemy team has heavy LRMs. Every time when I see a lot of LRMs on the enemy side on Alpine, I simply type "YOLO!" and charge at the enemy with my mech. My pugmates follow suit to assert their manhood and we win against the enemy. It happens a lot more than you imagine. Take control, do not go along like sheep to the slaughter. VOIP is there too.

LRMs are terribly bad at killing a charging mech quickly, compared to laser vomit or ballistics.

Edited by El Bandito, 15 July 2015 - 09:01 PM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Tesunie, on 15 July 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

Shall I remind that this hinders LRM mechs, as more mechs can use LRMs bedies assaults and heavies? Lights would be even harder pressed, and some mechs have either limited or no energy slots (one of the catapults, a Griffin can come to mind, I'm sure there are others). You also have to consider, that TAG being added in as a "necessary" is also one less energy hard point to use in another weapon system (such as a medium laser).

Also, TAG lets LRM users get a target lock, then they have to wait for a missile lock, which is also slowed down by ECM (currently). And your ECM negates locks for not just yourself, but for anyone in your bubble of influence, multiplying the effect of your ECM, over TAG which has to be direct line of sight and can only affect one person at a given time.

So.. for 1.5 tons, ECM is just amazing as it currently stands.

You are right. TAG should get the same lock speed on ECM mechs as normal mechs, slowing it is unfair. Additionally, ECM should be a personal suite not a bubble like it currently is.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

El Bandito, on 15 July 2015 - 08:58 PM, said:

Then grab the reigns and tell you teammates to charge the enemy, if they have heavy LRMs. Every time when I see a lot of LRMs on the enemy side on Alpine, I simply type "YOLO!" and charge at the enemy with my mech. My pugmates follow suit to assert their manhood and we win against the enemy. It happens a lot more than you imagine.

LRMs are terribly bad at killing a charging mech quickly, compared to laser vomit or ballistics.

A fair point but taking away ECMs indirect fire jamming will cause this imbalanced situation to occur much more often. Additionally the LRM heavy team will still have the distinct advantage, especially near the beginning of the match; on maps like alpine, a spider spotter can allow that LRM team to do a whole lot of damage before the other team has time to engage.

[El Bandito]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 15 July 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

A fair point but taking away ECMs indirect fire jamming will cause this imbalanced situation to occur much more often. Additionally the LRM heavy team will still have the distinct advantage, especially near the beginning of the match; on maps like alpine, a spider spotter can allow that LRM team to do a whole lot of damage before the other team has time to engage.

Paul said nothing about removing ECM's IDF jamming, so could you stop putting conjecture in your post?

[Tesunie]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 15 July 2015 - 08:45 PM, said:

Lastly I sympathise with the idea of wanting to keep the LRMs tactically relevant, but allowing ECM mechs to personally shield themselves from indirect locks will not even come close to taking away the tactical significance of LRMs. I highly doubt every single player is going to bring ECM to a match, and provided they don't the LRM indirect fire can still function effectively. Even IF every single player brought ECM once in a blue moon, with ECM in the state I'm suggesting LRMs would still be able to fall back on direct locks and have a good fighting chance.

Not touching that first part, as I think we shall just have to agree to disagree, because I feel it's very similar to ECM (if ECM wasn't in the game) as far as teamwork. If no one brings it, then it's a team's fault. But, lets avoid this farther and just agree that we shall disagree on this topic.


As far as ECM blocking indirect locks (AKA: the ECM makes it so I have to gain direct line of sight to get a lock for my LRMs, and those locks are not shared), I agree. This is part of my issue where ECM is stacking too many effects at once. I also wouldn't be opposed to some other penalties to shooting your LRMs indirectly, with some extra possible buffs to shooting them directly. (Read as, adjust the LRM spread depending upon situations.)

Some of my statement is to those "LRMs shouldn't be able to shoot indirectly at all, unless X gear is being used to spot". I feel LRMs need their indirect firing to keep them in their utility position. It's something unique to LRMs and I feel that it should be retained, not limited to only if someone sacrificed themselves by taking X gear and purposefully spotting. Then you have two gambits at that point, the person taking LRMs might never be able to shoot indirectly, and the person taking X (TAG/NARC/etc) gear to spot may never have LRMs to use said gear for.

ECM blocking target sharing, I'm good with. That would be a good place. Maybe retain a locking delay as well for quick dashing between cover to make an approach, without sensors just picking you up as soon as you poke your nose out. This keeps it for scouting, but not for "stand in the open, missile protection".

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Here's how I honestly think things should work, but I'm not a balancing genius so I'm not saying this is the exact right way to do things, it's just in the ballpark.

Let's say you are a Catapult and you brought the LRMs to the party. Your teammates have identified four different targets. A Timber Wolf that is cresting the hill ahead, a kitfox that is also cresting the hill with ECM, a Victor that is still out of your line of sight, and an ECM protected Hellbringer that is still out of your sight.

-You can missile lock the Timber Wolf Normally.

-Your missile lock time for the kitfox is increased by 50%.

-Your missile lock time for the Victor is increased by 50%.

-You cannot lock onto the Hellbringer.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 15 July 2015 - 09:18 PM.

[Tesunie]

El Bandito, on 15 July 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Paul said nothing about removing ECM's IDF jamming, so could you stop putting conjecture in your post?

That may be my fault, crossing the conversation...

[Hayato1983]

Sounds good! Give it a run.

[Tesunie]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 15 July 2015 - 09:12 PM, said:

Here's how I honestly think things should work, but I'm not a balancing genius so I'm not saying this is the exact right way to do things, it's just in the ballpark.

Let's say you are a Catapult and you brought the LRMs to the party. Your teammates have identified four different targets. A Timber Wolf that is cresting the hill ahead, a kitfox that is also cresting the hill with ECM, a Victor that is still out of your line of sight, and an ECM protected Hellbringer that is still out of your sight.

-You can missile lock the Timber Wolf Normally.

-Your missile lock speed for the kitfox is increased by 50%.

-Your missile lock speed for the Victor is increased by 50%.

-You cannot lock onto the Hellbringer.

I could agree with that. Keeps ECM in a place, but doesn't make it a direct hard counter to any single weapon.

[Juodas Varnas]

It's still the same bullsh*t, it always was.

This issue is so stupid, that i won't even bother retyping all my thoughts and i'll just quote myself.

Juodas Varnas, on 12 July 2015 - 09:04 AM, said:

I hate it.

It should be changed into an actual COUNTERMEASURES suite instead of the Deus Ex Machina it is now.
-It should NOT prevent targeting.
-It should NOT prevent missile locks (neither LRM nor SSRM).
-It should negate Artemis IV, TAG, BAP and NARC (instead of the other way around, where TAG, NARC and BAP are the ones that "counter the countermeasures")
-It should increase the time (or completely prevent) targeting information gathering (getting the paperdoll of the enemy mech)

If PGI is so scared of LRMs coming back for a second Lurmageddon, they should rebalance LRM indirect/direct fire capabilities, by severely increasing the missiles spread while shooting indirectly, while highly increasing missile speed and shallowing the missile trajectory, while using them for direct fire (with your own lock-on).

[Kurayami]

You people just love lame "fixes" righto? Instead of reworking detection mechanics and giving us actual radar\passive sensors etc you will just nerf one and only team module wreaking several weapons in the process to boot just because some minority whine on forums? Need i remind you that exactly those kind of fixes resulted in this game almost going to drainer?

[Jack Shayu Walker]

El Bandito, on 15 July 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Paul said nothing about removing ECM's IDF jamming, so could you stop putting conjecture in your post?

Lol, that was what I have been arguing about with several people the whole time, whether or not ECM should continue to jam missile locks, especially locks that are indirect. I have absolutely 0 problem with Paul's current proposed nerf to ECM, I'm all for it in fact.

[SilentScreamer]

Wow, I read through 3 of the 12 pages. My thoughts on the OP:

Likes:
- Proposed reduction of BAP and ECM range.
- Potential future separation of ECM & BAP functions, i.e. faster targeting, longer sensor range, slowing target lock, slowing target status data.
- Potential non-ECM mechs may gain access to more of the functions currently lumped in ECM.

Dislikes:
- How long this change took. Multiple DDCs were still a problem a long time ago.
- Still leaves the ECM bubble which grants immunity to lock on therby making Streaks useless and LRMs problematic against the bubble.

Unsure:
- Will Indirect fire of LRMs be changed before the "magic box" granted by ECM goes away (if it ever does)? I consider both a crutch used by too many players, but as others have mentioned couldinduce mass rage quits from an LRMpocalypse.
LRMs,"We lost because nobody got me locks." Half the time the LRM boat is over 1000m from the target anyway.
ECM, "dude, you are too far from the ECM, stay with the group". Usually is the first one cut down by gauss slugs.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Tesunie, on 15 July 2015 - 09:14 PM, said:

I could agree with that. Keeps ECM in a place, but doesn't make it a direct hard counter to any single weapon.

Then we are in agreement , though I like your idea of jamming targeting for a second or two for ECM mechs instead of slowing the missile lock like I suggested (though I'd keep the slower locks for indirect targeting). Helps hide my dorito when poking and properly using cover.

ECM then becomes the snipers LRM countermeasure, and AMS becomes the brawlers LRM countermeasure. If a brawler brings ECM in it's proposed implementation it won't do anything, whereas for the sniper it will protect him proficiently, as it should be.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 15 July 2015 - 09:29 PM.

[Volkodav]

CapperDeluxe, on 15 July 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

Why not just take out the ability to shield friendlies from GECM, then add Angel ECM as separate equipment? I just don't get it.

+
and give Angel ECM shield for teammates, but not yourself.

True. This will give the new equipment, and for players to new spend C-Bills and GXP. Variety. Different tactics to use.

Its need for role warfare/

Edited by Volkodav, 15 July 2015 - 09:36 PM.