945 replies to this topic

[SgtMagor]

have to see how this works out and affects gameplay, with ECM and BAP nerfs.

Edited by SgtMagor, 15 July 2015 - 03:45 PM.

[MischiefSC]

2 years late but I'll take it as a good start. I appreciate the realization that 90m is still a bit long, I'm game for 60m.

It all needs a rework and sooner started sooner done.

Please don't take 2 more years to finish. Let's get hammering on this **** like it owes us money.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Alistair Winter, on 15 July 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what, if anything, PGI does about LRMs and SSRMs. It will make or break the game for a lot of people.

This ^

I run ECM so a lurmboat army can't single me out while I'm behind cover and utterly obliterate me.

[TygerLily]

Do 60 m. Actually make it 45...actually, just the one who carries it.

Then add Angel ECM which does a bubble to 90m and can only be carried by the "Special ECM"ers...

Edited by TygerLily, 15 July 2015 - 03:46 PM.

[Kain Demos]

TygerLily, on 15 July 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

Do 60 m. Actually make it 45...actually, just the one who carries it.

Then add Angel ECM which does a bubble to 90m and can only be carried by the "Special ECM"ers...

Whichever ECM I still think a 'mech running hot in the bubble should be detectable. I think the threshold in MW4 was 50% to override ECM's protection...been a long time.

Edited by Kain Demos, 15 July 2015 - 03:49 PM.

[James Montana]

Tina Benoit, on 15 July 2015 - 02:33 PM, said:

Hello MechWarriors,

Please share your feedback on this thread regarding Paul's discussion on ECM changes.

Dude, go straight to 60 meters! I think that is going to be the sweet spot for that thing.

As for the BAP changes, I'm on the fence. The jury is still out on that one for me.

[Gas Guzzler]

IronClaws, on 15 July 2015 - 03:36 PM, said:

Yeah, so you will take 3 ECM Cataphracts and a Firestarter.

I'd rather have the Hellbringers though

[Jack Shayu Walker]

I'm fully for nerfing ECMs blanket protection range into oblivion, but don't nerf it's core functionality until it's effectively useless, please.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 15 July 2015 - 03:53 PM.

[1453 R]

My honest-to-God first reaction to this CC post?

"BOOYAH!"

A Command Chair post talking about role warfare? A CC post which directly talks about strengthening/deepening Information Warfare? A quirks system which is more than just a bunch of random armor/structure/weapon buffs? A direct improvement to Information Warfare? Differing sensor system performance across different 'Mechs? Actual implementation of Information Warfare? Potential IW specialist 'Mechs with much more effective ECM or ECCM than other chassis? FREAKING INFORMATION WARFARE? The long-awaited return of the Nerfinator, our last and greatest hope against the all-pervasive power creep invading the game?



Carry on, Piranha. Carry on with my blessing. I don't know if this is enough to convince me to buy the Origins pack, but it sure as shootin' is a big fat giant step or three in the right direction.

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 15 July 2015 - 08:40 PM.
Unconstructive content

[R 13]

I have little issue with the radius reduction, if the effect stays the same (in light of current LRM usage), however I feel this is driven some by people not finding ways to effectively deploy ECM in it's "ECCM" mode, as well as something to do with engagement range in CW.

Table top (stop facepalming, I'm going to end up somewhere productive with this) specifies a 180m radius....however:

As of the last rules revision ECM in TT has no effect on the ability to "lock-on" to someone with LRM / SSRM weapons. Even the ECM carrier can still be targeted. It just removes any bonuses from Artemis/NARC/C3 networks. In otherwords, if I can see something and my mech's sensors can parse another mech out of the background, I can get a firing solution for it....I just don't get the guidance aid bonus due to it being jammed.

That said, I'm not sure I'm prepared for the 3rd or 4th (lost track in open Beta) LRMpocalypse.

I think there needs to be some penalty/counter to indirect (i.e. the launching 'mech doesn't have LOS to the target) LRM fire (which per TT should be more difficult than LOS fire).

As such I'd propose the following:

180m ECM bubble that prevents lock-on of any in-direct LRM fire where TAG is not involved, however it does not prevent direct LOS lock-on (i.e. I had to expose my LRM boat and look at you long enough to acquire lock and hold it until impact).

or

180m ECM bubble, and provide NARC launchers with the (canon) disruption pod as a switchable ammo option to negate the bubbel for the duration of the pod. This would also bring more substance to the NARC system's game niche.

or

90m ECM bubble and measurable increase lock-on time for in-direct (using someone else's LOS) LRM fire.

I'm not sure how streaks will be impacted by all of this, but I think LRMs have pretty much always been the problem that ECM was used to solve (if you're dedicated to running streaks, you typically have a BAP or TAG anyway)

Edited by R 13, 15 July 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

bad arcade kitty, on 15 July 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

are you serious? you ruin the best tactical feature of ecm due to a lot of forum whining from the vocal minority

i just dunno... i am deeply disappointed in you

You mean the vocal minority that is actually a very vast majority of the entire playerbase, the group that has complained about ECM being too powerful since it was added to the game, the group that has been begging, pleading, and trying to bribe PGI to change ECM since it was first added?

THAT little ol group?

Seriously, do you read the forums at all? Next to the 'I got stomped by evil 12 mans' and 'the MM hates me', ECM complaints are probably one of the most common posts in the forums.

YOU are just upset because you run a StreakCrow and think the BAP/CAP changes will make it totally useless.

[ALKALIN3]

Tennex, on 15 July 2015 - 02:47 PM, said:

Heres a suggestion to information warfare/fixing ECM
Give all mechs Seismic Sensor by default as a "Radar"

1st....i'll want my 36 million cbills back.
2nd....no. thats a ridiculous idea

[Avenger762]

I don't mind ECM being shortened. As long as you decrease the effect of ECM jamming as well. I use ECM mechs to hide from radar and missile locks. Hiding allies is a bonus. Don't remove my defense. That is why I purchased an ECM equipped mech to begin with.

[Kiiyor]

Sadist Cain, on 15 July 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

make it 60m you wuss

+1

DO IT

[Jack Shayu Walker]

R 13, on 15 July 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

I have little issue with the radius reduction, if the effect stays the same (in light of current LRM usage), however I feel this is driven some by people not finding ways to effectively deploy ECM in it's "ECCM" mode, as well as something to do with engagement range in CW.

Table top (stop facepalming, I'm going to end up somewhere productive with this) specifies a 180m radius....however:

As of the last rules revision ECM in TT has no effect on the ability to "lock-on" to someone with LRM / SSRM weapons. Even the ECM carrier can still be targeted. It just removes any bonuses from Artemis/NARC/C3 networks. In otherwords, if I can see something and my mech's sensors can parse another mech out of the background, I can get a firing solution for it....I just don't get the guidance aid bonus due to it being jammed.

That said, I'm not sure I'm prepared for the 3rd or 4th (lost track in open Beta) LRMpocalypse.

I think there needs to be some penalty/counter to indirect (i.e. the launching 'mech doesn't have LOS to the target) LRM fire (which per TT should be more difficult than LOS fire).

As such I'd propose the following:

180m ECM bubble that prevents lock-on of any in-direct LRM fire where TAG is not involved, however it does not prevent direct LOS lock-on (i.e. I had to expose my LRM boat and look at you long enough to acquire lock and hold it until impact).

I agree with this. One of the problems with how locks are currently implemented in MWO is that everybody has a C3 computer, that is to say, everybody can share lock on information. If we treat lock sharing as a C3 computer and allow ECM to counter it then I am totally fine with LRM-boats being able to lock onto me while ECm is up; just so long as they have line of sight.

[bad arcade kitty]

Kristov Kerensky, on 15 July 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

You mean the vocal minority that is actually a very vast majority of the entire playerbase, the group that has complained about ECM being too powerful since it was added to the game, the group that has been begging, pleading, and trying to bribe PGI to change ECM since it was first added?

THAT little ol group?

Seriously, do you read the forums at all? Next to the 'I got stomped by evil 12 mans' and 'the MM hates me', ECM complaints are probably one of the most common posts in the forums.

YOU are just upset because you run a StreakCrow and think the BAP/CAP changes will make it totally useless.

you are funny
i wrote that post before i read about the possible bap changes

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Avenger762, on 15 July 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

I don't mind ECM being shortened. As long as you decrease the effect of ECM jamming as well. I use ECM mechs to hide from radar and missile locks. Hiding allies is a bonus. Don't remove my defense. That is why I purchased an ECM equipped mech to begin with.

Exactly!

[GreyNovember]

So wait.

Why not Guardian ECM as user only protection, with Angel ECM being a heavier, more bulky package for the ability to do this?

[AlphaStruck]

Good that you realize ECM is WAY overdone now but bad in your 1D thinking. Just do what weve asked for.

Stop the ROCK, PAPER, SCISSORS effect in every part of the game.

ECM blocks all locks outside 600m like it functions now. Inside 600m ECM mechs show on radar but require a 2x (placeholder time) lock time. A second ECM next to target would triple lock times.

BAP equiped mechs would lock ECM mechs at 800m.

TAG functions as it does now.

NARC shows target on radar and cancels its ECM effect as it does now. 3x lock time if NARC'd mech is under another ECM field.

AMS should be the PRIMARY anti missle defense. ECM should be the way to make a LRM boats life a little harder. Making the ECM a perfect missle defense was going to come back to bite us the players, nothing else could happen.

[Tarogato]

I look forward to the potential this has to shake up the meta. Especially since it's an indirect buff to LRMs, which are presently relegated to trash tier.

Not looking forward to the indirect buff it gives to cStreaks, however. Urggh those things are cheesy.