945 replies to this topic

[Allen Ward]

I doubt the range reduction will make the big difference they hope for. Bringing several ECM per team is easy. ECM is overpowered because it is only required on 1-3 mechs. All other mechs can use their tonnage for more firepower/armor. AMS is less effective (ECM=zero missiles fired at you, AMS=many missiles fired at you, some taken out) and many more mechs need to carry one (and more than 1t of ammo) to make it really effective for the group. Since Clan mechs bring a lot of LRM and ECM into the battles you see a lot of fights with missile spam from an enemy you can't lock on and hardly see.

I think ECM should be changed in different ways. And there should be more to counter it than a miserable tag laser with a limited range. Make tag unlimited or at least 1000m. Narc could use some buff, too. The short range and the heavy weight make it very undesireable. I could live with shorter NARC duration if the range get's increased. Recon drones could get buffed somehow either to counter or lessen ECM. Why do they stay immobile? Make them fly over an area with a certain radius around starting point, covering a wider area with sensors. They could even relay blips to all other mechs (similar to seismic radar blips) of targets in their field of vision.

Give as chutes, flares or other stuff to counter missile fire. Or some Counter-ECM beacons that can be deployed on the ground for a while to nullify ECM in a certain area (enemy and friends alike).

PPC hits should scramble ECM a bit longer than they do. ECM could be blocked for a random amount of time by PPC hit, something between 2 and 10 seconds.

There are endless possibilities to make this game more tactical, more versatile and more interesting. Look beyond the handful of parameters we already have. You could untie Missile lock and targeting computer. As LRMs bring their own advanced lock on system, there is no need that ECM blocks both. LRM targeting blocking is enough.

ECM could have another mode. One that produces heat and works much like ECM now, one that blocks LRM targeting (15m radius bubble) and produces no heat and one that counters ECM in vicinity (no heat, too).
Other games tend to produce to many new items, skills or parameters, where MWO seems to be rather uncreative when it comes to the task of fixing something. Forget the lore, so much has been ignored already, some new equipment wouldn't hurt here.

[Polkastein]

I would like to once again emphasize that ECM needs to affect ONLY the mech carrying it. If a non-ECM mech wants to be protected from LRMs, carry AMS. This would make those mechs with ECM more specialized whether it be scouting or a sniper build. Either way, the ECM bubble needs to die.

[KhanJames]

Due to the amount of (PGI) work vs desired result best way IMO is to
- reduce ecm to max 60 prob closer to 30, (possibly different ranges /possibly even weights based off mech weights/class like how it is with JJ) Although based off the LRM spam (both clan and IS) I see in a lot of games (unfortunately more in CW and Regular than ive ever seen before) the reduction in range might be enough alone.

- extend tag range ( or maybe just set it up more like a ERLL with missile lock bonus speed based off range (ie 1000 meters tagged target is slower lock than 500m tagged target)
- Have tag range for "missile effects/boosts" stay the same and a 500m beyond that to show the mech (allow visual/ red square lock only)so they can see theres a mech there they just cant lock lrms on it.
-also agree that Narc need something. honestly its just about useless compared to tag.

(agree with the guy way above that phantom heat needs a rework or to be removed)

As for the other guy above yea clans have a lot of ecm mechs (primarily IMO because its in a OMNI part and people put that part on every variant) but then you get into Omni vs proper customization which isn't going to change. Lrms are lighter for clans so yea you see more, you also see more lasers, and now that they "buffed" (or IMO began fixing) the clan ballistics you will prob see more balance. (That said ive seen and been on the receiving end of a lot of IS Lrms too so....) Although if your talking about LRM boats you get into Omnipods again so unless they throw away lore and say perfect balance (or as some people say reskinning IS mechs) nothing to change there. (lrms in general are a "easy button" weapon (and yes its the same for IS) so a lot of new-to-clan players have em and run em till they get used to there mechs)
And at the same time remember this is MechWarrior and MW lore is sorta central to a MW game they aren't trying to make Battlefield/Cod with mechs and your also talking about stuff they would require a LOT of reworking the game (based of dev cycle/ reworks /tweaks id guess many months if they stopped making new stuff) so prob not realistic.

I would prefer to keep towards lore but a bit of wiggle room is more than acceptable if it will improve gameplay.
Also curious to see how the rescaling of mechs affects gameplay, (always visualized the mechs having more of a size range, (then MWO has em all very close in size and to an extent similar shapes) and being unable to tower over lesser mechs in my atlas made me sad.)

[Setun]

KhanJames, on 28 July 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

Due to the amount of (PGI) work vs desired result best way IMO is to
- reduce ecm to max 60 prob closer to 30, (possibly different ranges /possibly even weights based off mech weights/class like how it is with JJ) Although based off the LRM spam (both clan and IS) I see in a lot of games (unfortunately more in CW and Regular than ive ever seen before) the reduction in range might be enough alone.

- extend tag range ( or maybe just set it up more like a ERLL with missile lock bonus speed based off range (ie 1000 meters tagged target is slower lock than 500m tagged target)
- Have tag range for "missile effects/boosts" stay the same and a 500m beyond that to show the mech (allow visual/ red square lock only)so they can see theres a mech there they just cant lock lrms on it.
-also agree that Narc need something. honestly its just about useless compared to tag.

I really like the idea that the weight class of the mech with ECM on it should affect how big the radius bubble around it is. Not sure if it's within BT lore or not, but it would shake things up a bit....also I can't remember if this was in BT lore or not, but I'd love to see a smoke screen type consumable come out that would provide a temporary ECM / visibility shield when crossing mostly open areas (looking at you, caustic valley and alpine peaks). The devs could even make it so you can either have the smoke screen or a UAV equipped, kinda like how you can have either an arty strike or airstrike, but not both at one time.

[bad arcade kitty]

btw consider removing manual disrupt/counter choice and to make that ecm switches to counter automatically when in the radius of an enemy one, it would make their abundance more tolerable

[no one]

Hmm. Looks like a band-aid 'fix' that sets a bad precedent for future balance decisions while simultaneously completely missing the point.

So. . . business as usual then?

Making ECM short ranged will just wedge more pilots into ECM 'Mechs.

Setun, on 28 July 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:

I really like the idea that the weight class of the mech with ECM on it should affect how big the radius bubble around it is. Not sure if it's within BT lore or not, but it would shake things up a bit.

That's not part of the tabletop play, and I don't think 'mech size should effect ECM function, but MWO's quirk system could give ECM bonuses to Sensor warfare specialist 'Mechs like the Cyclops.

There are a few very good threads floating about on the topic of active and passive sensors and signature radii for 'mechs scaled to things like mass and engine rating as well as ECM, BAP and CMs. It'd be a boon for role warfare and a step towards engaging implementation of ECM if they were dug up, printed off and pasted to a dev's forehead. ECM/BAP that only shortens your detectable range by 180m and counters Artemis (without the competing area of effect bull) would be a better first step than the proposed effective area constriction.

Setun, on 28 July 2015 - 06:34 PM, said:

also I can't remember if this was in BT lore or not, but I'd love to see a smoke screen type consumable come out that would provide a temporary ECM / visibility shield when crossing mostly open areas (looking at you, caustic valley and alpine peaks). The devs could even make it so you can either have the smoke screen or a UAV equipped, kinda like how you can have either an arty strike or airstrike, but not both at one time.

Light and heavy smoke are a part of BT. It's available as an ammo type for SRMs, LRMs and artillery. Smoke moves with wind conditions, and thins / disperses over time. A target moving through smoke is slightly harder to hit.

Edited by no one, 28 July 2015 - 09:42 PM.

[ChewBaka]

I believe its worth mentioning that whatever 'balancing' that is going to be done, PGI needs to ensure that LRM boats will only deal average damage with each match. They should never top the dmg charts consistently. NEVER EVER, or it will be a bad thing.

Someone else mentioned somewhere that LRM boats are pretty much a feast or famine loadout. You either do exceptionally well or you will suck in terms of dmg. I see it as balancing out. Nerfing ECM substantially will take out the famine portion, and what are we left with? A whole lot of feasting. LRM boats might top the dmg charts for doing little else but sitting back and hitting a button.

Consider how this game works and how it rewards players. Why do you think the Light queue is so...light? Because light mechs don't quite do enough dmg for the most part. Its why the Heavy queue is so popular. Now if LRM boats are consistently the top dmg dealers, what do you think will happen? Yes, every other mech will be a damned LRM boat Heavy. Whoop de doo.

So whatever you guys do, PGI...make sure LRM boats don't end up topping the dmg charts. No famine, but no feast too.

[no one]

Charlie Pohr, on 28 July 2015 - 09:22 PM, said:

. . .
So whatever you guys do, PGI...make sure LRM boats don't end up topping the dmg charts. No famine, but no feast too.

Agreed, ECM should never have been a hard counter against LRM locks, and LRMs should never have been the 'massed rain' weapon they were before ECM was as prevalent as it is now.



Problem:
LRMs are terrible as an individual weapon, because they were brokenly overpowered because they can be fired indirectly en mass. This wasn't an issue in BT because indirect fire only permitted one 'Mech to fire indirectly per 'Mech spotting.

Solution: Give IDF locks a tracking strength (whatever) attribute based on the spotter(s). Arbitrarily, say you get two points per spotter, plus three points if the target's TAGed and plus Four if it's NARCed. . . then ECM cover counters TAG and NARC. Each LRM launcher fired indirectly at a target consumes one point while it's salvo is airborne. If the maximum number of IDF launcher salvos for a target are already airborne then any concurrent attempts at indirect fire will not launch, though locks can be maintained normally. (or you could just do 1 spotter one person doing IDF, whatever).

Problem:
Another reason LRMs can be fired en mass is because the heat system is half-arsed and gives you the entire overheat range penalty free.
Solution:
A well expressed low capacity, high dissipation heat system with overheat penalties.

Problem:
LRMs have bad ammo efficiency, especially in the face of doubled armor and a weapon with no capacity for focused fire.
Solution:
240 missiles per ton for LRMs. 200 for SRMs.

Problem: SRMs and LRMs are slow.
Solution: Increase speeds.

Problem: The critical hit system is a bit junk.
Solution: fix the danged critical system.

There's a fairly important point I'm forgetting but I kinda ran outta steam.
Meh.

Edit - Oh yeah, AMS. It's effectiveness really should scale to the size of a missile salvo somewhat. Having it eat a consistent number of missiles per inbound salvo regardless of overlapping AMS cover would make LRMs much less of a 'feast or famine' weapon. Small launcher load outs could be useful.

LRM 5 -> 0 to 2 missiles destroyed
LRM 10 -> 1 to 3 missiles destroyed
LRM 15 -> 2 to 4 missiles destroyed
LRM 20 -> 3 to 5 missiles destroyed

Edited by no one, 28 July 2015 - 11:15 PM.

[30ft SMURF]

DeathlyEyes, on 24 July 2015 - 01:19 AM, said:

Remove indirect LRM fire without TAG spotting and I'd be ok with this. You are effectively doing a massive 5x nerf to affect the Hellbringer and Shadowcat.

180m = 25446 area
90m = 6361 area

I thought we were done with massive balance changes.


AMS dose pretty much nothing against LRM boats.

I suppose you've never grouped with another person who also had an ams... ever... Get a clue. This is a multiplayer game and you may need to rely on your team to also carry ams. I've personally used ams solo and in a group, and I can tell you in a group lrms don't have a chance...

[DeathlyEyes]

For 25 seconds and then everyone is out of ammo. Or you hit a team not running any lrms and you have all this ams ammo.

[happy mech]

@paul: do not need to treat the community like sissies
new mechs are good
new maps are good (unless there are bottlenecks)
events are good (but a lot of cw neglecting)
balance needs to be worked on (weapons, heat system (reduce cap and so alpha, remove ghost heat), omnimechs, information), you have the public test server for this, do not be afraid to use it, iterate
if you have time watch this , focus on 20:00 - 21:20

experiment (on the pts)
thank you for finally doing something about ecm, i would recommend to balance the weapons first (double cooldown and same accuracy for all lrms, horrible accuracy for shared locks, somewhat better with tag and narc, best with self and artemis), working without ecm and all support stuff (especially consumables ), and then add it with a purpose for its weight
removing the no los lock instantly (like radar deprivation) is also essential to make the lrms fit with other weapons (refund the related gxp and cbills for modules)
and reducing the sensor range to 500 (possibly being based on the weight, speed, heat of the mech to be detected?) would make the light mechs more useful as scouts even without passive sensors
sorry for long post

[HammerMaster]

Serious. This is a Half Measure with no thought process into overhauling a broken system.

[Zolaz]

lol ... all of ya'll happy about changes ... smh ... wait till you see implementation.

[Atreides76]

So essentially what's happened here is that the devs have caved into the whining of the "OMG this* item is OP" crowd. Goddamn it.

Edited by Atreides76, 30 July 2015 - 06:05 AM.

[KhanJames]

Not really I openly admit I love ecm and it is "better" than it has a right to be. For one ton become damn near untouchable at range and make teammates disappear too. taking into account that with the reduction of fire coming at you, you can reduce armor, remove AMS, not worry nearly as much about heat because the enemy isn't able to target you anyways (atleast not nearly as easy as a big red square around your mech) so add that up and your well ahead.

So the devs have realized that when trying to move from TT to Real time shooter tweaks will have to be made and are trying to find a way to do so while keeping it viable, when you realise that there cutting the radius down there is really no change to your mech. You just cant cover half the team with ecm alone anymore.

And again I agree with the guy above use the PTS more, just try a few "crazy" tweaks/changes here and there on PTS and see how the gameplay changes. Theres no "real" risk to it and you might find ways/ideas that lead towards fixing balancing issues.
And I agree that there should be more differentiation between classes (sensor range, detection range, etc) seems sorta crazy that you notice a spider at the same time/distance as an Atlas.

But the most important thing IMO is that they are trying to fix the balancing issues multiple ways rather than just quirks or nerfs mechs alone.

[Almond Brown]

Quote

And again I agree with the guy above use the PTS more, just try a few "crazy" tweaks/changes here and there on PTS and see how the game play changes.

And if more players would make use of the PTS when it is Open, it is quite likely PGI might use it more. BUT, every time I go to it when it is Open, the player numbers are abysmal (1-2% of base) thus making testing nearly pointless.

Maybe make players have to sign up to get in, that way the entirety of the MWO Player database won't have to be copied over to the PTS for those few that do actually show up...

P.S. ECM is what it is. Less range will just cluster teams together even more and Arty will quickly become that "BAD" thing...yet again.

[Sprouticus]

+1 in support.

There MIGHT be unintended consequences, but I doubt it. For instance, people may try to hug the ECM mechs to stay under the bubble, but that is hard to do and has its own downside.

[Djinnhammer]

Please consider for one moment the effect this will have on player behaviour-especially in solo Q:

More death blobs-peeps will be too scared to move away from each other, thus reinforcing the "stick together" mantra i.e the blob.
More timid play. This is already #1 problem for gameplay quality, people not wanting to be active and take hits. ECM at that range will make people even more afraid to be aggressive. this leads me onto final point:
Lrms. Reduce ECM range and more people will pack more lrms. This will make certain maps (caustic) pure misery. This will be force multiplied by the point above. Caustic for example it will make anything but the outside of the map a death zone.

Please consider what design changes mean to player behaviour!

[Bashfulsalamander]

I do not see this changing much, sure for people that actually want to use ECM to cover the team, which is actually rare in the solo que anyways especially if they are lights. Secondly 80 meters ( is that number right?) is not really that bad for covering the mechs that are usually targeted by LRM's first. Not to mention all the increase in the amount of ECM mechs especially for clan side. I know a lot of people say they like to stick with the ECM mechs, which in team play ( or party group play) they do, but as i said at the start a lot of pugs really do not pay that much attention to where the ECM is and they certainly do not try to center themselves in the middle of the team, so i do not see arty and air strikes becoming the next OP thing. All i see is a lack of benefit for the ones that do not bring ECM because they think someone on their pug team will, or they just do not care anyways.

[Gremlich Johns]

ECM, in any BT-based game, should only support the mech it's mounted upon, not the mech pilot's teammate's mechs. If PGI actually understood how EM works, we wouldn't have this issue of them having created a cloaking system, something they said they wanted to avoid.