945 replies to this topic

[Drunken Skull]

DaFrog, on 09 August 2015 - 07:40 AM, said:

Wrong, the spotter in TT can not do a single thing except giving coordinates to several launchers. No firing. So to the die roll you had to add launcher throw penalties ( move, heat, sensors ), spotter penalties ( move, heat, sensors, terrain ) and target penalties ( move ). That is why spotting for indirect fire was never popular as a strategy in TT.

Thanks for the clarification.

[DarkonFullPower]

I have no problem with Guardian ECM staying at 180m radius, so long at is stops being Angel ECM + Stealth Armor/Null Sig. If you seperated these features, you would finally have choice for ECM mechs.

Do I want to jam the enemy's extra equipment (NOT base targeting, LRMs or Streaks), or do I want to make ONLY myself completely untargetable?

However if the above happened, ECM would have to be able to correctly jam BAP as it does in Lore/Tabletop. But if ECM jams equipment only, I don't see this as a problem.

[Chados]

You know what I'd like to see? I get that this ain't canon but it exists in the real world right now. I'm sure some of it would be all OP and such but some of it just makes sense in an ECM-rich environment.

1) Lock-on-Jam mode for LRM and SSRM. Pilot toggleable. Lose a lock? Hit the key and see if you can catch jammer strobes, then lock the jammer and FIRE on that jammer. You have to hold the lock, as LRM and SSRM are command guided. But while you're tracking the jammer you can't see anyone else-you lose all the Doritos because the electronics are focused on defeating the jammer. Require the mech pilot to install BAP+Artemis for this, or BAP, Artemis, and the command console.

2) BAP+Artemis picking up an ECCM countering mode that allows mechs that can't carry ECM to make radar lock sometime before you hit min range for LRMs, say 500 meters. It would encourage LRM carriers to pack BAP and Artemis together, paying extra Cbills, and give up something else, such as armor or ammo, as well. That would introduce a weight, cost, and crit penalty for the feature.

3) Artemis-equipped missiles launching on a line-of-sight target fly straight, not on ballistic trajectory. Ballistic trajectory reserved for indirect fire. Or make it like U.S. Army Hellfires and have lock-before-launch and lock-after-launch modes for Artemis to change its trajectory from straight-line to ballistic. Sometimes you can do that with LRMs now if you throw them high, firing blind, then grab a lock before they self destruct.

4) We can missile-bend now with target delay, assuming a lot of things. But that's a lucky feature of the system. Current real world missiles have built-in off-boresight firing capability. It'd be nice if we could just let fly from a certain angle-off while locked, and add in a limitation on range when firing obliquely because the missile has to correct its flight path.

5) IR lock on capability is a standby in a high ECM environment. We have thermal vision, but no IR missiles? When mechs put out tremendous heat? I'd love to be able to get into thermals and see the heat plume of that mech that's hill-humping ERPPCs from across the map under ECM coverage, get an IR lock on his heat signature, and rain hot death from my side of the map on his reverse slope for a little counterbattery action.

[Spleenslitta]

Thrudvangar, on 09 August 2015 - 11:55 PM, said:

WHEN does this change is going live? WHEN?! its about time.. i'm sick about all of these ecm scrubs covering each other in an 3km radius rofl....

BAP is useless with all the ecm mechs flodding the matches and i refuse to equip another 1t to get a tag and lose a laser to be able to streak these little bas.tards.

Also playing an LRM mech in CW is senseless for the IS, every clan wave has at least 6 HBR +/- other ECM scrubs running around, Teambalance=0 and the clans let it rain...

I ask the same thing but for a different reason. When will this happen?
I want ECM range lowered or if it only concerned the mechs equipped with it would be even better.

I want it like that because i'm sick of the complaints when i go solo with my Cute Fox.
Just because i got ECM doesn't mean i want to be babysitting assault mechs throughout the entire match.

[Haitchpeasauce]

The problem isn't with the range of ECM but its broad and potent effects.

ECM does not affect radar or sensors outside of the bubble, and therefore it should not conceal ally mechs and be the blanket replacement of AMS.

Within the bubble, ECM affects:

• Sensors until within short range.
  
• C3 receiving/transmitting target information. In MWO all mechs seem to have C3i for free.
  
• BAP, but can detect and target ECM mechs within the bubble.
  
• Artemis IV, when your mech is in ECM bonuses are lost.
  
• NARC beacons within ECM.

In a much bigger information warfare revamp, I would suggest that target information wouldn't decay, but is only updated by sensors and C3. Therefore target information can become outdated, but still displayed.

The C3 unit should be purchasable equipment that takes slots and tonnage. Since it's hard to expect a PUG to carry a C3 Master unit, instead C3 would function like C3i.

C3 Boosted would be a way to get around ECM, being able to receive target data from friendly units.

[Luscious Dan]

I don't like the idea of having out of date paper doll information being available to pilots. People would moan about the targeting info being glitched or broken, and we'd never hear the end of it.

Removing (or reducing) the blanket effect for teammates within its radius would be great. It still should mess with Artemis, Active Probes, and other ENEMY electronics within its radius. That's what it's meant for. You'd probably need to buff AMS though to help ensure people use it, and LRMs don't get too powerful. Maybe some juicy XP/C-bill bonuses as well when you shoot down enemy missiles?

Chados presents an interesting idea -- switching to thermal vision to gain direct LOS target locks in the presence of ECM. That makes perfect sense logically. Greater differential from ambient heat could lead to faster locks, and make it a better/worse tactic on different maps or when your opponent is running hot or cold. I assume this method wouldn't provide you with target information (paper doll) but just allow you to lock on and fire LRMs/Streaks.

Had multiple drops over the weekend where we had literally zero ECM, and consecutive drops last night where I was the only player on my team with ECM, lost in a sea of enemy ECM mechs. We won at least one of those matches. Had some good personal results in those games last night (3 kills each time in my Shadow Cat), but I had to radically change my approach and I felt like the lynch pin -- playing babysitter, spotter, and commander of the team all at the same time. An interesting challenge for me, but if you don't have teammates who cooperate and use voice/text comms matches like that are often pretty quick stomps. I wouldn't want to play that role all the time.

God forbid you are full of players who take something like a Stalker with LRMs only and no backup weapons of any kind. Really useful if you don't get lucky on the match maker and find a group filled with BAP/ECM teammates...

Edited by Luscious Dan, 11 August 2015 - 10:57 AM.

[Knight2416]

Luscious Dan, on 11 August 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

God forbid you are full of players who take something like a Stalker with LRMs only and no backup weapons of any kind. Really useful if you don't get lucky on the match maker and find a group filled with BAP/ECM teammates...

I totally agree with you. I have 3 LRM boats (Stalk 3F, HBK-J, Jager-A) and all have backup weapons. At least if I have no locks I switch to backup (6-sm pulse stalker, AC2+2 lasers Jager, and sm lasers HBK-J) and use my armour to shield teamates. The number of times I see mechs with LRM only and see them get totalled by mech ball.

[Vlad Striker]

ECM is not problem - problem is team can't blind-fight and can shoot red squares only.

Edited by Vlad Striker, 11 August 2015 - 12:35 PM.

[Haitchpeasauce]

Blind fighting is easy, but sharing paperdoll/positional information was a pillar of MWO's information warfare spec.

Interesting idea about using thermal vision to gain LoS locks, but then again the targeting computer has thermal vision available to it at all times. Stealth/Nullsig armor would be the solution to trick this.

If MWO's version of ECM can somehow disrupt radar from detecting a group of mechs within an area, then it stands to reason the radar would detect this blob of disruption. Even so, I do not see how a mech's radar could be disrupted at all unless it was within ECM range.

But if ECM is the solution to guided missiles, the problem is the missiles. But it isn't, LRMs have plenty of drawbacks, indirect fire is already weak.

Reducing the range from 180m to 90m sounds like a concession and a refusal to let go of a bad design idea.

Edited by Haitchpeasauce, 11 August 2015 - 10:59 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Now that i have been seeing games with 11 ecm mechs we can see how utterly broken the mechanic is. We are no longer playing Rock Paper Scissors. We are playing Rock Scissors. When i do see LRM mechs i cringe because it is nigh impossible to see good performance out of them even with bap and tag. Streaks are a joke as well because of so much overlapping fields and ams is just thick as well. If this level of determent was put against autocannons you would not see them used either in comparison.

I dont know about anyone else but i no longer see matches with fewere than 5 ecm mechs. I dont even want to imagine how bad it will be if not fundamentally changed if every mech could carry it.

[Mr Andersson]

The range is not the problem with ECM. Decreasing the range will only result in more people bringing it, since you can rely less on your teammates' ECMs.

The problem is the passive effect of the ECM, where you basically make yourself (and a portion of your team) immune to LRMs and, in many cases, virtually invisible to the enemy. For 1.5 tons, those are some awesome bonuses.

The active side of the ECM (jamming the targeting of enemy mechs inside its range) I have no problem with. In fact, I think it should be strengthened by taking away BAP's ability to counter it.

[Torezu]

I run LRM mechs, and always have a BAP, and tend to carry my own TAG. Ofc, I play PUG or PUG group matches, so comp and CW may be a bit different, but I've been averaging 3-400 damage while I'm learning to use the mech (an ON1-V right now, but considering others). And the selection of ECM mechs tend not to have the firepower (or size) of the non-ECM mechs, so once you get into closer range, or the ECM mechs start dropping from focused fire, suddenly the options open up for LRMs again.

[kneuen]

I am a relatively new player to this game (less than a year of play). I agree with the reduction proposed for the simple reason that it will allow a more even play field for IS vs. Clan matches. It will make almost no difference in public drops due to the fact that you never know what your team will be bringing. You almost have to assume that you will have no ECM or AMS. The majority of games I have observed simply have each player trying his/her best to get LOS and pull the trigger. A lot of public drops simply don't have a "team" feel. That being said, when a team does actually work together, it is almost always a win for that team.

Many of the ideas I have seen presented here do have a certain amount of merit and others don't seem feasible. The question I must ask (and, I hope, are taken into account by PGI) is: What is the ultimate purpose of MWO? From PGI's stand point, they want to make money. We, as players, are looking for a fun game that we can enjoy on multiple levels. It was my understanding that the MWO universe was moving along the lines of the table top game. IE, one year in real life equaled one year in the history of Battletech. Obviously, that is untenable since the lore spans hundreds of years. As much as most of us would love to see this game played for that time period, I don't think that would happen.

And so, ultimately, we bow to the needs of the developers, who are answerable to the players. The game isn't fun, you don't have players and hence, no money. The game needs to be balanced. Currently, the Clan has a huge advantage over IS due to the availability of ECM on their mechs. (And yes, I know that's an opinion.) Drastic changes of any sort will cause an immediate backlash of "rage quits." A sustained period of one faction's abilities over another will also cause a large number of "rage quits" or a movement to the winning side, eventually leading to one massive team stomping all opposition out of existence in less than a day.

Leaving aside the mechanics of ECM as implemented (not possible within our current universal laws), the code already exists and is implemented. Adjustments to that code are relatively easy. PGI has not stated that the reduction will be put in. It is currently in the testing phase. Should the entire targeting system be rewritten? Possibly. New challenges are what make the game fun. Personally, I would love to see a C3 "quirk" implemented. I would like to see quirks for scouting mechs. I would like to see a true scouting mech that is actually useful. This could create new roles for all players and will require the development of situational awareness for all players.

In closing, I would like to restate: I like this adjustment and feel it is a step toward a balanced and fun game. I look forward to any and all proposed changes that keep this tenet in mind. Also, to any of those who feel that the Clan and IS mechs are balanced with the quirks that are currently in place, please take a look at the faction map. Many feel that change in the map is due to megaunits siding with the clans, but many of those units have moved on. Take a look at any given "pug" faction drop. The success/failure rate of IS vs Clan speaks for itself.

[Luscious Dan]

I'd be curious to see a breakdown of ECM usage by faction, if such a thing can be tracked. Most of the good IS mechs can't mount ECM, as IS mechs live and die by their quirks and ECM pretty much always means you get worse and fewer quirks.

Move up the timeline a little bit so I can have my Fafnir (2x heavy gauss rifles and ECM in a 100-tonner) and I'd be pretty thrilled about life as an IS pilot

Clan Wave 3 certainly gave them a lot more ways to mount ECM, as the Clan lights aren't all that popular. As we all know, it was mostly just Hellbringers all over the place for ECM (they were a pretty ideal chassis for it, given their weight and plenty solid combat ability). The Cheetah is a pretty strong contender among lights from either side. Shadow Cat, however, isn't generally a big player, as they don't quite have the tons or hard points to make a truly scary build.

Kneuen, I do agree that a brand new quirk pass with information warfare elements added to it would be very beneficial. However, I don't know if messing with ECM range as a quick fix is worth all of the gnashing of teeth that it will inevitably cause (and has caused already just by being discussed here).

Even if it is an improvement (which is debatable; since ECM usage is highly variable and not taken into account by the match making systems, then reducing the radius for the team with 1-2 ECM mechs only exacerbates the problems for them), it just has the bad optics of looking like a lazy fix to a complex problem.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 13 August 2015 - 12:10 PM.

[Hellion Kell]

i thought of a great way to balance ecm make it so you would show up a large dot because it jams radar it doesn't stop radar make so the enemy know kind of where but not exactly so in stead of know if the enemy is pushing the tunnel in forest colony you know that there is an ecm mech near there, the dot would need a random center and fuss out you radar the closer it got to the mech also another way to balance ecm is to make it so the more ecm you have on your team the less effective it becomes.

[Luscious Dan]

That's another interesting thought. Making long range radar blips show up similar to seismic blobs instead of the defined arrows could be an alternative to the current blanket effect that doesn't allow target locks at all.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 13 August 2015 - 02:07 PM.

[Jman5]

We are now officially at 1 month since the announcement of this change. Can we get some dialogue going on what sort of time table PGI is looking at to implement this seemingly simple adjustment to ECM and BAP?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Jman5, on 14 August 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:

We are now officially at 1 month since the announcement of this change. Can we get some dialogue going on what sort of time table PGI is looking at to implement this seemingly simple adjustment to ECM and BAP?

I'm fairly sure the roll-out will be comprised of more than just the range reductions mentioned in Paul's post. I am looking forward to more dialogue, but more specifically regarding the breadth of changes moreso than the timeline for implementation. I know that timelines aren't always something to bank on, especially on the ECM-related issues. Remember when ECM Ravens with no HSR ran amok while BAP had no counter-effect? Yeah, it lasted a while... ECM balancing and Timelines don't really go hand-in-hand. I'm just more interested in the proposed changes, themselves.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 14 August 2015 - 12:32 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

All I am going to say is I'm fairly sure this overly simplistic concept of your ECM change is NOT going to have the affect you think it will.

Question: Does PGI actually, and more importantly REGULARLY, play in CW matches with their customer base, to see how, we, the experienced and extremely creative, player base handle their game?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Dimento Graven, on 14 August 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

All I am going to say is I'm fairly sure this overly simplistic concept of your ECM change is NOT going to have the affect you think it will.

Question: Does PGI actually, and more importantly REGULARLY, play in CW matches with their customer base, to see how, we, the experienced and extremely creative, player base handle their game?

When PGI plays in broadcast matches, they always get smashed by player-teams. PGI teams don't try to play competitively (they play to goof around with mixed-loadouts and fun Mechs instead of effective ones) and that may explain why they don't balance the game from a "serious" gamer's perspective.