945 replies to this topic

[a gaijin]

Wow they finally caved. Sad. And I'm not even a guy who really directly used ECM but I still think it's disappointing.

But it's okay. I don't think this game is really for the guys who played TT or even MW2 or 3 anyhow. I've seen way to much lore-breaking for it to matter at this point, which is sad, because I was a pretty strong believer in the beginning.

Now I think the devs just care about the "core" players (who don't give a damn about lore) instead of the spirit of BattleTech/Mechwarrior.
And in devs defense, of course they're going to listen to the gamers who are supplying their paycheck, because disappointed "old school MechWarriors" won't be paying anymore.

"For Hire" means "for money" because you already have money.

[Avimimus]

My own concern is that this will make ECM more as a personal boost for individual mechs.

This reminds me of the ELO system which really does weight individual damage done as much as (or more than) winning and doesn't reward spotters. The same goes for CBills - capping is worth much less than damage in conquest mode.

The whole game is optimised for individualist pugs running metamechs.

[HuntingU]

I say lore shmore. Lore does not equal balance. If you want lore... should've support mechwarrior tactics. JK...

[Docta Pain]

so... is this not happening anymore??

[Drunken Skull]

Docta Pain, on 06 October 2015 - 07:26 AM, said:

so... is this not happening anymore??

AFAIK There is recent Youtube footage of various changes being tested on the MWO Test Client.

I hope they find a less garish way of displaying everyone's grid location than the bright red numbers and letters above everyone's radar markers, kind of distracting to look at.

Edited by Drunken Skull, 07 October 2015 - 12:32 AM.

[Shiro Kell]

I still believe that the way 'radar' works in MWO needs a review and modification before, or at the same time as the ECM changes. I think it would be beneficial to see active and passive radar introduced (I'm not going to get into my ideas for how this works), along with the current seismic sensor modules and possibly the inclusion of a magnometric sensor of some kind.

These basic sensors and how they work, really needs to be set in stone before the ECM issues in the game are resolved. The more sensor combinations/options we have, the better off the game will be as a whole IMHO. Just my 2 cents.

[Arandmoor]

Praetor Knight, on 15 July 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

Indirect Locks then can be a separate system that could explore fire and forget SSRM bones targeting maybe or whatever works best. And Streaks would only use locks as a means to save ammo.

IIRC, in table top Indirect Locks specifically require a TAG, or for your mech to be part of a C3, or C3i network. It's not a default LRM function anyway.

Avimimus, on 04 October 2015 - 09:07 AM, said:

My own concern is that this will make ECM more as a personal boost for individual mechs.

Well, currently the game goes to whichever team lucks into the most ECM.

It's pretty obvious that ECM needs a nerf or two.

Edited by Arandmoor, 09 October 2015 - 01:41 PM.

[Lugin]

Arandmoor, on 09 October 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

IIRC, in table top Indirect Locks specifically require a TAG, or for your mech to be part of a C3, or C3i network. It's not a default LRM function anyway.

Flat out wrong.

I've gone and dug up an old post that is relevant.
There was another with the exact ECM rules, but looks like that thread disappeared.
Guardian ("standard") ECM is only supposed to break the bonuses for NARC, Artemis, and C3/i, as well as block BAP's detection of hidden units.

As for LRMs...

Total Warfare, pg 111 said:

LRM Indirect Fire
Units armed with LRM-type weapons may fire those missiles indirectly. Indirect fire allows a unit without a direct line of sight to a target to attack that target, though a friendly unit must have a valid line of sight to the target (this unit is referred to as the spotter). An attacker with a valid LOS to a target cannot make an LRM indirect fire attack, even if that attack would have a better to-hit modifier. Resolve LRM indirect fire attacks in the turn they are launched. The base to-hit number is the firing unit’s Gunnery Skill.

Use the following modifiers:
• Range modifier based on the range between the target and the firing unit, including minimum range modifiers;
• +1 for indirect fire;
• All standard modifiers for target movement;
• All standard modifiers for attacker movement and a modifier for the spotter’s movement (infantry have no attacker movement modifier for spotting);
• Terrain modifiers based on line of sight from the spotting unit; this includes the +1 modifier if partial cover exists between the spotting unit and the target. (Regardless of whether partial cover shields the target from either the spotting unit or the attacking unit, Damage Value groupings from LRM indirect fire always strike the target and not the partial cover, even if they hit a leg location; see Partial Cover, p. 102.)

Finally, if the spotting unit makes any attacks in the turn that it spots for another unit, apply a +1 modifier to all of the spotting unit’s attacks, as well as a +1 modifier to the LRM indirect fire attack. If the spotting unit makes no attacks, do not apply these additional modifiers. The spotter can spot for any number of attacking units to a single target, but it cannot spot for multiple targets.

C3 only affects targeting bonus/penalty.

Total Warfare, pg 131 said:

C3 COMPUTER (MASTER/SLAVE)
The C3 computer system can link up to twelve ’Mechs or vehicles together—utilizing a series of C3 Master and C3 Slaves—in a communications network that will share targeting information.

To make an attack using a C3 computer network, calculate the to-hit number using the range to the target from the networked unit nearest the target with line of sight. Use the firing unit’s modifiers for movement, terrain effects, minimum range and so on. A weapon attack using a C3 network must conform to standard LOS restrictions and cannot fire beyond its maximum range, though a well-placed lancemate may allow the firing unit to use his weapon’s short-range to-hit number at long range. The C3 network itself has no maximum range, but only units actually on the playing area can benefit from the network, and the C3 Master (or C3 Masters if using a company-sized network) must be on the playing area.

TAG: The C3 Master (but not the C3 Slaves) exactly duplicates the function of target acquisition gear (see TAG; p. 142).

LRM Indirect Fire: C3-equipped units spotting targets for or launching an LRM indirect fire attack use the LRM Indirect Fire rules (see p. 111), and gain no benefit from a C3 network.

Minimum Ranges: Minimum range is always determined from the attacking unit to the target.

Variable Damage Weapons: The range, to determine the Damage Value of a Variable Damage Weapon, is always determined from the attacking unit to the target.

Stealth Armor: Armor that inflicts range modifiers against attacking units does not confuse a C3 network. While such additional range modifiers apply to the nearest attacking unit, they do not apply to any other units using the network to attack. However, some such systems (notably the Stealth Armor System, p. 142) include their own ECM system; in this case, an attacking unit must be outside the effective range of the ECM mounted on the target unit, or the attacker gets cut off from the network.

Narc:

Total Warfare, pg 138-139 said:

NARC MISSILE BEACON
If a Narc missile beacon attack hits, the Narc pod is attached to the target unit; the target’s player should still roll a hit location to determine exactly where the pod attaches. If that location is destroyed during any subsequent turn, the pod is also destroyed and its effects are lost during the end of the phase in which the location was destroyed.

In all following combat phases, any unit attacking with Narc-equipped missiles adds +2 to the result of the roll on the Cluster Hits Table. This modifier remains in effect for the targeted unit throughout the rest of the battle.

Other Narc pods attached to a target have no additional effect. Other Narc beacons in the target hex do not confuse Narc-guided missiles. The Narc system can be used to aid narc-equipped SRM and LRM missile attacks, but does not affect attacks made with special munitions or launchers.

Critical Hits: Exploding Narc ammo causes 2 points of damage per pod.

Buildings: Narc pods cannot be fired into or inside buildings.

ECM: Narc-guided missiles function like conventional missiles if the narc pod they are homing in on is within the “bubble” of an active enemy ECM suite; they do not receive the +2 modifier when rolling on the Cluster Hits Table (See ECM Suite, p. 134).

Indirect LRM Fire: Once a Narc pod is attached to a target, all Narc-equipped missiles may be fired indirectly at a target without a spotter; all other standard modifiers for Indirect LRM fire apply (see p. 111). In addition, if used in this manner, the Narc-equipped missiles lose their +2 modifier to the roll result on the Cluster Hits Table.

Infantry: A Narc missile beacon cannot be used to attack infantry.

TL;DR: C3 gives no benefit, and is not required. Narc as implemented is pretty much how it is supposed to be.

Also, TAG is for designating artillery targets. Specifically, Arrow IV homing artillery missiles. The only LRMs it works with are Semi-Guided, which only show up in 3057.

[stjobe]

Arandmoor, on 09 October 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

IIRC, in table top Indirect Locks specifically require a TAG, or for your mech to be part of a C3, or C3i network. It's not a default LRM function anyway.

Sorry, but you misremember. Indirect fire is a standard LRM function and doesn't require anything but another unit with LoS:


(Total Warfare, p.111)

That's all the rules and restrictions there are for indirect LRM fire.

Another thing you're misremembering is what TAG was for; it was solely a system for guiding Arrow IV artillery missiles and had nothing at all to do with LRMs until the advent of Semi-Guided LRMs in 3057:


(Tech Manual, p.238)

Finally then, C3 and C3i; it was a system that allowed you to fire at a target with someone else's range modifiers (preferably someone that was closer than you), it had nothing at all to do with LRMs - in fact, the rules specifically state that indirect LRM fire gains no benefit from a C3 network:


(Total Warfare, p.131)

So all in all, you've got your facts a bit mixed up.

Edit: Ninja'd by Lugin... Ah well, might as well set the record straight about what Guardian ECM does according to TT rules:


(Total Warfare, p.134)

That's ALL it does - remove the bonuses from BAP, Artemis, Narc, and C3. Nothing more. None of this "block everything and hard-counter LRMs" malarkey, that's solely a PGI invention.

Edited by stjobe, 09 October 2015 - 02:29 PM.

[Arandmoor]

stjobe, on 09 October 2015 - 02:25 PM, said:

Sorry, but you misremember. Indirect fire is a standard LRM function and doesn't require anything but another unit with LoS:

Prolly. It's been a long time since I played table top, and there's a lot of rules to remember.

stjobe, on 09 October 2015 - 02:25 PM, said:

That's ALL it does - remove the bonuses from BAP, Artemis, Narc, and C3. Nothing more. None of this "block everything and hard-counter LRMs" malarkey, that's solely a PGI invention.

So, basically, ECM is way, way, way more powerful in MWO than it should be.

[Ultra-Laser]

The problem isn't the area of an ECM suite, its what it does. What makes ECM so useful is that it prevents any and all LRM locks, but the only thing LRMs have going for them is indirect fire. ACs have comparable spread and better DPS while Gauss/lasers/ERPPCs can still fire into an ECM bubble while having more concentrated damage. Non-LRMs also have the advantage of no minimum range (save PPCs and even than its only half) and faster travel time across the board. Missiles that require a target lock can't be used to deliberately target specific components of an enemy mech. Streaks are in an even worse place because not only are they not able to fire AT ALL while under enemy ECM and NORMAL SRMs are the only missile system where the player has a say in what part of the target they hit.

You don't need that drastic an overhaul to have sensible ECM, just divorce target acquisition from missile locks by;

1) Allow missiles (both LRMs and streaks) to acquire target locks (not target information!) if they have personal LOS into the target. Sharing the lock with teammates that have LOS themselves is negotiable.

2) Don't allow a mech to fire indirectly if there is an ECM bubble between them and the spotter and/or one of them is inside the bubble itself.

These things combined allow for GECM to fulfill it role as an EWAR suite without turning the radius around the ECM mech into a black hole for target locks AND preventing the return of the LRMageddon by still letting them shield their teammates from indirect fire.

On a less direct note. ECM should be about protecting the team and not just yourself, if you're scared of being locked on to just switch to passive sensors (which should double as radio silence, so players can't just coast on their teammates target locks).

Edited by Ultra-Laser, 09 October 2015 - 08:20 PM.

[stjobe]

Ultra-Laser, on 09 October 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

the only thing LRMs have going for them is indirect fire.

Ultra-Laser, on 09 October 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

2) Don't allow a mech to fire indirectly if there is an ECM bubble between them and the spotter and/or one of them is inside the bubble itself.

You don't see a contradiction between these two statements? ECM needs to stop blocking LRMs, period. If that means we risk LRMageddon IV, then it also means the LRM code needs to finally be revisited. Having ECM be a substitute for good LRM code is ridiculous.

We have BAP, Artemis, and Narc. We even have TAG that helps with acquisition. So why not have ECM just be what it should be - a piece of gear that stops those things from giving bonuses?

[Donatello Jones]

Im good with the change in effective range of the ECM. The rest of the discussion about how it is supposed to function is spinning waaaaaay over my head at the moment.

All I do know is: This is a free game and the guys/gals have put ALOT of hard work into it and are continuing to do so. Im all for bringing balance to the game - and I will continue to pay to support it - but I refuse to b***h about the path/changes that imperfect people have lovingly taken toward MWO perfection.

[nehebkau]

@ devs

The ECM range is fine, problem is that the clans have a meta (or near meta) ecm in both light and heavy mech chassis so you see several in each CW drop. That means that clans are still LRM immune (for the most part) in CW whereas IS is substantially less so. Its something that you need to look at. As far as pub queue is concerned -- I think BAP should be decreased a little bit.

[Barkem Squirrel]

I have been running LRMs, and the change is noticeable to an extent. I can watch visually the ECM mechs moving around and the bubble seems smaller, but I use TAG and most of the time only fire direct LRMs. I still get a longer time to target mechs with ECM or covered by it even under a UAV, but if the ECM mech departs it is almost instant target lock. I can also mess with 3L ravens with ECM. Just this morning I was out in the water on river city keeping the raven at 200 to 240 m and just LRMing him to death while TAGing and the BAP blocking his signal. Then a few other people were dumping some LRMs, lasers and AC's into him.

It can still be used like before, but there is not total coverage from one ECM mech for an entire team. Now you need three ECM mechs to cover the team. So your team can get some targeting on one or more mechs and allows for more situation awareness due to the mechs that are not covered by ECM now compared to before.

One thing I do notice when using Artemis, there are no bonuses to lock on time with an ECM mech or one that is covered. I have not tested this after an ECM mech is hit with a PPC. It is part of lore in that regards, but will PPC's allow Artemis to work in an ECM bubble?

[MavRCK]

ECM range 90m -- but the notification that you are near enemy ECM is still the old 180m. Helps tracking down the ECM mech - intentional??

[Baron Von Hunchback]

Norman Kosh, on 15 July 2015 - 02:55 PM, said:

Awesome! With all the ECM mechs released lately the number of ECMs in field is so high and every single one is carrying a 360m bubble. I have to play most of my matches in Thermal View lately to see any mechs. All those pretty maps and all I see is grey. I'm so happy about this!

And so are the lrm boats...if you listen real hard you can hear the saliva globules hitting the floor.

[Malachy Karrde]

ECM is virtually worthless these days except to the mech that carries it. Most of the time we are spaced more than 90 meters apart. I actually bought three hellbringers and mastered the class recently in order to use ECM. I don't even waste the space any more...I would rather mount 1 ton of ammo than an ECM unit for all the good it does post nerf.

[Vermaxx]

"Role and information warfare" are terms you have been throwing out literally for years, but have no effect in game.

Having ECM or BAP doesn't make a role, and it hardly adds information. If you want roles, you need to add some kind of bonus for jobs to where the pay and mission rewards justify the risk.

This tier rating is a prime example. The only thing that really matters is how many people I kill, and if we win. If I do 200-400 damage (which is a lot in a curbstomp), I'm still demoted. There's no reward in that system to scout, or to flank, or do anything other than herd and try to steal kills.

This is why you don't see coordinated fire - a lot of people have figured out the direct correlation between k/d and mission rewards. You can't have "role and information warfare" in a game that is ultimately about getting the biggest kill score.

Edited by Vermaxx, 22 December 2015 - 10:40 PM.

[Vermaxx]

If you want roles - add serious incentives for lights to scout, for mediums to harass, for heavies and assaults to PUSH. Reinstate ammo resupply costs. Add some kind of functionality to the command console. Do SOMETHING other than fiddle with ECM and quote a vague master plan for game depth.