945 replies to this topic

[Commissar Aku]

PolyunsaturatedFat, on 02 August 2015 - 09:11 PM, said:

Can you explain what the intention behind the ECM change is?

This sort of change will have a profound impact on the metagame. Right now, the metagame leans towards direct fire - Laser and/or Gauss. If you nerf ECM range, the meta will swing towards indirect fire, e.g. LRMs.

Personally, I find the direct fire game much more fun than the indirect fire game - I enjoy a game of positioning, line-of-sight, movement, dodging and weaving. That's what makes big stompy robots fun for me.


So again, I ask you, what is the intent of this change? Because the effect will be in the overall gameplay and the dominant metagame, and I'd really hate for MWO to suffer from unintended consequences.

Don't worry I plan to punish the change with missile hell, I mean BAP, TAG and 60 tubes with 2k ammo, 2000 damage pug matches here I come. Advanced sensors, advanced target decay, BAP, NARC, UAV, TAG and ECM all things that keep ECM in check or down right counter them, so every person has 7 options to counter or at least nerf ECM and they are just to self centered to not use them. I think this is a player base problem, they need to find a way to promote the use of support items, like using AMS, ECM, BAP, TAG, NARC, and all the other stuff that takes away firepower for utility. I really hate the direction this game is going, I don't even use that many ECM mechs, but personally if anything I though it needed a buff again because it had become under powered with all the stuff that countered it.

[Sigmar Sich]

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

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

I believe ECM should be redesigned. In my opinion, rebalance is no longer an optimal solution - MWO battlefield evolved, and differs very much from circumstances, when ECM was designed. Here is few suggestions about ECM effects design:

ECM
"BattleTech 1707 - Master Rules, page 136
The Guardian ECM Suite is a broad-spectrum jamming and electronic countermeasure device designed to reduce effectiveness of enemy long-range scanning and surveillance equipment... An ECM suite has an effect radius of 6 hexes that creates "bubble" around the carrying unit. The ECM disruptive abilities affect all enemy units inside this bubble, as well as any line of sight traced through the bubble. It has no effect on units friendly to the unit carrying the ECM.
Within its effect radius, an ECM suite has the following effect on the following systems (the ECm does not effect other scanning or targeting devices such as TAG or Clan targeting computer).
Active Probes: Active probes cannot penetrate the ECM's area of effect. The probing unit will notice it is being jammed.
Artemis IV FCS: ECM blocks the effect of Artemis IV FCS. Artemis-equipped launchers may be fired as normal missiles through the ECM, but ...bonus is lost.
Narc Missile Beacon: Missiles equipped to home in on an attached Narc pod lose ...bonus for that system if they are affected by ECM. The Narc launcher itself is not affected by ECM."

So, ECM effects suggested to change:
ECM requirements remain the same - 2 slots, 1.5 tons, and ECM-capability of carrying 'mech.
ECM creates area of effect ("bubble"). Size of bubble is to be balanced, suggested 90 meters is fine. (Though i believe very small radius, 45 or 60 meters, plus ability to affect line of sight passing through bubble will be more interesting to gameplay, encouraging more frontline activity of ECM-carriers. But i guess it meets engineering obstacles, as new feature. So -) Bubble does not affect line of sight, passing through it, only units inside the bubble.
ECM decreases enemy sensors radius to X%. (To be balanced.. Lets say for 37,5%. Default spot distance is 800 meters? So it makes distance for spot ECM-shielded units 300 meters. BAP bonus to sensor does not apply, quirk and module bonuses does apply.)
ECM increases time to lock on carrier and shielded units, at any distance.
Enemy ECM no longer jams friendly signatures.
In addition - ECM disrupted after PPC shot for longer time (>150%-250%<)

So - ECM no longer denies targeting at all ranges - only on long and medium ranges, depending on sensor ranges of opposite team. ECM still saves from LRM/SSRM lockon, but not by denying targeting, but through increased time to lockon (something as current lock on working ECM-carrier, spotted by UAV), not only to carrier, but to other friendlies inside the bubble, at all distances, as long as ECM is not disrupted by PPC shot or enemy ECM in counter mode.
TAG and Narc beacon dismiss ECM lockon protection, but Narc beacon loses its bonuses. ECM dismisses Artemis IV FCS bonus.
So with this changes ECM becomes more flexible happening on battlefield, not "all or nothing" protection from targeting and lockon as now. You can taget and lock onto targets shielded by ECM, without disrupting it, but it will not be easy.

LRM
As main concern for ECM rebalance.
LRM needs nerf for indirect fire. By rules, mech cannot use its weapons on turn when he doing spotting for indirect LRM fire. Means indirect lockon is more complicated, than in MWO. But from gameplay perspective better to affect shooter, not spotter, so:
LRM can fire without having line of sight to target, but 1) lock only possible on targets with gathered information (you have to wait when you see name and mech model, not just red square); 2) lockon takes X% more time than lockon with line of sight (lets say 150-200%). Lock with line of sight on target works as usual, with no need for gathered information.
So with this changes LRM as primary weapon will require more skill or teamwork to use. Mechs using LRMs as auxiliary weapons should not be affected much (because they need line of sight for other weapons to use).
Now LRM-rains from safe places should be more rare, and happen to very passive teams, or enabled by skilled spotters.

BAP
"BattleTech 1707 - Master Rules, page 130
Capable of detecting and identifying even shut-down and camouflaged units at distances much greater than standart-issue electronic warfare suites, the Active Probe makes a valuable addition to any recon unit."

Losing disruptive ability to ECm effect, Active Probe needs redesign too.
Suggestions:
BAP no longer can disrupt ECM.
BAP bonus for spotting distance does not apply when spotting ECM-shielded targets.
BAP spot distance for shut-down mechs increased significantly (300-400 meters). But mechs without BAP now can target shut-down mechs too, but on small distances, like 50-90 meters.
If enemy ECM-carrier is in range of sensors, and have line of sight to friendly BAP-equipped mech (BAP bonuses to sensor range do apply), ECM-carrier highlited with marker (same marker as now in use for ECM-jammed mechs). So you cannot target ECM-carrier, but you and your team can see where it is.


I'm sure i forgot to describe something, but i guess this is enough for you to imagine how suggested changes will work. Core idea is - presence or absence of some equipment should not drastically influence battle. Current balance is bad in its core - it have some aspects (massed indirect LRM fire, ECM cover,) which are too powerful, and too easy to cancel completely at same time.

Edited by Sigmar Sich, 03 August 2015 - 09:46 AM.

[Old Mechdonald]

Great idea.... 90 meters is plenty... maybe 60 m is even better. Love it, please go with it. please I beseech thee.

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

make it 60m you wuss

Sounds good, bring the heavy hand down, the game needs it.

[Dubinsky]

Just few thoughts about actual informational warfare IRL.

ECM prevents radar to get stable locks at max range, Approaching closer ecm loses its ability to hide you - radar overwhelms decoy signals and gains back its ability to get lock. The more powerful radar is the earlier locks you get. Also missile systems have special home on jam mode to fire in which case they will passively follow any ecm they can find in range.

As I can see this in game:

ECM target is not visible at 1000-300m. Is partially visible at 300-150 (x2 lock time target info gather etc). Stable locks at 150 and below but without target sharing (only for you and without any penalties, mostly useful for streaks).BAP will increase those ranges and reduces ECM target sharing shield. TAG works like it works now, maybe we should make it invisible to encourage lights to tag targets without giving away their positions, Home on jam for missile boats where you fire at some place and they will automatically locks to first ecm mech in 100m radius on their flight path.

Edited by Dubinsky, 03 August 2015 - 12:58 PM.

[MetalMatt86]

InspectorG, on 15 July 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:

A. Give Lights more Recon: larger sensor range, faster + better target info. Should affect Heat Vison and Night Vision similar to zoom on a TC.

B. SHRINK Medium/heavy/Assault's SENSOR RANGE in ascending order. Medium = 500m, Heavy = 450m, Assault = 400m
ALL BUT SELECT FEW MEDIUMS get LESS sensor info.
FOSTERS COMMUNICATION/SHOT CALLING: VOIP FOR A REASON

C. ECM, covers @90m DIAMETER, COUNTERS INDIRECT LOCKS- Direct locks act as normal, Negates NARC/Probes

D. Buff BAP/AP PROPORTIONAL to weight class of mech using it.

E. Due to ECM cutting indirect locks, LRM users should use TAG and stay CLOSE ENOUGH for their weight class's sensor range...YES! NO MORE LRM FROM THE BACK - YOU NOW GET TO FIGHT GLORIOUS FIGHT COMRADE!!!
Dedicated scout can still scout but will have to be more 'dedicated'. TAG would thus be used like spotting artillery and provide bonus for indirect LRM use. Bigger reward for spotting.

F. TAG range depends on weight class. 700m for Lights, 600m for Medium, 500m for Heavy/Assault.

G. Buff LRM if needed due to more demanding criteria.


Something like this.

You get:
Roles for Lights
Demand for more teamwork
Perhaps better balance for indirect fire/LRM/ECM
Meta less heavy on strict damage done.

After reading A LOT of different ideas IMHO, this guy has the most sensible balance of weight class roles, information gathering, actual TEAMWORK (talking & communicating. A shocker I know) and the relationship between ECM & LRMs.

[InspectorG]

MetalMatt86, on 03 August 2015 - 05:35 PM, said:

After reading A LOT of different ideas IMHO, this guy has the most sensible balance of weight class roles, information gathering, actual TEAMWORK (talking & communicating. A shocker I know) and the relationship between ECM & LRMs.

Thank you. The sensor idea was not really mine though.

I just play many different boardgames and get all nerd over mechanics.

[kilgor]

How about ECM only disrupting bonuses for BAP, Artemis IV, TAG, NARC at standard ECM range and nullifying or reducing targeting computers bonuses within 90 meters or so of ECM. All 'Mechs are all still targetable. Reduce LRM range back down from 1000 meters to the original 720 meters, but allow IS to have hot loading fire capabilities with reduced damage like clan LRMs currently have and bump up clan LRM damage to normal, since they didn't have range restrictions. If there are still LRM problems, increase AMS rate of fire and modify LRM ammo amounts. And give us Arrow IV so TAG and Narc get better spotting bonuses or let it boost Artillery Strike and Air Strike.

Edited by kilgor, 03 August 2015 - 08:00 PM.

[KraftySOT]

Can you please make ECM more interesting rather than just keep messing with its ranges?

Annoying as heck.

[White Bear 84]

InspectorG, on 03 August 2015 - 05:44 PM, said:

I just play many different boardgames and get all nerd over mechanics.

Edited by White Bear 84, 03 August 2015 - 09:31 PM.

[Krellshand]

I like it,

I noticed that in recent times you more or less have an invisible team because of some new mechs that sport ecm and are more than decent.

I really dont think you should be able to hide so many mechs with just 2-3 Ecm Mechs, and if they are spread a littlke, you get an ecm voverage of nearly a kilometer! So I am happy to see this

[Meta 2013]

Well it sounds like a good idea.

The entire system makes no sense at all, given how its done in the "real" Military world. One Jammer is all you need.

ECM (Electronic Counter Measure) can have many faces, it can Jam active radars, it can also Jam IFF communication, and it can deny shared targeting information systems. Normally, it is specialized to accomplish one of those mentioned above.

The Way ECM works here ... not letting any mech see anything under the bubble... is somewhat accurate, however the one thing that is not at all accurate is the range at which enemy mechs are effected by said bubble, The Active Radar on a mech 1000 meters out should not be effected, only mechs close enough to the enemy mechs jamming range should be effected. Any systems using the Active Radar data for lock or acquisition, should not be effected until it gets in close, the effect should get stronger the closer you get, meaning the Bubble of effect should grow the closer you get. ECM as a Radar jammer, slowly over time raises the background "noise "level to such a degree, that the Enemy mechs Radar receivers cannot see the target through the noise level. So as you get further away from the jammer, the effect is reduced. ECM Doesn't cancel the Radar energy from hitting a mech and then re-radiating back to the receiver, it simply keeps the receiver from being able to distinguish between a real target and background noise levels. So in that Respect any Mech carrying Advanced Sensor packages that are not within the " ECM bubble" should not be affected at all. and it should be a gradual thing, ie within 90 meters its all hosed, at 120 meters you can get targeting data but not target lock ... need to be at least 150 meters out to get all the data, and the closer you get to a jammer the longer missile lock should take, unless of course your a mech with an advanced electronics package installed. BAP would be part of that advanced electronics package. Advanced sensor range module, and a targeting computer should also reduces the jammers effective ranges.



IFF is a different system, that operates on different frequencies from the Active Radar carried on mechs. IFF is a two-way communication, it is just the frequencies used are in the Detection Radar bands. IFF is a simple challenge with a question, get an answer back. IFF stands for Identification friend or foe. Friends give an answer back... foes do not.

Jamming Techniques Vary, but as I said you normally only have one Jammer in a package, and that lends well to the Lance concept in mech warrior. As an example you normally would only take one F-111 wild weasel with an F15/A10/A16/F4 strike package. His job was to Jam enemy radar, which would consist of Anti Aircraft guns, SAM launchers, and other anti aircraft missile systems. Yes they knew something was coming, but had no idea where it was and no way to get a tracking radar missile lock. However, if they had IR tracking systems, once our aircraft where close enough to get a laser on them ...ie mech warriors equivalent to TAG, an IR tracking Missile would still work. Unless mechs start carrying chaff ammo and a chaff dispensing system along with AMS your not defeating TAG and IR tracking Missiles combined.

Ideally, A friendly Mech equipped with an ECM package should be able to see the enemy Jammer and any mechs under its Bubble. However, only the friendly Jammer will see them all, and only if he is in counter mode and not disrupt, because his Active Radar in counter will switch to a non jammed frequency, and still work as normal. The only Info that other mechs should be able to see... IF, and this is where you tie in the targeting systems, is positional data on the one mech the friendly jammer has targeted on your mini map, you should not be able to get missile lock, but you should get target info shared through the targeting computer system, since it will be on a separate comm band way out of the enemy jammers package. This is information warfare, this is how you make targeting computers worth carrying.

yeah ok I'm done, time to stop day dreaming, and get back to reality ... ok 90 meter reduction is a good start.

Meta

Edited by Meta 2013, 04 August 2015 - 01:37 AM.

[KursedVixen]

Jimmy DiGriz, on 03 August 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

@PolyunsaturateFat - I think some change to ECM is absolutely necessary. ECM rules the battlefield and whilst I agree that the "direct" game you describe above is, for most of us, the main thing, there is a place for indirect fire: e.g. forcing the turtled assaults to move or as a "denial of territory" weapon.

Obviously I don't know "their" intention but I would think it is to open up the battlefield a bit and remove the overly powerful cloaking effect of ECM as it currently works. I also hope they are looking at the "must have" aspect of ECM.

With SO many ECM capable mechs now - as has been stated before in this thread but it bears repeating - ANY ECM capable Clan mech WILL be carrying it as things stand, the reward for a mere ton of weight far outweighs the loss of, possibly, one weapon slot, which will probably be balanced by a multi-slot arm omnipod.

Things are slightly different for IS forces but, again, every weight class now has ECM capable chassis and you see more and more of them in game.

I am pleased that PGI is approaching this slowly and carefully with a very minor nerf to ECM to begin with and hopefully they will continue to re-balance this great piece of kit and get it to the stage where we actually have to think about whether to use it.

Clan still has no ecm Assault.

[Jman5]

We're approaching a month since this announcement was made. Can we get this implemented into the game?

[Scanz]

WHEEN ?? Every mech in a match with ecm .. lrm usseless

[Mochyn Pupur]

One thing I never understand with the use of ECM in MWO - this is a countermeasure designed to cover electronic signatures; to allow it to work, you need a filter to counter the ECM blanket broadcast - therefore friendly Mech's would have this frequency programmed into their "radar" system. When BAP is used this would allow one frequency to be detected and countered, as is the game at the moment. Surely, using different frequencies on the same Team would jam other friendly systems if the Mechs are only allowed to "counter" one frequency. Stacking of the same frequency (as you would expect a Team to use) would therefor have no additional effect?

As it is now, you can stand with BAP facing a static target at 50m and not get a lock because another ECM carrying opponent is nearby. Yes allow the others to remain "hidden" if outside of the BAP bubble, but let the visual locked Mech be targeted - we are after all, talking about technology 1000 year plus in the future - - Oh, I forget - - they forgot how to fix rear view mirrors or rear facing cameras to big stompy robots (something you can pick up now for the cost of a family 3 course meal in a restaurant . . . silly me

[KursedVixen]

PeppaPig, on 05 August 2015 - 01:51 AM, said:

One thing I never understand with the use of ECM in MWO - this is a countermeasure designed to cover electronic signatures; to allow it to work, you need a filter to counter the ECM blanket broadcast - therefore friendly Mech's would have this frequency programmed into their "radar" system. When BAP is used this would allow one frequency to be detected and countered, as is the game at the moment. Surely, using different frequencies on the same Team would jam other friendly systems if the Mechs are only allowed to "counter" one frequency. Stacking of the same frequency (as you would expect a Team to use) would therefor have no additional effect?

As it is now, you can stand with BAP facing a static target at 50m and not get a lock because another ECM carrying opponent is nearby. Yes allow the others to remain "hidden" if outside of the BAP bubble, but let the visual locked Mech be targeted - we are after all, talking about technology 1000 year plus in the future - - Oh, I forget - - they forgot how to fix rear view mirrors or rear facing cameras to big stompy robots (something you can pick up now for the cost of a family 3 course meal in a restaurant . . . silly me

actually they do have rear mounted cameras and even rear mounted weapons ,but PGI either doesn't or cannot program the rear facing camera even though we have many useless screens in mechs.

[L Y N X]

PGI, Tennex,

I like the concepts described below, with one exception, do not call Seismic Sensor a Radar, these technologies exist in the Real World today. Both are based on different science, Radar on radio waves, electronic emissions, while Seismic is based on vibrations like sound waves or almost a passive sonar bouys. Please do not combine the operation of these two techs. Otherwise the conceptual changes described below would be beneficial to Information Warfare roles.

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"

Almost all mechs equip the module seismic sensor. It has become the de facto Radar of Mechwarrior Online. (don't freak out. Think of this change as just Seismic Sensor with more integration into Role Warfare)
Summary of what changing seismic sensor to Radar will do for the game :

• Active/Passive Radar
  
• True to lore implementation of ECM. That doesn't break all missiles
  
• Visual/Missile Targeting is the ONLY mechanic of Information Warfare right now. This change will fix that
  
• True to lore implementation of whatever the hell radar tech you can think of
  
• Null Sig

And here is the how:



By actually having a Radar mechanic you are are able to implement features that are true to lore.
Meanwhile the Radar(seismic sensor) portion of the game is still kept separate from the Missile Lock/Visual Lock portion of the game. What this mean is:

#1 Just because you see mechs on your Radar(seismic sensor) doesn't mean you can lob LRMs at them. Just because you see them on Radar, doesn't mean you can have damage information on them. (A problem the developers sought to get rid of from the old game.)

#2 Lore ECM: Having a separate Radar and Missile targeting system means that ECM can have the Radar jamming portion of its function (invisible from Radar, jams enemy's Radar), without the missile targeting interference. I.E true to lore and does not break an entire 1/3 of the weapons.


#3 You can tune/adjust a mech's Radar capability without hindering its Missile/Visual Targeting ability. I.E if you lower the Missile Targeting range from 1000 you can no longer effectively use LRMS. Whereas if you lower the Radar radius there is no effect on viability of Missile weapons. Worried that giving light mechs 2x Visual/Missile Lock will wreck the game? Worry no more, giving light mechs 2x Radar range is fine and encouraged!

#4 Passive/Active Radar! Turn off your own Radar(Seismic Sensor), and other mechs will not see you on their Radar. This means mechs will still be able to sneak around, and have that stealth gameplay.



Heck, devs can add Null Sig if they wanted to if it no longer has functionality overlap with ECM. Miss your Sniper Raven? Slap that Null Sig onto a Rave, turn on Passive Radar and it works just like ECM does now without the broken umbrella.

[Felicitatem Parco]

7ynx, on 05 August 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:

PGI, Tennex,

I like the concepts described below, with one exception, do not call Seismic Sensor a Radar, these technologies exist in the Real World today. Both are based on different science, Radar on radio waves, electronic emissions, while Seismic is based on vibrations like sound waves or almost a passive sonar bouys. Please do not combine the operation of these two techs. Otherwise the conceptual changes described below would be beneficial to Information Warfare roles.

I cannot support the use of Seismic as the primary targeting sensor system. It should be electromagnetic, since a Seismic sensor cannot provide accurate enough information to lock in a target and cannot be used while moving.

I do agree that the Angel ECM we have in the game now should be downgraded to Guardian ECM, and then let us test that on the PTS. This game never had Guardian ECM, even for testing purposes, but it may be a good idea to at least try it once.

Also, you have to consider that Tennex suggested they can add NullSig, which hides your Mech from thermal vision. I don't know if that's good for this game since the combination of Angel ECM currently in-game blocking all targeting functions and zero thermal emissions would make every match feel like a Terra therma match... At least in regards to targeting ECM Mechs. If they downgraded the in-game Angel ECM to Guardian ECM, though, then it might be more tennable.

[Dagorlad13]

Prosperity Park, on 05 August 2015 - 10:22 AM, said:

I cannot support the use of Seismic as the primary targeting sensor system. It should be electromagnetic, since a Seismic sensor cannot provide accurate enough information to lock in a target and cannot be used while moving.

I do agree that the Angel ECM we have in the game now should be downgraded to Guardian ECM, and then let us test that on the PTS. This game never had Guardian ECM, even for testing purposes, but it may be a good idea to at least try it once.

Also, you have to consider that Tennex suggested they can add NullSig, which hides your Mech from thermal vision. I don't know if that's good for this game since the combination of Angel ECM currently in-game blocking all targeting functions and zero thermal emissions would make every match feel like a Terra therma match... At least in regards to targeting ECM Mechs. If they downgraded the in-game Angel ECM to Guardian ECM, though, then it might be more tennable.

Using the TT rules for Guardian ECM would definitely make AMS much more desirable. Since Guardian ECM pretty much just cancells the Artemis bonus and disrupts target sharing, then PGI should greatly increase missile spread when Artemis is not installed, or if it is "jammed". Maybe PGI should even make a hit location roll for each missile, instead of groups of five.

Edited by IronClaws, 05 August 2015 - 03:01 PM.

[ManusDei]

No SSRM locks until 90 meters? That means the ECM mech can fire and I cannot until I get to 90 meters. SSRMs kill Lights...take that away and Lights will dominate every match. You can't kill lights if all you give BAP is a 90 meter window. What we need is more effective BAP range to counter ECM not less.

Edited by ManusDei, 05 August 2015 - 07:55 PM.