945 replies to this topic

[Gremlich Johns]

For working at tactical ranges (within 3-5kms), modern ECM equipment weighs about 50-100kg - not Tons.

In MW4, you had the option, if your mech could use ECM, select it and it made no change to your mech's weight.

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 16 August 2015 - 09:33 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Prosperity Park, on 14 August 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

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.

Yes, but I don't recall ever seeing them broadcast a CW match, so it makes me wonder if they have any first hand experience at it.

This change, I think, will further exacerbate the Clan OP problem.

[Kotrin]

I'd like to see a true TT ECM implementation just once....

1. 180m radius is okay, jam/counter mechanic is okay
2. Enemy units within ECM range are unable to transmit target triangle to their team (making indirect-fire and tactical info gathering more difficult)
3. No enemy NARC works under influence of ECM
4. No drone works under influence of ECM
4. TAG works only if the 'Mech firing the TAG is outside from the bubble
5. No effect on LRM, SRM or Streak-SRM
6. Get rid of the null-effect PPC has on ECM

If you really want to get further than lore you can slow down locks against an ECM-wielding unit, but at something like 25-50% and this should be related to distance.

ECM should not have any effect of any kind outside the bubble. This is my main gripe with MWO implementation of it.

[Dimento Graven]

Kotrin, on 16 August 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

I'd like to see a true TT ECM implementation just once....

1. 180m radius is okay, jam/counter mechanic is okay
2. Enemy units within ECM range are unable to transmit target triangle to their team (making indirect-fire and tactical info gathering more difficult)
3. No enemy NARC works under influence of ECM
4. No drone works under influence of ECM
4. TAG works only if the 'Mech firing the TAG is outside from the bubble
5. No effect on LRM, SRM or Streak-SRM
6. Get rid of the null-effect PPC has on ECM

If you really want to get further than lore you can slow down locks against an ECM-wielding unit, but at something like 25-50% and this should be related to distance.

ECM should not have any effect of any kind outside the bubble. This is my main gripe with MWO implementation of it.

Wow... So... You want to go in the opposite direction and buff the holy **** out of ECM then...

Well, I seriously doubt that would happen.

[Kotrin]

Dimento Graven, on 16 August 2015 - 10:34 AM, said:

Wow... So... You want to go in the opposite direction and buff the holy **** out of ECM then...

Well, I seriously doubt that would happen.

I really don't get how you can consider what I wrote as a buff to ECM.

[Neput Z34]

My 2 C-bills on the issue.

ECM should:
♦ Reduce range at which you can be targeted by the enemy ( 50% ?)
♦ Increase time for the enemy to acquire missile lock and information readout (50% ?)
♦ Disrupt enemy C3 target info sharing (if you are under 100m?)
♦ Have a counter ECM mode / toggle inside the C3 disruption range

ECM should NOT:
◘ Provide an invisibility umbrella / cloak field
◘ Cause HUD / Target bracket flickering while your C3 is being disrupted (have an alternate way of notification of being Jammed, possibly like NARC )
◘ Prevent missile locks inside the C3 jam range

In my honest opinion the whole Information Warfare "pillar" needs to be serious reexamined / reconsidered:

• Active and Passive sensor mode (currently MIA)
• BAP / CAP (OK for the most part)
• Command Console ( some thing other then over priced Targeting Computer )
• Targeting Computers ( after Mk1 most are of "limited value" )
• Artemis FCS, TAG, NARC (Currently fine as is but may need adjustments in the future)

Currently, default detection range is 800m_____ECM equipped mechs will be detected at: 400m
Sensor module extends it to 1000m.___________________________________________500m
Sensor module + BAP / CAP = 1200 ~ 1250m_________________________________600~625m (could be scaled non linearly to 800m )

Detection ranges above would apply to Active Sensors mode.

Passive sensor mode (Silent Running) would limit your sensor range to 250m ~ 265m and negate any bonuses provide by BAP / CAP, Command Console, Targeting Computers, Sensor modules and ECM.
In turn you will be detected at the same ranges as ECM equipped mechs, with out other benefits provided by ECM.

BAP / CAP should be returns to their previous functions since ECM would not prevent missile locks.

P.S.
Clan S-SRMs need to "ripple fire" just like Clan LRMs, maybe with a bigger pause between missiles.

Edited by Neput Z34, 16 August 2015 - 12:03 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Kotrin, on 16 August 2015 - 11:05 AM, said:

I really don't get how you can consider what I wrote as a buff to ECM.

Because these:

Quote

...
2. Enemy units within ECM range are unable to transmit target triangle to their team (making indirect-fire and tactical info gathering more difficult)
3. No enemy NARC works under influence of ECM
4. No drone works under influence of ECM
4. TAG works only if the 'Mech firing the TAG is outside from the bubble

6. Get rid of the null-effect PPC has on ECM

Give it abilities it doesn't currently have, or changes abilities in such a way as to make ECM more effective.

[Kin3ticX]

What is the status of the ECM change?

[Gleech]

The ECM/LRM dynamic is pretty ****. I used to run a Catapault all the time, but I haven't touched it in forever. I mostly pug, and in a pug you're just not gonna have the absurd amount of coordination and support you need to make LRMs work, certainly not now that the other team's going to be all under ECM the entire time.

I'd like to see ECM loose the lock-blocking property entirely, at least for friendly mechs. I'd be OK if it only prevented lock-and-scan for the mech carrying it, and for everyone else it just delayed lock-on and caused instant lock-loss when the friendly mech ducked.

I'd also be willing to see LRMs nerfed a bit, just to keep things sane. They used to fly slower and have a shallower ark, so that you actually had to know the terrain and plan your shot; going back to that would be fine with me. It'd be better for LRMers, net/net, or at least a lot less frustrating.

Kotrin, on 16 August 2015 - 11:05 AM, said:

I really don't get how you can consider what I wrote as a buff to ECM.

Because you haven't dealt with darling babooo Dimentio before.

[Dimento Graven]

Gleech, on 16 August 2015 - 06:46 PM, said:

...

Because you haven't dealt with darling babooo Dimentio before.

Given this comes from someone with only 16 posts... You haven't really dealt with me either.

[Goombah]

The interplay between ECM and Lock weapons is a complete mess in this game.
Altering ECM's range, without changing its basic functionality will NOT CHANGE THIS GAME AT ALL.
Scrubs will die! Pros will cluster a little bit tighter around their hellbringers, cheetahs, and shadowcats.

It's one thing for equipment like jumpjets, active probes, command computers, ecm and so on to work with or against one another, to enhance your ability to scout, or spot, or scan for weak points on an enemy mech.

It's a different story when equipment starts countering my guns before they even leave the barrel, or in this case the tube.

With any weapon system, if I can see it, I can shoot it (baring range). Some guns are better at long range, some are better at close range, but ANY GUN WORKS MORE OR LESS. Sure LB-10X sucks, but it CONSISTANTLY SUCKS EVERY GAME.

Why on god's green and blue earth would a tiny box completely counter two weapon systems? More so when ECM had no previous history of countering missiles?

"Because we would get wreaked Goombah!" I hear you! I know as well as anyone what lock on, indirect fire does in this game! If ECM and LRMS were changed to not have such a screwed up relationship with one another, LRMS would need to be patently weaker than they are now.

Do these weapons absolutely need to be so polarizing? Couldn't they be more average, middle of the road type weapons?
Now one of my favorite parts of mech warrior and BT in general is the wide variety of weapons on a mech or tank, and the fact that you can use TWELVE GUNS! AT THE SAME TIME EVEN! What other game does that? AND you can mix and match any weapons you want! How many games have boring weapons that are virtually indistinguishable in function? I couldn't tell you the difference between 15 different assault rifles in most FPS games, but every auto cannon in MWO has a different flavor.

I'd hate to ruin the special snowflakeness of indirect fire LRMS, but is it really possible to make the game fair and balanced, make lock on weapons good, but not TOO good, or TO CRAPPY with the way they are currently implemented? Is this hard lock, hard counter system REQUIRED? I just want every weapon to be good and usable and balanced on every map, and no weapon to be considered complete **** tier and taken seriously by very few.

Lock weapons need to be untethered from the circle jerk of bap / tag / ecm. Each item is so up in the others business that one system like ECM can't be changed without affecting everything else.

ECM can't be balanced properly when it is ball-and-chained to a particular weapon system like this. By only changing ECM, as many things are fixed as they are also broken. Separate electronics equipment from weapons, and each can be balanced in its own way.

Streaks are considered "more accurate" or at least more efficient because ammo is not wasted without a "lock"
PGI already has a history of, when balancing weapons, and giving out quirks, to make certain weapon systems more ACCURATE by increasing PROJECTILE SPEED and reducing BURN TIMES. Why not, I ask, make streak launchers fire missiles at higher speeds?
Streak launchers are heavier, so you have to take less ammo or heat sinks or tubes even, with the bonus affect of being significantly more accurate. Regular SRMS have a projectile velocity of 300, why not make streaks go . . . 500? 600? and REMOVE THE LOCK ON MECHANIC ENTIRELY.

Likewise, why not make LRMS dumb fire, and travel at about 1300 velocity, a little higher than PPCS, and NOT REQUIRE A LOCK MECHANIC?
"Because that would make them boring!" "We have too many direct fire weapons already!"
Swarm and Stream fired LRMS, in rough clusters, spreading out their damage, using ammo, would make them practically and functionally different from other direct fire weapons. Just imagine SRMS that could hit something at 1000 meters away, but not hit anything inside of 190 (for inner sphere). There would be no compairison between PPCS, large lasers, and VERY FAST dumb direct fire LRMS. The special snowflakeness would be secure.

Only then can electronics be balanced appropriately. Too many other elements in the game have a high stakes investment in other elements.

We aren't being given enough credit. They don't think the average player can handle a skill based indirect fire weapon. I'm fairly certain most people reading this have used a grenade launcher in team fortress, or THROWN A GRENADE IN ANY FPS. We aren't ********! Something can be worked out to implement indirect fire weapons without being LOCK ON WEAPONS AT THE SAME TIME. There's a justifiable amount of hate here for the INDIRECT FIRE portion of LRMS, which necessitates ECM in it's current implementation. It's not the indirect fire portion, its the almost (but not completely) bereft of skill portion of it. Heck, if you can somehow lob explosives over a building, and actually hit me, and kill me, with your own skill, good on ya mate! I had it coming for sitting still too long!

What do you do in any other game when someone tosses high explosive bombs over your cover? YOU MOVE YOUR ASS! What does the lock on mechanic do in this game? IT MAKES PEOPLE HIDE until the boogey man goes away! When someone is tossing indirect fire at you, you GET IN THEIR FACE, juke shots, and shoot them!

Even if LRMS become line of sight and direct fire, other weapons can be implemented that can be indirect, fired in an arc. Last I checked there were some awkward, unpopular artillery type weapons certain maniacs welded to their mechs in battle tech! Maybe we could use those?

This balance to ECM only reminds me of the 8 or 9 "rebalances" to medium lasers in beta. Fiddlefucking with range brackets WILL NOT FIX ECM.

[Avimimus]

Yeah, having some type of probability based system would probably work much better (e.g. ECM flickers in and out at longer ranges). Would probably require changing more than a single line of code though...

[Bolide]

I'm sure everything has been discussed somewhere by someone already, but I'll throw in here as well.

There are so many ECM mechs available now it doesn't matter if you decrease the radius to 90m, ECM will still dominate the battlefield.

What ECM currently does is equivalent to Star League ERA Null Signature Systems or later era Stealth Armor.

From tabletop what ECM is supposed to do is negate tech advantages, not make you harder to hit with missles and it doesn't make you disappear from radar.

PGI, if you are going to change it, change it right. ECM should make getting target info on a mech in the bubble take longer. It should negate Artemis and BAP on the mech that possess ECM.

ECM should block targeting computers and BAP of mechs within the ECM radius. Another option might be to not allow enemy mechs within the bubble to share targets with allies as C3.

It should not prevent LRMs and Streaks from locking on. Maybe reduce the effective targeting range (half the mechs range maybe, so sensor mod helps offset) as I have mentioned before.

ECM should be an umbrella against extreme range LRM volleys and a brawler's tool against mechs picking out damaged areas. Preventing locks is just silly and limits your ability to implement other technologies down the road.

[Alex Reed]

Current ECM implementation and the proposed future implementation take away the "Paper" and makes MWO a game of "Rock - Scissors" with "Scissors" having a buff to make them workable against the "Rocks."

ECM, in my opinion, is out of control and is too powerful as it almost totally negates LRM usage and general target acquisition.

By effectively removing missile systems from the game, the game has ceased to be balanced or fun.

I have adjusted my game schedule from four to five nights a week down to one or two nights. Why? Because a team running 5+ ECM mechs makes the game impossible to play and enjoy with any modicum of success.

Many in my unit (The Seraphim) feel the same way ... we have seen a sharp decline in the participation of our casual players and I feel it is due to this as well. Many casual players, players with slower connections, and players with slower reflexes favor missile systems as a way to bridge the ability/technology gaps they face in playing the game.

Personally, I am a Catapult pilot and I love my Founder's Cat because I no longer have the reflexes (or low blood pressure) to fulfill a role in brawling ... ECM makes my Founder's mech a useless mech.

So, if my favorite mech (and it's main weapon system/purpose) is not balanced to be a viable mech, why would I continue to play MWO and encourage others to do so?

Sincerely,

Alex Reed
Commander of the Seraphim Regiment
Legendary Founder

[Veev]

I was always under the impression that AMS was the logical counter to missiles... ECM in MWO has always needed a rework, a major rework. Something more than a reduction in range detection.

[ball0fire]

Veev, on 18 August 2015 - 08:25 PM, said:

I was always under the impression that AMS was the logical counter to missiles... ECM in MWO has always needed a rework, a major rework. Something more than a reduction in range detection.

this is true, could we not just remove ECM's bubble and anti lock on ability and then buff AMS missile knock down rate to like 50%?

[Docta Pain]

why radio silence, pgi?

[Alex Reed]

Over-buffing AMS to compensate for lack of null sig ECM is not the answer.

Who would knowingly take an AC/20 or Gauss Rifle into battle if you knew the enemy had a shield that would cut its damage to half? It would totally destabilize the balance of weapon load outs.

LRMs require that most weapon payload be dedicated to weapon and ammo with very little tonnage left for close range defense. This makes them highly susceptible to close range attack (unless they are clan mechs ... That is a whole different can of worms). A fast attack of light mechs stops the missile fire as the pilot has to break locks to try to defend themselves.

Effective light mech tactics go a long way towards fixing the LRM problem.

When LRMs have been nerfed due to one system being unbalanced (here I mean ECM), AMS and extra AMS ammo can be removed in favor of a few more medium lasers for more "laser vomit." Radar decay can be removed in favor of a more offensive module (like Advanced Zoom for snipers or Seismic Sensors for brawlers). Balance brings the economic idea of opportunity cost to all players and forces more judicious decisions when it comes to mech load outs.

If a team has twelve LRM mechs, the other team adjusts tactically and overwhelms them. As a Catapult pilot, there is no worse feeling than playing against smart pilots who use cover to absorb your salvos and then push when your missile tubes are empty.

Now, if the issue is fighting missile boats (mechs that take advantage of numerous LRM 5 launchers for continuous fire), then I would be all for increasing the spread of those missiles or a decrease in their accuracy to combat the effects of "boating."

Edited by Alex Reed, 19 August 2015 - 03:51 AM.

[Reno Blade]

How about this:

The radar signature of your mech = 300 + (tonnage x 5)
And heat over 50% increase your radar signature by 25%
ECM just reduces your radar signature by 25% and negates BAP, Narc and Artemis aimed at you.
TAG stays as it is now.

No bubble, no immunity to locks or targeting.

It might sound boring, but that way it would not be a gamebreaker anymore.

[ViridianKnight]

Lesser ECM effect will just produce more whining about "OP" LRM`s !
Thats my 50 cent.