2028 replies to this topic

[ShadowThunder77]

ECM needs to be toned down so people will stop feeling that missles are useless cause the way ECM is now people feel that direct fire weapons are the only way to fight and it might frustrate people that arent used to using direct fire weapons and such

[Tolkien]

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 06:52 AM, said:

So, if ECM didn't effectively block LRMs and SSRMs from functioning, do you still think it would need to be "toned down"? I honestly don't.

That's a big if, but let's play with it.

I believe that streaks needed to be taken down a peg... maybe two whole pegs, as they were a little obnoxious before. part of that was the smoke and shake, part was the poor light mechs getting their lag shields broke.

From a balance perspective I still think ECM should not counter other ECMs, this one is egregious that it made it in.

Additionally ECM does way too much damage to enemy situational awareness - it should not have any effect on mechs that are outside of the 180m bubble.

The only buff I would dare suggest be added to ECM assumes that the small development team could integrate voice chat: ECM should cut off from keyboard and voice chat enemy mechs that are within the 180m bubble.

[Lyrik]

So...? We now came to point where not ECM is overpowered but LRM and SSRM are so that ECM is a necessity counter to them?

NERF Lrm and SSRM and buff Tag/Narc/Beagle to improve ECM?

What a mess :-P

[Not a Number]

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 06:52 AM, said:

[...]

So, if ECM didn't effectively block LRMs and SSRMs from functioning, do you still think it would need to be "toned down"? I honestly don't.

All that needs to change is for ECM to not affect any friends or foes outside its 180M bubble, like in the tabletop. Maybe it could use some further adjustments beyond that, but the sensor range reduction to 200M is the biggest problem with the current implementation.

[Mercules]

Not a Number, on 12 December 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

All that needs to change is for ECM to not affect any friends or foes outside its 180M bubble, like in the tabletop. Maybe it could use some further adjustments beyond that, but the sensor range reduction to 200M is the biggest problem with the current implementation.

Except in TT it does affect foes outside its 180m bubble. The sensor range reduction shouldn't be 200m. In checking out the Double Blind rules it looks like it cuts sensor ranges down by about 4 hexes which is about 1/2 normal sensor range. So instead of cutting us down to 200m(230m with Sensor Range Increase) it should probably cut us down to about 400m.

[flashdrive]

ReaverLord, on 04 December 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

ECM, is pretty powerful atm. Seems a bit overpowered because small groups can surprise large groups from behind. New strategies will need to be created to counter ECM, having another ECM to counter, doesn't really sufice.

Yes new ways to play will have to be implemented however we can't look towards the devs to fix everything, as far as balance goes in my opinion this is the most balanced the game has ever been reason being is that the TAG must and will be used more often, maybe even the NARC in order to punish those who dare leave the sphere of influence since with NARC vision of the target is not required (granted there may be a large group of mechs with ECM so some creativity will still be needed in part of the NARC) however the overuse of ECM drives home the importance of electronic warfare just like how the overuse of LRMs have demonstrated the importance of the use of cover while moving and since there is no way for one to practice one's skill offline we'll all have to learn each stage of the game together. Notice the line up of brawler and somewhat long range trial mechs which I'm sure what the devs are trying to say is. "Here is another dimension of the game you have to learn". This increases role importance of each and every teammate because the equipment installed will have a great influence on the outcome of the battle and there will be real priority targets that must be destroyed in order to secure victory instead of a senseless arms race which the game have much been up until this point.

[StUffz]

DeaconW, on 12 December 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

Truth hurts?

I am actually hoping Tolkien puts it in his SIG so it's in every post of his on this thread...

I saw it more as a "cheese and whine" posting and it started to annoy because it was too repeating...

[ShadowThunder77]

are my ECM related posts being ignored??

[Tolkien]

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Except in TT it does affect foes outside its 180m bubble. The sensor range reduction shouldn't be 200m. In checking out the Double Blind rules it looks like it cuts sensor ranges down by about 4 hexes which is about 1/2 normal sensor range. So instead of cutting us down to 200m(230m with Sensor Range Increase) it should probably cut us down to about 400m.

Does the 230m with sensor range increase actually work? BAP is supposed to give you 25% more sensor range too but is knocked out by ECM. My suspicion is that in the current implementation ECM simply overrides everything else and just crushes your detection range down to 200m - at least that's the way it is worded here: http://www.mwowiki.o...termeasure_(ECM)

[Mercules]

Tolkien, on 12 December 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

I believe that streaks needed to be taken down a peg... maybe two whole pegs, as they were a little obnoxious before. part of that was the smoke and shake, part was the poor light mechs getting their lag shields broke.

No, the main issue with Streaks is that they take very little skill to lock on. Ballistics take skill to lead, Lasers take skill to hold on target, Streaks can lock on with your reticle wildly swinging about and even leaving the mech. They just are not balanced against the other weapon mechanics. That is the issue with Streaks. They need to require more focused aiming for lock and to not need "r targeting".

Tolkien, on 12 December 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

Additionally ECM does way too much damage to enemy situational awareness - it should not have any effect on mechs that are outside of the 180m bubble.

It is supposed to. Read my explanation of Double Blind rules above. It should cut sensors in half and not allow mechs inside it to share their "r targeting". It is supposed to cut battlefield awareness. What should also be added though, is that BAP should allow you to notice areas of ECM on the map. So having a BAP mounted makes a reddish overlay roughly a circle show up within your sensor range(which BAP expands still). So while you wouldn't know exactly what is in the rough circle of "jamming" you could be pretty sure there was an ECM mech at the center. This sticks with TT rules as well as BAP will notice it is being jammed.

[Not a Number]

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

[...]

Except in TT it does affect foes outside its 180m bubble. The sensor range reduction shouldn't be 200m. In checking out the Double Blind rules it looks like it cuts sensor ranges down by about 4 hexes which is about 1/2 normal sensor range. So instead of cutting us down to 200m(230m with Sensor Range Increase) it should probably cut us down to about 400m.

I'll once again quote another lore buff who posted in this thread to show that this is not the case:

Marcus Tanner, on 06 December 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

[...]

In double-blind, ECM makes it harder to acquire sensor blips without LOS, but only so long as the spotting unit is within the jamming radius of the ECM suite. If the spotting unit has LOS, then ECM does nothing. If the spotting unit does not have LOS but is outside jamming range (180m), then ECM does nothing.

Marcus Tanner, on 06 December 2012 - 02:16 PM, said:

[...]

Not a Number, on 06 December 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

[...]

Was I correct in assuming tabletop ECM does not actually make your mech undetectable and does not have any effect outside of its 180M bubble like it currently does in MWO? Because that's my biggest problem with the way PGI implemented it.

The short answer is that you are correct.

It can affect a C3 net if the ECM bubble get between a slave computer and a master computer, even if neither of them is in the ECM bubble.

MWO target data sharing is not C3 because it doesn't help you hit enemies as if they were point blank. The analogy isn't crazy, though. It's much closer to C3i (improved C3) than it is to normal C3 computers because the MWO mechs don't need a "master" unit in order to share data (a C3 net stops working if the master unit is destroyed).

See here and here.

Edited by Not a Number, 12 December 2012 - 07:34 AM.

[Xendojo]

Tolkien, on 11 December 2012 - 11:44 PM, said:

I just wanted to point out the ECM page http://www.mwowiki.o...ermeasure_(ECM)

Note that NARC is not a counter (as you correctly said) but that is because


This in itself is aligned with what the ECM should do, but combined with all of its other over the top buffs it is just too much.

To review - what we have here is a system that is able to have a 1.5 ton 2 slot piece of equipment counter

Artemis
BAP
Tag bonuses (and the whole system inside of 180m)
NARC - a system which takes more space, weighs more, requires real coordination and skill and has ammo.
other ECMs
LRM locks
SRM locks
general targeting info
relegate AMS to almost pointlessness
have no exploding ammo
generate no heat
cost less than a module by a factor of 15

Anyone who tells you that it 'just needs a tiny tweak' to be balanced is sadly probably unable to read

Did you miss the part where i said NARC needed to be adjusted AWAY from TT rules? Just like EVERYTHING else? NARC should be a counter to ECM, that was kind of the point of my post. With my suggested change to NARC(remove the timing mechanic on the beacon, NARC'd mechs can be targeted normally under ECM)a NARC launcher with 1 ton of ammo, could potentially nullify 6 ECM mechs.

Edited by Xendojo, 12 December 2012 - 07:34 AM.

[Tolkien]

flashdrive, on 12 December 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

...as far as balance goes in my opinion this is the most balanced the game has ever been...
... which I'm sure what the devs are trying to say is. "Here is another dimension of the game you have to learn". This increases role importance of each and every teammate because the equipment installed will have a great influence on the outcome of the battle and there will be real priority targets that must be destroyed in order to secure victory instead of a senseless arms race which the game have much been up until this point.

Uhm, ECM is an arms since the cluster of mechs with N+1 ECMs gets all the benefits of ECM while the other side gets none, as well as the benefits of situational awareness, SSRMS, and LRMs. Also, experience is showing us that in coordinated groups where ECM are a must there are now less 'winning' strategies, most common seeming to be that the teams bypass each other, or the football team moves as a single glob and smashes into the other - the side with N+1 ECMs on the field having the advantage. I can't agree with your point of view

StUffz, on 12 December 2012 - 07:22 AM, said:

I saw it more as a "cheese and whine" posting and it started to annoy because it was too repeating...

Oh I completely agree that ECM right now is Cheese, mostly since it is a 1.5 ton 2 slot piece of equipment that can counter

Artemis,
BAP,
Tag bonuses (and the whole TAG system inside of 180m)
NARC - a system which takes more space, weighs more, requires real coordination and skill and has ammo.
other ECMs (terrible terrible idea that forces an arms race)
LRM locks (due to the mistakes of the past as well as the BS quartering of sensor range)
SRM locks (probably a good thing)
general targeting info
relegates AMS to almost pointlessness
has no exploding ammo
generates no heat
and cost less than a module by a factor of 15

As for the whine, I'd like a nice Chablis please I didn't run streak anything before but did use support LRM C1 often since I have really weird framerate craters that make piloting a light mech (now known as a fast ECM carrier) or a brawler (now known as an atlas D with ECM) both bad ideas.

ShadowThunder77, on 12 December 2012 - 07:22 AM, said:

are my ECM related posts being ignored??

No, they're just not controversial enough to get a response I guess - don't want you to feel left out so I'll say 'hi' to you here.

[flashdrive]

Tolkien, on 12 December 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

That's a big if, but let's play with it.

I believe that streaks needed to be taken down a peg... maybe two whole pegs, as they were a little obnoxious before. part of that was the smoke and shake, part was the poor light mechs getting their lag shields broke.

From a balance perspective I still think ECM should not counter other ECMs, this one is egregious that it made it in.

Additionally ECM does way too much damage to enemy situational awareness - it should not have any effect on mechs that are outside of the 180m bubble.

The only buff I would dare suggest be added to ECM assumes that the small development team could integrate voice chat: ECM should cut off from keyboard and voice chat enemy mechs that are within the 180m bubble.

I don't like your ECM buff suggestion that would effectively break the game. What is needed here is some adjustment and creativity which we all have been doing since the day one of the closed beta (except the match making nerf since it's PITA to get a team of 8 together) electronic warfare is a real world tactic which give the user the power to control the flow of information there are ways to effectively change the influence of the battle by prioritizing targets and assigning roles for counter measures should the assigned player fail at his mission then the chances of winning drops down a bit further because of the importance of the the objective. The implementation of ECM is huge since this automatically adds dynamic objectives which are constantly changing the flow of battle instead of a silly all out arms race. Where spamming some easy fire lock on weapon is the order of the day.

[Mercules]

Not a Number, on 12 December 2012 - 07:28 AM, said:

I'll once again quote another lore buff who posted in this thread to show that this is not the case:



See here and here.

Quite simply, he is correct but ONLY in a non-"Double Blind" game because in a non-"Double Blind" game you simply don't have sensor ranges. In the very basic game you put your mechs on the map and so does your opponent. Everyone knows where everyone is all the time and sensors never even get brought up. The only time you have concerns about sensors is when you are dealing with a Double Blind game. In that case there is a PAGE of rules for ECM alone. MWO is a Double Blind game, I don't know where you are at until someone on my side spots you and lights you up with the sensors ("r targeting").

To put it bluntly, your "source" is not dealing with the right set of rules to properly answer your question. AKA: Wrong.

[Tolkien]

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

...It is supposed to. Read my explanation of Double Blind rules above. It should cut sensors in half and not allow mechs inside it to share their "r targeting". It is supposed to cut battlefield awareness. What should also be added though, is that BAP should allow you to notice areas of ECM on the map. So having a BAP mounted makes a reddish overlay roughly a circle show up within your sensor range(which BAP expands still). So while you wouldn't know exactly what is in the rough circle of "jamming" you could be pretty sure there was an ECM mech at the center. This sticks with TT rules as well as BAP will notice it is being jammed.

Not a Number, on 12 December 2012 - 07:28 AM, said:

I'll once again quote another lore buff who posted in this thread to show that this is not the case:

"In double-blind, ECM makes it harder to acquire sensor blips without LOS, but only so long as the spotting unit is within the jamming radius of the ECM suite. If the spotting unit has LOS, then ECM does nothing. If the spotting unit does not have LOS but is outside jamming range (180m), then ECM does nothing."

Oh Snap!

[flashdrive]

ShadowThunder77, on 12 December 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:

ECM needs to be toned down so people will stop feeling that missles are useless cause the way ECM is now people feel that direct fire weapons are the only way to fight and it might frustrate people that arent used to using direct fire weapons and such

Ever heard of adapt and survive that's the name of the game, matter of fact before ECM there were and still are lrm safe routes which brawler compositions can take advantage of. The LRM tactic effectively dies to brawler because once it gets harassed or the distance is closed since that most of the teams damage output gone. it's too early to call for sensible nerf for the ECM (the LRM may effectively get a buff because the ECM now exist or should I say properly works) since there will be more equipment mechs and features added to the game. I think the most important feature missing from the game is internal VOIP which will help both organized teams and pug gamers alike.

[Not a Number]

Xendojo, on 12 December 2012 - 07:32 AM, said:

[...]

Did you miss the part where i said NARC needed to be adjusted AWAY from TT rules? Just like EVERYTHING else? NARC should be a counter to ECM, that was kind of the point of my post. With my suggested change to NARC(remove the timing mechanic on the beacon, NARC'd mechs can be targeted normally under ECM)a NARC launcher with 1 ton of ammo, could potentially nullify 6 ECM mechs.

I've suggested before that if NARC were buffed in a similar fashion ECM would be a great counter to it. This would only make sense if PGI removed the sensor range reduction, but if they did both systems would be closer to tabletop (which is preferable in my opinion). In addition ECM would be more balanced in and of itself and there would be no need to drop with TAG, NARC or another ECM in order to get around its effects.

Mercules, on 12 December 2012 - 07:38 AM, said:

[...]

Quite simply, he is correct but ONLY in a non-"Double Blind" game because in a non-"Double Blind" game you simply don't have sensor ranges. In the very basic game you put your mechs on the map and so does your opponent. Everyone knows where everyone is all the time and sensors never even get brought up. The only time you have concerns about sensors is when you are dealing with a Double Blind game. In that case there is a PAGE of rules for ECM alone. MWO is a Double Blind game, I don't know where you are at until someone on my side spots you and lights you up with the sensors ("r targeting").

To put it bluntly, your "source" is not dealing with the right set of rules to properly answer your question. AKA: Wrong.

Then why is he referring specifically to double-blind rules, according to which ECM still has no effect outside of its 180M bubble (his words)?

[StUffz]

Not a Number, on 12 December 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

I've suggested before that if NARC were buffed in a similar fashion ECM would be a great counter to it. This would only make sense if PGI removed the sensor range reduction, but if they did both systems would be closer to tabletop (which is preferable in my opinion). In addition ECM would be more balanced in and of itself and there would be no need to drop with TAG, NARC or another ECM in order to get around its effects.


Then why is he referring specifically to double-blind rules, according to which ECM still has no effect outside of its 180M bubble (his words)?

The point with NARC is that it is transmitting electronic signals which is in jamming range. Therefore I would not add NARC as a counter to ECM. TAG is different because it uses visual optical targeting. And about streaks. It should work as SRM 2 if it is within ECM range.

[Mercules]

Tolkien, on 12 December 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Oh Snap!

Did you notice that LOS spotting of units still works in MWO? Visual Spotting still works... amazing.

BTW, if it CROSSES that 180 bubble then it is affected by ECM. So Mech A is outside 180m range of ECM mech B and Mech C is also outside the 180m radius of ECM mech B. Can C spote A with Sensors? Yes. Can C spot B with Sensors? No, because it crosses the ECM line.