317 replies to this topic

[Remarius]

Why exactly do you want it to be just like TT? Next you'd be demanding the twitch element is taken out of the game as that's "not in TT!".

TBH any time I have LRM users in game, if they're alert and follow my tagging, we do well. That's sort of my job as a scout ... task in the artillery!

Every time we get back to this argument its basically about entitlement - people hate ECM as it makes them work to counter it as a team. They want to be able to solo everything in the game. People seem to have forgotten how bad the game was when it was totally dominated by LRM's, that or they were LRM users and want it back!

[DocBach]

The mechanics of the table top with electronic warfare could very easily be implemented into a real time simulation game. Did you read the original post? It went over rule sets from several of the rule books, including the advanced rule sets like MaxTech and Tactical Operations, and then a real-time interpretation of those rules.

The problem with Information Warfare isn't that the rules can't translate to real time, its that PGI added ECM in with a whole bunch of other rules with no downsides while the rest of the electronic warfare devices have absolutely no purpose or benefit.

Remarius, on 28 December 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Why exactly do you want it to be just like TT? Next you'd be demanding the twitch element is taken out of the game as that's "not in TT!".

TBH any time I have LRM users in game, if they're alert and follow my tagging, we do well. That's sort of my job as a scout ... task in the artillery!

Every time we get back to this argument its basically about entitlement - people hate ECM as it makes them work to counter it as a team. They want to be able to solo everything in the game. People seem to have forgotten how bad the game was when it was totally dominated by LRM's, that or they were LRM users and want it back!

Did you read the original post at all, or did you see ideas inspired by Battletech rules and think "TT BAD"? As a professed scout you would probably love what the other electronics besides TAG and ECM do before they were ebbed out of the game by PGI's insistence to use ECM to fix LRM criers.

Edited by DocBach, 28 December 2012 - 04:02 PM.

[Lonestar1771]

Remarius, on 28 December 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Every time we get back to this argument its basically about entitlement - people hate ECM as it makes them work to counter it as a team. They want to be able to solo everything in the game. People seem to have forgotten how bad the game was when it was totally dominated by LRM's, that or they were LRM users and want it back!

No, every time anyone makes an argument against something that PGI did, people throw out the word "entitlement" instead of forming actual thoughts and counter points to the original argument. "Entitlement" and "It's BETA" have been the catch-alls since PGI starting letting people play their game.

[DocBach]

Remarius, on 28 December 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Every time we get back to this argument its basically about entitlement - people hate ECM as it makes them work to counter it as a team. They want to be able to solo everything in the game. People seem to have forgotten how bad the game was when it was totally dominated by LRM's, that or they were LRM users and want it back!

I don't care that ECM is in the game, but I would like the information warfare pillar we were promised to be more than which team can effectively counter ECM by stacking more of it.

[squidvt]

DocBach, on 28 December 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

The mechanics of the table top with electronic warfare could very easily be implemented into a real time simulation game. Did you read the original post? It went over rule sets from several of the rule books, including the advanced rule sets like MaxTech and Tactical Operations, and then a real-time interpretation of those rules.

The problem with Information Warfare isn't that the rules can't translate to real time, its that PGI added ECM in with a whole bunch of other rules with no downsides while the rest of the electronic warfare devices have absolutely no purpose or benefit.



Did you read the original post at all, or did you see ideas inspired by Battletech rules and think "TT BAD"? As a professed scout you would probably love what the other electronics besides TAG and ECM do before they were ebbed out of the game by PGI's insistence to use ECM to fix LRM criers.

As a scout, I would much prefer the proposed nurff to ECM and LRM/SRM. It would actually make my life as a scout more meaning full and not as a RTB counter-cap or Harasser. I want to go out find where the other team is at and report that back to my team!

One thing I've been setting lately is the return of LRM boats, not a lot but enough. Tag going though my ECM bubble would drive me nuts.. but hey that's part of the life of a scout. See them, don't get seen, and get the **** out of dodge when the big boys come to play fast!

BAP is useless, NARC is useless, TAG was and in someways still is useless. ECM really needs to have some major down side to it. Right now, ECM owns the battlefield. I want my job as a scout to actually be able to scout, tag targets and own them.

Forget the Xbox360/PS3 cry babies. Get me something that takes more skill to run!

[Trauglodyte]

ECM, in its current form, is way too much. Right now, as I said, you're either at a supreme disadvantage where you don't have it or it becomes a Cold War nuke escalation where its about which team has the most ECM. That isn't what it was about in TT and isn't what it should be about now. And while I concur that, with everything, self entitlement seems to be getting out of control and that the boards just reak of "its not fair because...", ECM isn't really in those boundries.

I don't fault PGI for what they've released because I've always been of the mind set that when you add something into the game, let it all hang out and go for broke. It is a lot easier to pair things back then it is to add them.



PS> Too many Murphy's Law people here - its a trap!!!

Edited by Trauglodyte, 28 December 2012 - 04:23 PM.

[DocBach]

Trauglodyte, on 28 December 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

PS> Too many Murphy's Law people here - its a trap!!!

Well, we did discuss the matter quite a bit since it was implemented, which was sort of a motivator to write my original post.

[StUffz]

DocBach, on 28 December 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

We are both familiar on how ECM works in real life, but for the sake of fun and balance a lot of things in reality are waved in the game.

Unless we are army boys who served under sig command I think nobody really knows the full potential how ECM works in real life. We only know part of what the capabilities of the tools are and the other part is top secrect - military confidential. If you really know how it works, then nobody would complain about 1.5 tons and two crit slots of ECM in BT/MWO.

By the way, has someone considered that mech hits should maybe disturb jamming of ECM?

[DocBach]

StUffz, on 28 December 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

Unless we are army boys who served under sig command I think nobody really knows the full potential how ECM works in real life. We only know part of what the capabilities of the tools are and the other part is top secrect - military confidential. If you really know how it works, then nobody would complain about 1.5 tons and two crit slots of ECM in BT/MWO.

By the way, has someone considered that mech hits should maybe disturb jamming of ECM?

Let me rephrase that - I know that ECM made Iraqis on their cell phones very pissed off when my Caiman drove past them and that a lot of IED's blew up behind me instead of next to me because of it.

[Trauglodyte]

DocBach, on 28 December 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Well, we did discuss the matter quite a bit since it was implemented, which was sort of a motivator to write my original post.

I bet.

I'm on board with what you're saying. Honestly, though, I think that we need to really take it a bit farther to the grass roots. Take everything out of the equation and just look at Sensors in general. They've got an 800m range but only function without a 270 degree radius (ie, the rear 90 degrees is a blind spot). On top of that, current sensors are extremely primitive in the sense that they only pick up that which is in LOS. And finally, the few modules that we have the boost sensors do nothing to fix the prior issues.

- 360 Target Retention: Allows a sensor lock when the target goes behind you; does NOT allow for 360 degree sensors
- Sensor Range: Increases sensor range by +15% (+120m)
- Target Info Gathering: Decreases time it takes to get info on your target by 25%

Now, the 1.5 ton piece of extra sensor equipment, BAP, does nothing for us other than extend sensor range by +25% (+200m). It and the last two modules listed are completely negated by ECM. Plus, even if you take BAP and are not negated by ECM, you still can't use it to properly scout because you've got to put yourself in harms way to see the targets. And, quite frankly, thermal vision does a much better job on every map except for Caldera and it weighs nothing and cannot be blocked.

So, while I agree with everything that you've said, in order to fix ECM as you suggested, you've got to first refit sensors to be in a better spot. Then you've got to do a complete map, engine speed, and weapon range/damage/heat rebalance. THEN, you can get ECM where it needs to be.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 28 December 2012 - 04:41 PM.

[DocBach]

I don't mind that my sensors are LOS dependent and forward facing only - it does help enforce team mates to watch each others back and communicate the location of enemies as well as provides a role for scout 'Mechs. Thermal vision does serve as a problem - admittedly I use it about 90% of the time regardless of weather or light condition. It almost negates scouts completely as I can see exactly where the enemy is moving from my spawn point with thermals most of the time.

[Trauglodyte]

You bring up scouting and I'll touch on that in a second. I don't mind that my base sensors are 270 and LOS only. I mind that BAP is still 270 and LOS only. I mind that the 360 retention is retention only and doesn't fill in the missing 90 degrees. I'd love for BAP to be a passive/active setup where on passive, it would work as it does now. And, while on active, it would do a 360 "ping" at 150% of current sensors (not on top of the already 125% it provides to passive) that would alert you on your map where targets are but wouldn't allow you to target them. If someone had ECM, it would still show the dead area thus alerting you to where the group is (ie, as it is in the rules). The downside would be that everyone would know where you were. Would be a huge asset to scouting.

NOW, since you brought up scouting, I've heard rumblings that the new map being released is going to be a desert with a size that is 50% bigger than current maps. This is all fine and good but current maps are only 2000m long. That means that at my current speed of 146kph, I can go from the back edge to middle in 24.7 seconds. If I've got a target at the dead center of the map, with the PPC I have equipped (540m range), I'm in optimal firing range in 11.3 seconds or extreme firing range in 0s. Assuming that they do boost the map size by 50%, that means edge to middle is 1500m adjusting the figures above to 36.9s, 23.6s, and 10.3s. New map aside, how the Hell am I supposed to scout effectively in a sandbox? As you brought it up, how can I scout when I'm seen by thermal AND able to be ranged by a lot of weapons within seconds? You can't.

[KrimsonKore]

Where does passive sensors fit in to this?

[DocBach]

Agree that Beagle should be 360 degrees of coverage - Beagle is suppose to work as a bubble like ECM, only with 150m range of the active scanning. It'd be great if it allowed you to see behind you as well, since it does take up tonnage and criticals.

I should fix my previous use of scout and replace it with "spotter" - a lot of Electronic warfare in Battletech was geared at making missiles more effective, and they all had a role including ECM.

KrimsonKore, on 28 December 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Where does passive sensors fit in to this?

More or less all sensors are functioning as active, always.

[StUffz]

Trauglodyte, on 28 December 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

NOW, since you brought up scouting, I've heard rumblings that the new map being released is going to be a desert with a size that is 50% bigger than current maps. This is all fine and good but current maps are only 2000m long. That means that at my current speed of 146kph, I can go from the back edge to middle in 24.7 seconds. If I've got a target at the dead center of the map, with the PPC I have equipped (540m range), I'm in optimal firing range in 11.3 seconds or extreme firing range in 0s. Assuming that they do boost the map size by 50%, that means edge to middle is 1500m adjusting the figures above to 36.9s, 23.6s, and 10.3s. New map aside, how the Hell am I supposed to scout effectively in a sandbox? As you brought it up, how can I scout when I'm seen by thermal AND able to be ranged by a lot of weapons within seconds? You can't.

Uhm... Desert = hot? Sorry but using Thermal in hot region is as if you are using NV equipment during dayligt... Let's see how the devs are planning the map but I believe in desert maps Thermal view gets obsolete. What you can do as a scout is trying to use cover and ECM to avoid visual and electronic targeting. Sad the game does not support camo color to shade a bit the appearange but you can't have everything best in detail in all games.

[Trauglodyte]

KrimsonKore, on 28 December 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Where does passive sensors fit in to this?

I brought up passive sensors because the primary purpose of ECM is to block sensors. The relative power of one is massive compared to the other. In order to balance ECM, you've got to have adequate sensors and we really don't. When you can get ranged before you can even see who hit you or where it came from, you're in a bad situation. For that matter, if you can hit the "h" button and get better info then what your on board computer can provide you, you're in an even worse situation.

BAP, in its implementation, is nothing more than a module that boosts passive sensors. So, even with BAP, you're still screwed in the information war. The fulcrum is putting all of the weight on the side of ECM when you're crippled before you even get out of the gate. That's why I brought it up.

[Murphy7]

Remarius, on 28 December 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Why exactly do you want it to be just like TT? Next you'd be demanding the twitch element is taken out of the game as that's not in TT

I am rather tired of the straw man that appears when someone invokes the TT rule set, that necessarily people are arguing for an online TT game.

It is appropriate to look back to TT for ideas for a number of reasons, but the one I am leaning towards is that there has been almost thirty years of balancing and tuning to the ruleset, and it is still very recognizable to people who played in the 80's.

I am not thrilled with the balance of the ECM implementation as it stands, but would not favor the loss of the stealth component we do have in the game now. TT was not good for the stealth aspect of ECM, barring a third party referee for a game; this is an area where the computer game can handle it much better for us.*

I would like to see ECM have its abilities split into more channels, so that not all of them are active simultaneously.

STEALTH - ECM equipped mech does not show up on radar for friend or foe unless it can be directly observed within 200 meters. TAG or NARC would allow target location data to be shared with the team, but passive target sharing would not occur. No other effects, not even the streak disruption.

STREAK - specific disruption of Streak missile acquisition locks. Works for the equipped mech, not a shared effect.

JAMMING - jams communications and targeting data in an area of effect. Enemy mechs must have direct LOS to target mechs in the area, but can do LRMs attacks with a significantly longer time to resolve the lock. Artemis, NARC effects are cancelled out, and enemy mechs cannot passively share target data. Streak may or may not be affected, lean towards not.

DISRUPT - disrupts a single enemy mech's ECM. Doesn't matter what it is set to, just fights the other ECM.


Active mode, as it is known now, does the work of the first three modes I describe, which is both too much and too easy. I don't mind Streak invulnerability, AMS mostly doesn't cover them so ECM handling that is fine by me. People will need to choose modes to work in, and that choice makes it a bit more of an active, tactical decision than on or off.


* A prime example of this was the online collectible card game "Chron-X", it had stealth and detection mechanics that could only work in the computer environment, and would not translate to TT play.

Edited by Murphy7, 28 December 2012 - 05:41 PM.

[KrimsonKore]

I would like a passive sensor mode that gave some measure of stealth with beagle active probe being able to negate any benefits from passive sensors. Or something like that. In the mean time I am going to find a way to make machine gun boats OP.

[DocBach]

To murphy- the major problem I have with guardian doing all the abovw is that it instantly obsoletes equipment like angel ecm or stealth armor before they even come out.

[Soulforge]

DocBach, on 28 December 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

We were promised a deep Information Warfare pillar where we'd have several different pieces of equipment that all provided an edge over our opponents and the other equipment, working against each other. What we got was ECM, ECM, and ECM, partially because of the fact that it was implemented with way more features then it ever had in any iteration of Battletech or MechWarrior, partially because implementation of other pieces of Information Warfare is so lackluster; ECM needs to be toned down and other components like Beagle and Narc need to be toned up.

ECM should not provide stealth 'Mech ability to an entire team
(Total Warfare, pg 134): "The ECM does not affect other scanning or targeting devices such as TAG and targeting computers"

ECM should not make missile locks impossible:
(Total Warfare, pg 134): "ECM blocks the effects of Artemis IV fire control systems. Artemis-equipped launchers may still be fired as normal missiles through ECM." and "Missiles equipped to home in on an attached Narc pod lose the Cluster Hits Table bonus for that system if the pods themselves lie within the bubble. The Narc launcher itself is not affected by ECM."

The previous rules state that missile attacks occur as normal, just not augmented with guidance from their advanced systems. Under no rulesets does it say that standard Guardian ECM negates the effect of Streak missile systems.

In disrupt mode ECM should have the following abilities:
-Disrupt Beagle's ability to detect shut down 'Mechs (Total Warfare, pg 134)
"Active probes cannot penetrate the ECM's area of effect. The probing unit would notice it is being jammed, however"

-Negate the tight groupings of Artemis-enhanced missiles (Total Warfare, pg 134)
"ECM blocks the effects of Artemis IV fire control systems. Artemis-equipped launchers may be fired as normal missiles through the ECM, but they lose the Cluster Hits Table Bonus"


-Negate the tight groupings of Narc-enhanced missiles, as well as prevent indirect fire on a Narc'd 'Mech without LOS (more on this later)
(Total Warfare, pg 134): "Missiles equipped to home in on an attached Narc pod lose the Cluster Hits Table bonus for that system if the pods themselves lie within the bubble. The Narc launcher itself is not affected by ECM."

-Prevent spotters in the ECM bubble, or on the other side of, with line of sight passing through a bubble from transmitting target data to team mates outside the bubble
(Total Warfare, Pg 134) "ECM has the effect of cutting off any C3 equipped unit from its network." Even though we don't officially have C3 installed on our 'Mechs, the way that our units communicate target data is what the C3 network does effectively. Being inside the ECM bubble should disrupt your ability to send data back to the rest of your team.

-Make target ID slower to acquire, but not block locks or targeting completely
(Maximum Tech, pg 54) "Though ECM systems can prevent a sensor probe from identifying a unit, they produce powerful distinctive electronic signatures." So sensors know something is out there, it just can't identify it or provide target information like the paper doll.

-Generate ghost targets in a seperate mode from disrupt/counter - bring up the command map with B in ghost target mode and plot a false radar signal that shows up like a target shrouded by ECM - target-able by R, but no target data available
(Tactical Operations, pg 100): "The ECM suite can be tuned to generate "ghost targets" that may affect the ability of enemy units to properly target friendly units. The ECM loses its normal function when used this way."

-Run counter ECM mode
(Tactical Operations, pg 99): "An ECM suite can be tuned to act as electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) in order to negate enemy ECM systems."


Beagle should:

-Detect shutdown 'Mechs outside of ECM bubbles
(Total Warfare, pg 129): "An active probe can detect any hidden 'Mech if the concealed unit lies within the probe's range."

-Negate ECM's target acquisition slowdown while outside the bubble

-Identify ECM Ghost targets as being false targets
-Identify users the boundaries of the ECM bubble
(Total Warfare, pg 134)
"Active probes cannot penetrate the ECM's area of effect. The probing unit would notice it is being jammed, however"

The Narc beacon was rendered completely worthless when PGI failed to include its most important perk (Total Warfare, pg 139) which states:

"Once a Narc pod is attached to a target, all Narc-equipped missiles may be fired indirectly at a target without a spotter"

By this writing, we should be able to maintain locks on targets affected by Narc even if they go behind terrain and cut off line of sight, thus Narc should:

-Tighten LRM/SRM grouping on targets in line of sight
-Allow targets marked by Narc to remain targeted even when LOS is lost so LRM attacks can continue indirectly without spotters
-Last for either an extended duration than current or until the location the Narc hit is destroyed

A couple simple changes would make all of the advanced EW equipment viable, while remaining faithful to the source material without being game breaking or overpowering. ECM would still be useful to take, especially for protection against LRM spotters, as it would prevent them from sending target data to their LRM boats, protect you from Narc which would actually be a useful item if it kept enemies lit up on radar for indirect fire without a spotter like the rules say it does, and give Beagle expanded roles like countering ECM outside of the bubble (inspired by detection rules from MaxTech and Tactical Operations), and serving as a warning system that you are inside the bubble propper, which would be useful for spotters trying to Narc targets or transmit data.

The above changes would make information warfare have counters to each other, beyond just ECM, ECM, ECM. It would make it everything a useful addition to a team, but not an absolute necessity or gamebreaker.

Absolutely agree! This should be implemented to make the game all the more "Smart" and "Fun" to play, Allowing Intelligence and Skill to show.