317 replies to this topic

[Kai Lae]

Falso, on 03 January 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

Good Idea.

I always like variety, and prefer that we get new tools to combat something rather than nerfing it.

Lets beef up BAP and NARC instead of nerfing ECM!


Randomizing the location that streaks hit is also a good idea.

Streak cats were never really that big of a deal, IMO and yes ECM has taken some of their ability away, but smart teams are still using ECCM to make their streaks work.

What IMO would make the most sense, and what others in the thread have suggested is going more TT functionality on these items. People sometimes decry TT fanbois, but simply put, TT has a lot more playtesting in it and therefore less potential balance issues when converted over. Sure BAP and NARC need boosting - basically to become more TT like. But the ECM definately can and should be looked at again. It needs nerfing and boosting I think, in that it does things it should not right now (prevents missile locks) but does not do things it should (false target mode). Sure it can be countered, but as it is now, it's overpowered and this can be seen by the amount typically employed in matches. If it was bad no one would use it, if it was average/good you'd see it about as much as anything else. But if it's OP you see it everywhere, which is what you commonly get now (it's not unusual to see 1/2 the mechs in a match mount it, isn't it?).

[Koniving]

It's up. Late but up.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1695120

[Koniving]

Command Console

From what I understand the command console is supposed to allow an extra player to ride in the mech using it, whose only role would be to use the map and command forces. Not quite sure how that will work, however. If I'm riding shotgun then I want a 3-D interface and overlay, top down angle, and enemies appearing and disappearing when sensor contact is lost.

Wouldn't mind being able to look away over the pilot's shoulder, too. But doubt we'll have that.

C3

I can see how to use C-3 in this. There are a few space fighting games that come to mind. Wing Commander to name one.

The game had a target lead indicator which gave you an idea of where you had to fire your weapon to score a hit. For example let's say you target a Raven about 800 meters out. He is running | that way from you. C3 puts a target space x-distance ahead of that Raven which is calculating where the enemy will be by the time your AC-5 will reach that spot. You aim for that little targeting knitch, and BAM! He takes it in the side torso.

I could see it also allowing us to choose specifically what non-cockpit body part we want our missiles to go for.

Possibly "visual" overlays (WALL HACKS! O_O!) of moving mechs that you can see through walls so long as someone has spotted them, giving you direction, which leg is forward, where he's aiming, etc. Trouble is that would create an exploit in the game.

But that's without knowing much about it.

|

v

Pay more attention to Dirus Nigh's explanation of C3.

Edited by Koniving, 03 January 2013 - 07:09 PM.

[Dirus Nigh]

DocBach, on 03 January 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

How could they implement C3 to where it would be useful for someone to take 5 tons of Master Computer to set up a network? It'd be really hard to negate range penalties for things like long range direct fire weapons, as in this game they're completely reliant on skill.

I'm sure you know the rules for table top, I am just going over them to explain my thinking. Showing my work if you will.

When PGI uses the table top they use both the hard rules and the spirit or in universe description of how the item works. Following that thinking this is part of how I think C3 would, or should work.

A lone mech's sensors will pick up any contact with in range and LOS. The HUD designates these contacts with an open triangle. The mech pilot then actively targets one of the contacts. The actively targeted contact is relayed to the rest of the lance. This is how PGI is adapting the hidden rules and spotting for indirect fire.

C3 rules for table top state that the C3 master and slave units networks the sensor and fire control computers of a company. For the table top this translated into a firing unit using the range modifiers of the closest mech with LOS to the intended target in the network. All other factores are ignored. Speed of lancemate, or any visual modifiers (wood hex or light smoke) do not apply. The facing the lancemate does not matter. ECM of not withstanding.

I think C3 should work at the very least in this manner. A C3 network would not only relay the actively targeted contact, but all contacts picked up by the mechs sensors. This data will then be sent to all lancemates in the network. when that lone scout that runs ahead and finds half the enemy team it does not have to actively target a mech for the rest of its team to lock onto it. They could actively target any mech that lone scout sees, with all target data being registered. A delay in target data transmitting would be understandable.

If the devs wanted to take it farther they could tinker with how a C3 networked mechs works with an active target. If that lone scout is actively targeting a mech then it could shorten the lock on times for missiles. Not by much maybe half a second. This bonus could stack with TAG, and artemis. If the artemis system of the firing mech has LOS of course.

Adapting the C3 network into MWO, a simulator, should focus on what the system does. Relaying all passive and active target and sensor data through out the whole network.

This is another reason why PGI messed up on ECM. The 25% reduction in detection range is really short sighted. That will completely upset a C3 network, making it useless. That forward scout will have to be in between the range reduction and the ECM bubble itself in order to transmit data. Keep in mind that if an ECM bubble can cut off a mech from the network just by being in between the mech and the rest of the lance. Let alone being inside the bubble.

Edited by Dirus Nigh, 03 January 2013 - 07:03 PM.

[Zakie Chan]

Bump to get this above the drivel.

Very much agree, these changes would add much needed depth to mwo. Would also improve the 8man scene.

[Erik Hollister]

Orzorn, on 28 December 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Like I said, these changes don't imply that SSRMs don't need something done to them. They're too powerful as it is, but having that power concentrated along side the most powerful equipment in the game right now just makes it lopsided as all hell. ECM + Streak lag shielding Ravens are too much for me to take. It hurts my soul to fight them.

The ONLY reason SSRMs are OP right now is because of lagshield and no knockdowns. If a player could depend on the server registering the hits that they actually perform on their computer, many would opt for standard srms with artemis to maximize damage. Especially if the biggest lagshield beneficiaries, the lights, ran into stuff and fell to the ground, making them easy targets.

Lets not treat the symptoms, lets cure the disease that causes them. Fix the netcode. Go client side control if you can't get rid of the lagshield on the server. Reinstate knockdowns.

[F lan Ker]

S!

Interesting discussion Seems agreement is that this 1.5t module has no drawbacks but only benefits. I would suggest one drawback based on my own RL experience on ECM and RWR equiment installed on aircraft: HEAT! Whenever we do system tests on AN/ALQ aka jammer, the plane it is mounted on requires more than usual amount of cooling as the jammer equipment does run hot, even it is only running tests! And it can do so while doing it's real job at full output etc.

So, give the ECM added heat to the Mech to compensate it's power. How substantial is hard to say, but it could affect the cool down rate and heat efficiency of the Mech it is installed on thus requiring more skill to be used in conjuntion with weapon systems. Basically a Mech with ECM fitted would heat up faster and have less heat efficiency as the ECM suite would be taxing the system more than without it.

Another thing was mentioned, passive sensors indicating incoming ECM. Very much like the RWR equipment on aircraft. Antennas receive signals processed by the RWR system and it is put out on an azimuth display in the cockpit. It indicates rough direction of the signal source but not the distance. Could this be used in MWO as well? Feels strange we have quite a sophisticated ECM but no RWR/similar at all.

One suggestion is also that when PPC gets the EMP effect the ECM would be disabled momentarily on the Mech being hit by PPC. Would make use of cover more important as direct fire is your enemy even now, eyes and thermal can see you. The later coming stealth things are another matter.

Just some thoughts..

Edited by F lan Ker, 03 January 2013 - 08:11 PM.

[HiplyRustic]

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?

Well no, Army boys have some sigint...but the AF and Navy boys have more, especially in the EW/ECM department.

More to the point, if we want to talk about ECM from the perspective of real life we'll start by throwing out the idea that it can make the vehicle/plane/ship it's mounted in invisible to radar or disable, forever, a missile targeting system's ability to get a lock. Doesn't happen. If it did happen then every dang warplane in the arsenal would be radar invisible, would never be shot down by non-line of sight weaponry and there would be no need for special composites or builds designed to scatter radar.

Edited by HiplyRustic, 03 January 2013 - 09:28 PM.

[Koniving]

HiplyRustic, on 03 January 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

More to the point, if we want to talk about ECM from the perspective of real life we'll start by throwing out the idea that it can make the vehicle/plane/ship it's mounted in invisible to radar or disable, forever, a missile targeting system's ability to get a lock. Doesn't happen. If it did happen then every dang warplane in the arsenal would be radar invisible, would never be shot down by non-line of sight weaponry and there would be no need for special composites or builds designed to scatter radar.

Been said. But yeah, in agreement. ECM whether real or in the table top rule book does not and should not make you invisible to radar and completely negate missile locks.

Edited by Koniving, 04 January 2013 - 10:18 AM.

[DocBach]

Dirus Nigh, on 03 January 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

A C3 network would not only relay the actively targeted contact, but all contacts picked up by the mechs sensors. This data will then be sent to all lancemates in the network. when that lone scout that runs ahead and finds half the enemy team it does not have to actively target a mech for the rest of its team to lock onto it. They could actively target any mech that lone scout sees, with all target data being registered. A delay in target data transmitting would be understandable.

So it'd be the death to you having to tell people "Press R to target, dude." Would be really cool if we got a lobby in which we could set up the individual networks of slaves to Masters and Masters tied to other lances....

[DocBach]

(Technical Readout: 3050 Revised, pg 196)
"The Guardian emits a broad-band signal that interferes with all sonar, radar, UV, IR, and magscan sensors, thus protecting all units in a radius of up to 180 meters by projecting a "cloak" to its enemies. Enemy long-range sensors can find vehicles and 'Mechs within the curtain, but the Guardian obscures the reading and prevents identification. By the time the enemy enters visual range, sensors can sometimes override the jamming, but by this time most pilots rely on their own eyes to track the opposition."

This right here is great - it might not be official rules, but it is an official description of the equipment, which states that the ECM cloak doesn't make enemies disappear off radar like it does in MWO very clearly.

[Kai Lae]

DocBach, on 03 January 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

(Technical Readout: 3050 Revised, pg 196)
"The Guardian emits a broad-band signal that interferes with all sonar, radar, UV, IR, and magscan sensors, thus protecting all units in a radius of up to 180 meters by projecting a "cloak" to its enemies. Enemy long-range sensors can find vehicles and 'Mechs within the curtain, but the Guardian obscures the reading and prevents identification. By the time the enemy enters visual range, sensors can sometimes override the jamming, but by this time most pilots rely on their own eyes to track the opposition."

This right here is great - it might not be official rules, but it is an official description of the equipment, which states that the ECM cloak doesn't make enemies disappear off radar like it does in MWO very clearly.

Perhaps what it should do is not prevent lock ons in jamming mode, but it should prevent showing any details about the enemy mech. So no loadout information for example.

[shotokan5]

I don't understand why a person can unload 900 LRM 20 and end up with 10 points. All are locked on.

[StUffz]

DocBach, on 03 January 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

(Technical Readout: 3050 Revised, pg 196)
"The Guardian emits a broad-band signal that interferes with all sonar, radar, UV, IR, and magscan sensors, thus protecting all units in a radius of up to 180 meters by projecting a "cloak" to its enemies. Enemy long-range sensors can find vehicles and 'Mechs within the curtain, but the Guardian obscures the reading and prevents identification. By the time the enemy enters visual range, sensors can sometimes override the jamming, but by this time most pilots rely on their own eyes to track the opposition."

This right here is great - it might not be official rules, but it is an official description of the equipment, which states that the ECM cloak doesn't make enemies disappear off radar like it does in MWO very clearly.

Read the last sentence: "By the time the enemy enters visual range, sensors can sometimes override the jamming, but by this time most pilots rely on their own eyes to track the opposition."

The sentence includes "sometimes" and not "always". My opinion here is with the patch change that ECM jam only interferes with nearest mech this has been modified to apply to the description "sometimes".

[KuruptU4Fun]

Ok, just for a minute let's set aside what needs to be fixed with netcode; Artemis; ECM; TAG and NARC so that C3 would even be a possibility. To make it level with ECM, C3 sensors would have to have the same restriction to available mechs. Which to date are:

Master:
Atlas

Slave:
Atlas
Blackjack
Catapult
Centurion
Hunchback
Jenner
Raven
Spider
Trebuchet

Based on that info we'd need a couple more Master capable mechs for this to fully work. But at least for now it could be implemented and tested to get the kinks worked out.

BTW, in doing my research I am aware that the Master Variant Atlas (-CM) and Slave Variant (-C) aren't variants we can choose. So please let's not argue on which ones are canon and should be created for us to play...

Edited by KuruptU4Fun, 04 January 2013 - 08:43 AM.

[DocBach]

Kai Lae, on 04 January 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Perhaps what it should do is not prevent lock ons in jamming mode, but it should prevent showing any details about the enemy mech. So no loadout information for example.

Exactly my thoughts - not even show a chassis information, so without direct eyes on you don't even know what you are lobbing missiles at. It'd make it hard to decide what needs fire coordinated against, but not make it impossible for a third of the weapons in the game to hit it.

Edited by DocBach, 04 January 2013 - 09:02 AM.

[KuruptU4Fun]

DocBach, on 04 January 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:

Exactly my thoughts - not even show a chassis information, so without direct eyes on you don't even know what you are lobbing missiles at. It'd make it hard to decide what needs fire coordinated against, but not make it impossible for a third of the weapons in the game to hit it.

No chassis seems a bit much, but not seeing hitboxes would be.

[DocBach]

It says it obscures the reading, which would be the hitbox, and prevents identification - not saying this should be permanent as the rules in Tactical Operations outline that identifying ECM shrouded 'Mechs is based on a skill roll which would easily be handled in MWO as a time penalty for your sensors to identify a target. Its still light years better than current ECM which doesn't allow you to even lock, nevermind identify a target.

Not knowing what you are shooting at means you need to use another crucial part of information warfare, your eyes.

[KuruptU4Fun]

DocBach, on 04 January 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

It says it obscures the reading, which would be the hitbox, and prevents identification - not saying this should be permanent as the rules in Tactical Operations outline that identifying ECM shrouded 'Mechs is based on a skill roll which would easily be handled in MWO as a time penalty for your sensors to identify a target. Its still light years better than current ECM which doesn't allow you to even lock, nevermind identify a target.

Not knowing what you are shooting at means you need to use another crucial part of information warfare, your eyes.

But if people DID that it would be AWE.... wait for it...... SOME!!!!!!

[Svenz]

OH I AGREE .....little nerf on ECM and BAC,TAG and NARC need reworking.....losing because you were out ECM'd..especially if there a lot missile mechs....