16 replies to this topic

[Zaptruder]

OK, let's have a thread of suggestions about how we can reduce the effectiveness of ECM, while also keeping in mind its role in reducing the overuse of missiles.

Comment on people's suggestions, or put your own in.


1. PPC EM effect extends to ECM as well. Been hit by an PPC blast should stuff with your HUD, but also shut down ECM for a short period of time (nominally, 5 seconds). Buffs PPC, allows for skill based ECM countering.

2. BAP should soft counter ECM. Double targeting range from 250m to 500m for BAP equipped mechs, and also allow for LRM/streak lock on in the bubble, but increase lock on time by 2 to 3 fold. All mechs can mount BAP. While not all mechs will mount BAP, this should help to rebalance the prevalence of ECM mechs; providing a two fold decrease to ECM power (less usage, and BAP counter).

3. Split ECM functions into seperate modules. Popular proposal is null signature system (i.e. reduce targeting range to 250m), and countermeasure for electronic enhancement equipment. So if you want targeting range reduction to 250, and you want to block streak usage, you're going to have to mount two pieces of equipment.

4. Streak/LRM relock-on mechanic: A good idea proposed in the "Some Proposed Streak And Ecm Changes" thread. Basically, every time you launch missles, you have to reacquire target lock on. This effects ECM primarily because 3 of 5 ECM mechs can carry multiple streak launchers. Reduces the rate of their DPS with this change, provides smaller mechs with the chance for evading ECM/Streak light combat.

5. Streak deadfire: Streak/ECM combo is double potent because it locks out other streak mechs from even firing, rendering the streaks on the ECM mechs triply potent. Allow deadfire of SSRMs when in ECM bubble. Or even just in general, if players can't wait for lock on.

6. Hand balance specific ECM mechs - while the Spider's speed cap is an arbitrary limitation predicated on the current state of the netcode, it does open a method and a way of balancing the power of the streak/ECM lights (commando 2D/Raven 3L) - cap their speeds/engine sizes to a more reasonable 115km/h, giving players a much better chance of hitting them.


The idea of balancing is to have ECM mechs provide a valuable role in the group based tactical warfare, without providing the individual mechs that carry ECM with an overwhelming advantage relative to other mechs.

ECM should continue to provide teams with it a good edge; but the absence of it shouldn't doom a team that would otherwise have won.

[ClaymoreReIIik]

I would balance the electronic warfare equipment in the following manner:

Mechs should have electronic warfare (short: ewar) slots. Every mech should have at least 1 ewar slot. Lights could per definition have 2 ewar slots with all other mechs having 1. Special variants (Com 2D, Raven 3L, Cic 3M, D-DC and the current ECM-Spider) should have 1 more ewar slot then the other variants of the chassis.

ECM:
ECM takes up 1 ewar slot.
ECM should have 2 modes of operation.
1 would be cloak. Cloak creates a 180 meter bubble around the ECM mech where people can target you and relay your position, but they will not gather any target information at all. No percentage, no distance, no location on minimap. Just a red dot with a direction for all the team to see. Missile lock on times on cloaked targets are at 300% (meaning REALLY slow but possible locks). Tag from outside the bubble will give back distance to target and Damage indicators. BAP from outside the bubble will reduce the lock-on-timer penalty to 200%. NARC beacons inside an ECM-cloak-bubble should keep the target distance and information visible for the duration and drop the lock-on penalty to 200%.
2 will be disrupt. Disrupt has only one effect. If the hardlocked target is under 500 meter away from you and your ECM is on disrupt, (ONLY!!!!) your hard-locked target can not get any missile locks. (No LRM, No Streaks.)

BAP:
BAP takes up 1 ewar slot.
BAP should have 2 modes of operation:
Mode 1 will be "Improve" that has the same effects as BAP has now.
Mode 2 will be "counter" that will counter the effects of the ECM of (ONLY) your hard-locked target if the hard-locked target is under 500m distance from you.

TAG:
TAG should stay as it is right now, with the exception that it takes up an EWar-Slot instead of an energy slot. (Laser that grants lock-on boni to Missiles instead of doing damage.) Lock-on time duration should be shortened to 50%

NARC:
NARC should take up 1 ewar slot.
NARC should give a 35 second beacon signal. If the "victim" is not under ECM cloak missiles should lock onto it without having the reticle over the target and lock-on-duration should be shortened to 30%. (Hard lock would be enough to get missile lock.) NARC within an ECM bubble should behave as described under ECM.


That way you would get some "rock,paper,scissors" interaction between the electronic warfare equipments that can be pimped/decreased by the uber expensive modules.

None of the pieces would be unstoppable in its own right and if a Light would want to do all the things it would have to sacrifice 7 tons and 5 crit slots to bring ECM, BAP, TAG (even more if he wants NARC as well).

Each item would have its own distinct advantage it brings to the table and I think that setup would further the diversity of EW-equipments used.

Additionally I think in this setup all mechs could have the ability to field all ewar modules, as long as they have the slots for it. Using more then 1 ECM to have one operating in each mode would be a possible option too.

Edited by ClaymoreReIIik, 17 January 2013 - 05:12 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Proposal 1 - Agree.

Proposal 2 - Disagree, because ECM is specifically supposed to largely negate the advantages of BAP (as well as disrupt the functioning of standard-issue 'Mech Sensors) when said BAP (as well as the aforementioned standard-issue 'Mech Sensors) is directed against anything within the ECM field or on the opposite side of an ECM field (such that the sensor in question would need to go through the field to get to the target).
Read more here.

Proposal 3 - Disagree, because actually looking into the BT gameplay rules that the Devs are using as a base shows that ECM is (or can be reasonably inferred to be) actually capable of everything that it does in MWO.
Read more here and here.

Proposal 4 - Partially Disagree, because this is/should-be a function of the missile launchers themselves that is wholly independent of the presence (or lack thereof) of ECM (with the BT gameplay rules that the Devs are using as a base specifically stating that having to re-lock after every salvo is canonically the case for Streak systems).

Proposal 5 - Disagree, because this is a situation that only occurs with regard to the Angel ECM Suite, while MWO's ECM is based on the Guardian ECM Suite (which very specifically does not produce the proposed effect).
Read more here.

Proposal 6 - Partially Disagree; as a matter of personal preference, I would like to see adjustments to the game's netcode be the preferred solution to the "speed vs targeting issue", while keeping the engine restrictions in place to aid in role preservation (especially with regard to Light and Medium 'Mechs, which respectively tend to be designed for scout/harasser and vanguard/striker roles).

[Hoshi Toranaga]

You cannot balance something totally gamebreaking by boosting other systems. Many game developers already had to learn that lesson and still everyone tries this....

You have to completely remove the current implementation and make something more sensible and according to canon and TT rules (since everything else is balanced around that).

[Hoshi Toranaga]

A: There are a lot of personal opinions about how ECM should work. ECM is currently under review and will undergo minor tweaks along with additions to help counter/disrupt the ECM effects. We are prepping a Command Chair post with details soon.

"minor tweaks" to something that is totally unbalanced.... says it all. Somehow I think devs play a different game or are all using laser boats.

This answer has me worried again... well I will finish to level up my Atlases and we will see.
I set my date for end of Feb.

[Alphonz]

Similar thread here.

[Syllogy]

Terry Ward, on 17 January 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

You cannot balance something totally gamebreaking by boosting other systems. Many game developers already had to learn that lesson and still everyone tries this....

You have to completely remove the current implementation and make something more sensible and according to canon and TT rules (since everything else is balanced around that).

Canon and TT don't translate to a video game.

[Theobald Hauser]

Alphonz, on 23 January 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

Similar thread here.

Lol. Alphonz and his suggestions-hijacking habits striking again.
This thread is a week older man.

Terry Ward, on 17 January 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

You cannot balance something totally gamebreaking by boosting other systems. Many game developers already had to learn that lesson and still everyone tries this....

You have to completely remove the current implementation and make something more sensible and according to canon and TT rules (since everything else is balanced around that).

You're nearly right, I think. There are some other methods than nerfing-slash-dumbing-down, thus said, from a gamedesign perspective, like averaging the new gameplay element so that there isn't a high cliff between equipped and non-equipped players. Even more if the gameplay element has his own counter in itself.
My point here -> http://mwomercs.com/...e-design-ideas/

Edited by Amarius, 23 January 2013 - 09:08 AM.

[Alphonz]

Sorry, looking at the list of recently updated threads throws me off

there should be an entire section for ECM related threads so we know what has been come up with before.

Edited by Alphonz, 23 January 2013 - 09:18 AM.

[Syllogy]

The devs are keeping a close eye on tweaks, changes, and counters.

Bryan Ekman, on 22 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:


Q: [insert question about ECM]
A: There are a lot of personal opinions about how ECM should work. ECM is currently under review and will undergo minor tweaks along with additions to help counter/disrupt the ECM effects. We are prepping a Command Chair post with details soon.

Link: http://mwomercs.com/...evs-30-answers/

[Theobald Hauser]

Alphonz, on 23 January 2013 - 09:15 AM, said:

Sorry, looking at the list of recently updated threads throws me off

there should be an entire section for ECM related threads so we know what has been come up with before.

You mean, you look at recently updated threads, and you purposedly make new ones with exactly the same content eight hours later, and it's not a mistake ?

Nice work trying to make ECM threads less drowning in their own numbers by creating a new one. That's brilliant design !

[Hoshi Toranaga]

Syllogy, on 23 January 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Canon and TT don't translate to a video game.

Then why the hell is everything else in this game balanced towards TT and canon?
Actually it does translate, you need a mathematical baseline to balance something. TT is well established mathematically and balanced. Now shoot something in the mix, which is totally out of proportion (current Angel ECM/Nullfied implementation) and you got something that is WAY off.
But according to the devs they are not going to listen to this thread anyways, as I have too high postcount, play the freakin game too much because I love BT even though ECM depresses me and am whining ... as I am fed up with the devs excuses by ruining this awesome game with a single implementation of crap ECM.

Sorry but that had to come out.

[Hoshi Toranaga]

Well all the laser boaters and ECM team runners are going to post that it is fine.

However I do not know about player statistics, as they are removed from the client. But I see that our unit is bleeding members now and due to their resign posts, most of them are not going to join elsewhere but stepping away from the game completely.
In many resignation letters you find ECM and that the game got boring, due to lack of tactics that were involved before. So most people think that the current brawlfest is actually easy mode and not what we had before, where you had to actively dodge LRMs, use cover and move more carefully.
Of course to people that prefer FPS games and close range brawling, this will be appealing. But for those people we also have resignations, as they prefer FPS shooter games like Hawken or PS 2.

So I am wondering if it is our unit, or if the game in general is losing players over it? It may well be that it is our unit, as communities attract likeminded people and so most of us are ECM haters...

But since this is still a beta (as PGI tells us over and over) why not remove ECM for a single week and look how it works out. If the removal spawn totally cool server and user numbers and more mechs used in 8s, then please redesign ECM. If I am proven wrong then stick with it and I will gladly go and play something else.

[Syllogy]

Terry Ward, on 24 January 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Then why the hell is everything else in this game balanced towards TT and canon?
Actually it does translate, you need a mathematical baseline to balance something. TT is well established mathematically and balanced. Now shoot something in the mix, which is totally out of proportion (current Angel ECM/Nullfied implementation) and you got something that is WAY off.
But according to the devs they are not going to listen to this thread anyways, as I have too high postcount, play the freakin game too much because I love BT even though ECM depresses me and am whining ... as I am fed up with the devs excuses by ruining this awesome game with a single implementation of crap ECM.

Sorry but that had to come out.

OK, so we'll just go ahead and make a 10 second cooldown standard for all weapons. That'll work out well, right?

[Hoshi Toranaga]

No it wont.
I see that you are a mathematics genius. We are talking math not game mechanics.
So if weapon a has DPS X with HPS Y you balance that against weapon b with DPS and heat etc.
Since the base mathematics is from TT, sans the mechanics (because we also do not move on squares and can turn any way we want too genius) the basic mathematics for all other things also persist.
The first thing that went wrong was mech speeds as you could put any engine in any mech before, they balanced it by limiting engine size on chassis to re-establish the TT and canon ruleset for that mech and it actually balanced out greatly... if they fix the netcode and lagshielding it will be nearly perfect.
Same with many other things. Of course some formulas went out of proportion (PPC heat for example) but they are re-balancing it to make way for the "non 10s" firing. Good thing as it is a direct balancing approach.

Now introduce something that has totally different math involved like our current AngelECM/Nullfield thing. Range tables, missile fire dps, movement tables etc. all break down. Trying to balance it by counters will not work, because the base it is working on is total bogus.

ECM is an I win button? No it is not. But is cheapens the game.
Ducking LRMs is a major thing and always was in Batteltech. It is not a thinking mans shooter, because you run into direct fire range and blast away. The only thing you can do is bring enough ECM and a team that can outflank your enemy.
Can I still win 8 mans consistently? Yes I can, but I have to bring 3-4 D-DC and 2-4 3Ls plus some high hitting direct fire mechs. Apart from some silly things you can do like our 4 3L + 2 Jenners + 1 Missile Stalker thing we did and made an Assault heavy 8 man look really bad... but again it was ECM advantage plus tag on our side that won the game, not skill or thinking.
Uninterrupted LRMs will never ruin your day, if you can move your mech and use actual tactics (then it would be a thinking game, because you would have to think which path to take on each map)

The devs made a mistake with ECM and how it is implemented and they are not man enough to admit it.

Edited by Terry Ward, 30 January 2013 - 01:46 AM.

[Syllogy]

Terry Ward, on 30 January 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

ECM is an I win button? No it is not. But is cheapens the game.

Ducking LRMs is a major thing and always was in Batteltech. It is not a thinking mans shooter, because you run into direct fire range and blast away.

The only thing you can do is bring enough ECM and a team that can outflank your enemy.

Can I still win 8 mans consistently? Yes I can, but I have to bring 3-4 D-DC and 2-4 3Ls plus some high hitting direct fire mechs.

Apart from some silly things you can do like our 4 3L + 2 Jenners + 1 Missile Stalker thing we did and made an Assault heavy 8 man look really bad... but again it was ECM advantage plus tag on our side that won the game, not skill or thinking.

Uninterrupted LRMs will never ruin your day, if you can move your mech and use actual tactics (then it would be a thinking game, because you would have to think which path to take on each map)

The devs made a mistake with ECM and how it is implemented and they are not man enough to admit it.

Sorry, but I had to break up your Wall-O-Text.

First, please explain how ECM cheapens the game?

Second, How do you explain that the average number of ECM per 8 man team is 3-4, and steadily declining?

Third, you contradict your own arguement when you say "Uninterrupted LRM's will never ruin your day, if you can move your mech and use actual tactics [you can interrupt their fire on your position.]

Lastly, if your unit numbers keep declining, maybe it's for a reason that can be attributed to a person(s) other than the Developers?

Edited by Syllogy, 30 January 2013 - 06:06 AM.

[DocBach]

Syllogy, on 23 January 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Canon and TT don't translate to a video game.

This is a dumb comment in regards to electronic warfare in the state of the game. All of it can easily be translated in to a real time environment.

Are you telling me the TT description of Beagle Active Probe, which allows it to detect ECM fields, detect units behind obstructions that are hidden in a 360 degree, 120 meter bubble around it is impossible to translate into a video game?

How about the ECM, and the rules for disrupting sensors says you have to be within the 180 meter operating range of the ECM to have it affect your sensors to prevent spotting (ie locking), but that ECM affected target information gathering, so things like chassis details like loadout or damage couldn't be instantly acquired, but that they could be tracked would be impossible to implement in this game?

If they (very simply) buffed all the electronic warfare stuff to what they are suppose to do, instead of nerfing most of the other ones and releasing their features as modules (ie target decay module effect should be free with Narc beacon, and last a whole longer than 2.75 seconds), while including ECM at beyond full power, we wouldn't have these debates about how everything but ECM sucks in this game. The TT already did most of the balancing work for PGI, they're choosing to ignore it to **** out their 6,000,000 c-bill modules to gain balance instead of get it balanced from the start.