238 replies to this topic

[focuspark]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

You keep thinking that the ECM is reaching out and affecting your sensors. It is simply cloaking an area.

The sensors are not affected, they just don't pick up the area. If they were affected, your map would be flickering the whole game.

Grr... dude, we already covered this. It is reaching out an affecting sensors. There's no magic EM retention bubble that prevents everything but visible light and inferred from escaping.

Seeing how you're misinterpreting this is probably a very good example of how the devs botched the design as well. Makes me sad.

[Volthorne]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

So was having weapons that deal proportional damage to weapons that actually have to be aimed.

Personally, id rather have them be guided with a much higher speed and less turning capability, so that sharp manuevers could avoid them.

But, they went with full lock, fully guided, so ECM implemented in its current form to curb their simplistic low risk high reward style of play.

If LRMs required a higher degree of skill to use from the start, i don't think ECM would have to operate as it does now.

So the big, slow firing, low DPS/high burst damage gun needs to be nerfed to the point that it needs ANOTHER weapon to fire? If I devote upwards of a third of my total tonnage into PPCs and the necessary heat sinks, it's fine that I can dish out three times as much damage as the equivalent of LRMs in half the time, but as soon as those LRMs start landing, despite being 10, no, 20 times slower than a PPC, it's "OP" or "low risk". You do realize exactly how many things are wrong with that picture, right?

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

You keep thinking that the ECM is reaching out and affecting your sensors. It is simply cloaking an area.

The sensors are not affected, they just don't pick up the area. If they were affected, your map would be flickering the whole game.

Okay, great, so let me put on a BAP, which would recognize the area as being jammed/cloaked/whatever, and lock onto the area as one big unit.

Edited by Volthorne, 12 February 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[Roughneck45]

focuspark, on 12 February 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Grr... dude, we already covered this. It is reaching out an affecting sensors. There's no magic EM retention bubble that prevents everything but visible light and inferred from escaping.

Seeing how you're misinterpreting this is probably a very good example of how the devs botched the design as well. Makes me sad.

RL ECM =/= MWO ECM

[focuspark]

I think the issue with LRM is/was that the launcher can be behind a hill and raining down death on anyone his team can see, without much limitation or method to counter it. AMS doesn't counter squat and shouldn't.

IMO, the real problem here is that LRM continue to track for far too long. They should only lock a location and not a mech, if the mech moves the miss; of course they'd need to travel A LOT faster to make this balanced at all. Basically, LRM would be the anti-stupid weapon; as in do not stand still stupid!

[Roughneck45]

Volthorne, on 12 February 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

So the big, slow firing, low DPS/high burst damage gun needs to be nerfed to the point that it needs ANOTHER weapon to fire? If I devote upwards of a third of my total tonnage into PPCs and the necessary heat sinks, it's fine that I can dish out three times as much damage as the equivalent of LRMs in half the time, but as soon as those LRMs start landing, despite being 10, no, 20 times slower than a PPC, it's "OP" or "low risk". You do realize exactly how many things are wrong with that picture, right?

It is a lot harder to use LRMs now, and ECM is certainly an easier to use as a defense than it is to make LRMs work well.

I don't think the way they interact is a problem though.

Id rather see an LRM buff Than an ECM nerf. Faster missile speed would be good, so that you can take better advantage of the locks when they are available.

Or they could up the damage slightly, so that the salvos that do land have more significant impact.

Edited by Roughneck45, 12 February 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[focuspark]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

RL ECM =/= MWO ECM

Why not?

[Volthorne]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

Or they could up the damage slightly, so that the salvos that do land have more significant impact.

I don't know if you were in CB when LRM damage was 2.0 (compared to the current 1.7) but that's not really an option.

Also, I edited my last post for one of your posts, so maybe take a look at it again.

[focuspark]

Volthorne, on 12 February 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

I don't know if you were in CB when LRM damage was 2.0 (compared to the current 1.7) but that's not really an option.

Also, I edited my last post for one of your posts, so maybe take a look at it again.

Additionally, tweaks are insufficient to solve the problem. They may mask the issue, but they won't solve it. Core mechanics need a review in this case.

[StalaggtIKE]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

You keep thinking that the ECM is reaching out and affecting your sensors. It is simply cloaking an area.

If radar extends out to 800m. Then, why can I not target the ECM carrier from any range, until I am right next to him, within 200m?

Quote

The sensors are not affected, they just don't pick up the area. If they were affected, your map would be flickering the whole game.

I am unable to target the ECM carrier until I am within 200m of him, so something is going on to my sensors until that point. As I get closer the map flickers. That's called intensity.

Quote

Real world ECM may operate in a different matter, but were not talking about that.

Agreed. However the rules should be consistant within the fictional universe.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 12 February 2013 - 01:31 PM.

[Codejack]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

RL ECM =/= MWO ECM

OK, fine, but MWO ECM =/= ANYTHING

There is no excuse for this from any previous MW/BT title, there is no justification using the known laws of physics, and in fact, the only explanation for it is that there was some kind of galaxy-wide plague that left the entire human race 40 IQ points lower.

[focuspark]

Codejack, on 12 February 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

OK, fine, but MWO ECM =/= ANYTHING

There is no excuse for this from any previous MW/BT title, there is no justification using the known laws of physics, and in fact, the only explanation for it is that there was some kind of galaxy-wide plague that left the entire human race 40 IQ points lower.

Pretty sure it was just easier to code like this.

for (int i = 0; i < m_enemymechs_len; i++)
{
m_enemymechs[i].Radar->Range /= 4;
}


Done.

Edited by focuspark, 12 February 2013 - 01:34 PM.

[StalaggtIKE]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

It is a lot harder to use LRMs now, and ECM is certainly an easier to use as a defense than it is to make LRMs work well.

I don't think the way they interact is a problem though.

Id rather see an LRM buff Than an ECM nerf. Faster missile speed would be good, so that you can take better advantage of the locks when they are available.

Or they could up the damage slightly, so that the salvos that do land have more significant impact.

Those suggestions are bandaids. What happens when at team with LRM with faster or more damaging missiles face a team without any ECM? They will easily win. It would be a repeat of before, the very problem ECM was created to fix. Choosing to go with or without ECM/LRM. Would be a gamble. It would be more so than a game in a casino.

The fact is ECM completely negates LRM. The mere existence of an item should not negate another. The fixes need to go towards toning ECM down. That's how you properly balance something.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 12 February 2013 - 01:42 PM.

[ThePieMaker]

Slugger2012, on 08 February 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

Dear Devs,dear Piranha employees,

i really try to be polite and hold contenance,but....

P L E A S E remove that stealth capability from the god-damm f**** ECM system!!

The stealth feature has nothing,ABSOLUTLEY nothing in common to the original Battletech ruels!!

I don`t want to troll about game balance etc. - but i think Battletech shall remain Battletech..otherwise you could implent moronic devices like "teleport-system" or "cruise missile" up to "Macross-Mega-Fusion-Anti-Matter-Raygun" too....

Jamming of certain enemy devices - all right - thats what the Battletech Compendium says..nothing against that! But STEALTHING (exactly stealthing with ONE Mech 2(!!) complete lances ).... MAN ! You can't be serious with that ?!

My point of view is,you did an amazing an excellence job on this Game ! Really - amazing graphics,amazing sounds,superiour athmosphere...

but why in gods name do you muck up all this brilliant things with an absoloutley unrealistic (okay - never say realistic an Battletech in one way =) ) and state of the art rule-breaking ECM device ?!

I am really sick of running into an stealthed Atlas with a medium Mech and get immedately blasted to pieces by it! See ? ATLAS <-> STEALTH....c`mon..that`s idiotic !

If you want to implent stealth technology to this great game,I suggest you can realize this by ARMOR..(of course with adequate drawbacks)...like i posted some time before..i remember some level 3 rules supporting stealth armor..at least,i have read about it years ago..
BUT PLEASE NOT with that ECM !

Okay,I think i have calmed down a little bit...so far...so now here are my facts..:

Replace ECM with one thats true to the original BT-rules...removing stealth ****...otherwise,i really have to think about playing MWO for the future !

Want to play BATTLETECH..and definite NOT some ROBOT-METAL-GEAR-SOLID-STEATH crap !

so far...

See my thread for an ECM suggestion
http://mwomercs.com/...to-balance-ecm/

[Roughneck45]

StalaggtIKE, on 12 February 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

If radar extends out to 800m. Then, why can I not target the ECM carrier from any range, until I am right next to him, within 200m?


I am unable to target the ECM carrier until I am within 200m of him, so something is going on to my sensors until that point. As I get closer the map flickers. That's called intensity.


Agreed. However the rules should be consistant within the fictional universe.

Because your sensors are rolling over the ECM shield, similar to radar trying to detect a stealth jet.

Picture 3 mechs in an open field, each spaced 300 meters apart in a line. One end is your mech, the middle is the enemy ECM carrier, and other end is an enemy mech. Your sensors would be able to detect the enemy mech at the other end, because he is not in the ECM bubble. Your sensors just cannot detect what is in the bubble until he gets in the sweet spot just above 180m.

Your sensors are not being affected, he is cloaking himself from them. Once he closes the gap, then they are being affected.

Volthorne, on 12 February 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

I don't know if you were in CB when LRM damage was 2.0 (compared to the current 1.7) but that's not really an option.

Also, I edited my last post for one of your posts, so maybe take a look at it again.

I was there. It was LRM warrior online lol.

1.8 always sounded better to me. The speed increase would be better than any damage tweak though.

Edited by Roughneck45, 12 February 2013 - 01:56 PM.

[Roughneck45]

Volthorne, on 12 February 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Okay, great, so let me put on a BAP, which would recognize the area as being jammed/cloaked/whatever, and lock onto the area as one big unit.

something like that would be cool.

The other equipment needs to be useful. Currently the only one that is is ECM.

BAP should do what the sensor modules do in regards to ECM detection, and it should be better at it because it actually takes space on your mech. I think it should make the minimum range smaller as well, so that you can lock on between, lets say, 100m and 250m. Make it all stack too, so that you could push that max range to about 400m or so if you invest in all the sensor upgrades.

AMS needs a buff as well. Currently there is no reason at all to take it. It should be more effective against streaks, and even SRMS, particularly when either of those weapons are boated. Would make non ECM lights stand a chance against 3L's, as well as better defense against splatapults.

Edited by Roughneck45, 12 February 2013 - 01:56 PM.

[Codejack]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

Because your sensors are rolling over the ECM shield, similar to radar trying to detect a stealth jet.

No. Just no. Nyet. Nein. Nichtvar.

A stealth jet reflects radar off of planed surfaces; you cannot create a field that affects EM radiation.

[Willie Sauerland]

Codejack, on 12 February 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

I reject the rules and want people to have fun my way as it is the right way.

You're still here? Would you like some cheese to go with that whine of yours?

[focuspark]

Codejack, on 12 February 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

No. Just no. Nyet. Nein. Nichtvar.

A stealth jet reflects radar off of planed surfaces; you cannot create a field that affects EM radiation.

Well... you can, it just takes a massive amount of gravity but I doubt BattleMechs would survive long. ;-)

[Volthorne]

Roughneck45, on 12 February 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

Because your sensors are rolling over the ECM shield, similar to radar trying to detect a stealth jet.

Picture 3 mechs in an open field, each spaced 300 meters apart in a line. One end is your mech, the middle is the enemy ECM carrier, and other end is an enemy mech. Your sensors would be able to detect the enemy mech at the other end, because he is not in the ECM bubble. Your sensors just cannot detect what is in the bubble until he gets in the sweet spot just above 180m.

Your sensors are not being affected, he is cloaking himself from them. Once he closes the gap, then they are being affected.


I was there. It was LRM warrior online lol.

So if ECM provides stealth, then what does Stealth Armour provide? Cloaking? Oh boy, wait until THAT goes live.

Stealth planes use a special paint that "absorbs" the radar "pings" used for traditional tracking of aerial objects. They don't create a bubble of interference, because that would be detectable by ground radar.

And yes, CB was an absolute gongshow where missiles were concerned. If ECM had been implemented back then, D-DCs with +2000 ammo would have been unacceptably OP, and cries to nerf ECM (or the DC) would have risen immediately.

Codejack, on 12 February 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:

A stealth jet reflects radar off of planed surfaces; you cannot create a field that affects EM radiation.

Actually, see above.

[Codejack]

Willie Sauerland, on 12 February 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

You're still here? Would you like some cheese?

Better than the horse**** you keep on trying to feed me.