7 replies to this topic

[ExAstris]

State of Information Warfare, by ExAstris: Patch 1.2.182

Warning: This is a full length report on this subject approached in a semi-academic fashion, considering the base system and the implications of modifying it at various levels. That means it is long. Please read carefully or refrain from baseless feedback.





Cheers fellow mechwarriors;

There are 6 layers to information warfare in MWO.

1. Detection
2. Targeting
3. Scanning
4. Locking
5. Sharing
6. Coalescing

In this work, I will give an analysis of each of these by defining what I mean by each component, and describing its impact upon gameplay. After a moderately exhaustive description of the complete information system at work in MWO, I will then note the effects of several modules and components in MWO with respect to these 6 datalayers. I finally will conclude with comparisons to other competitive games and their information warfare aspects. If you know your MWO inside and out already, feel free to skip the primer on how MWO handles information warfare and go to the modules and equipment comparison section as well as game comparisons and conclusions.


A final note before getting started. I am primarily concerned with the game as presented to a new player, or one who deliberately prefers to play solo or in small groups. My considerations of the impact of various impliments within the game is coming from the logic of how MWO's information warfare system is set up, and with respect to these solo and small-group players.

1. Detection: This is the capacity of your sensors to locate an enemy mech and register its location data. The in-game result of successfully detecting an enemy mech is that a red triangle is placed on your HUD over the location of the detected enemy. This gathering process has 3 natural constraints for all mechs, maximum detection range, detection angle, and line of sight (LOS). Enemies that are out of arc, out of range, or obstructed cannot be detected. This is the fundamental basis of information warfare in MWO. Detected enemies can be reacted to. Undetected enemies must be visually acquired to react to. Mechs are sometimes visually detected before sensors register them under normal circumstances, which usually occurs at extreme range on high visibility maps or while using thermal vision. Most enemies, however, are detected by your sensors before your eyes pick them up. Detection also has the benefit of instantly giving you IFF information. While this is not terribly useful at the opening of a match and friendly/enemy locations are known, it is vital later in the game.

2. Targeting: This is the capacity of your targeting system to pick out a specific mech which it is aware of (though it need not be detected by your own sensors). Any pilot does this by pressing ‘R’ (default) or by having no enemy targeted for a given period of time while facing a detected enemy (your targeting computer will automatically select one for you if you have none). The only two benefits tied directly to targeting itself are the target’s distance and showing the target’s designation. The target’s designation is simply a letter attached to its target box and is useful for calling out targets to concentrate fire on, as well as can help you sort enemies faster if you recall them from earlier in a match instead of waiting on your scanning to reveal more.

3. Scanning: This is the capacity of your targeting system to gather information specific to your currently selected target. This process is automatic and will reveal information specific to that opponent. In order the information revealed is, the target’s name and mech variant, the target’s paper doll (i.e. damage readout), and finally the target’s weapons loadout. Each of these pieces of information can affect how a player behaves. A player will assess his situation differently if the detected mech is a light mech or an assault mech. Players are liable to change what level of zeal they grant to pursuit of a particular mech upon noting its current damage level. Players are also liable to change their strategic positioning or general approach to the battle upon realizing what weapon loadout a particular enemy mech has. Harassers will skirt the main battle to pin down mechs with more LRMs than support weaponry; mechs with long range direct fire weaponry are liable to backpedal upon noticing approaching enemies with all short range weapons, etc.

4. Locking: This is the capacity of your targeting system, when directed over a targeted enemy, to obtain a lock on the enemy mech. Currently, the only benefit of a lock for guided missiles. SSRMs cannot be fired with a lock, and LRMs will have no guidance to a given target or location when fired without a full lock achieved. Losing lock will cause loss of immediate loss of guidance.

5. Sharing: This is the capacity of your mech to communicate with friendly mechs. This capacity takes two forms in game. The automatic mechanical method (henceforth 5a) is to share signals between mechs which can carry battlefield data. Mechs can share information both ways simultaneously, they can both send information to allies and receive information from those allies. Currently no mechanic in MWO separates these two; either a mech is doing both or neither. The second sharing aspect of information warfare (henceforth 5b) is to use text chat to communicate any information you wish. This of course potentially allows you to circumvent shortcomings or losses in 1 or 5a, but not 2, 3, or 4 (In some way it may be considered a partial fix to loss of 2 or 3, noting “Focus Alpha; it’s an Atlas”, but this will be of no use to a pilot who cannot detect alpha, nor will the additional “He’s in D4” help if there are multiple Atlai there which he cannot target).

6. Coalescing: This is the capacity of your mech’s on-board computer to gather all the information it has available to you and render it in your HUD and battlegrid with clarity and conciseness. No matter if the information was bounced across 3 friendlies to get to you and required several steps of their information gathering to access, your computer can, under normal circumstances, take that information and put it into your battlegrid and render it on your HUD. It is also technically doing this for your own data constantly. The data as retrieved by your sensors must be put into a form you can understand, and this is the part that does that.


Dependence relations: Several steps in this process are dependent on others. Sometimes they are so dependent that it takes some serious reflection to even note that they are actually different layers entirely!

Layers 3 and 4 have a hard dependence on layer 2. If no mech is targeted, no scanning will be done nor can a lock be achieved. The dependence is ‘hard’ because if you do not do the targeting yourself, you will never get the information, even if it would be instantly available via another ally who had already done the targeting.

Layer 5 has a soft dependence on layer 1. If no player detects anyone, then there will be no data to share. Though, friendlies will still share position data, even if no enemies are detected. Furthermore, I consider this method ‘soft’ because you can gain a tremendous amount of information without actually detecting anyone yourself. Your allies could be detecting all the enemies, but you might be reaping the rewards. So having information about enemies does have a hard dependence on layer 1, but you specifically do not have a hard dependence upon layer 1 to obtain the data.

Layer 6 has a soft dependence on layers 1 and 5. Putting the information into your battlegrid and HUD requires that it come from somewhere, but not any one place necessarily, thus it is soft. You can acquire the information from your own sensors via 1-4 or through sharing via 5.
Note, every piece of information a player can possibly have in MWO that does not come via 5b (text) or by their own audio/visual senses is dependent on layer 1. Also worthy of note, is that any player deprived entirely of layer 6 is in an epistemic situation equivalent to a total lack of layer 1. This is to say that without his computer putting the information together for him and displaying it, he might as well not have gathered it. (much like looking at raw data from a complicated experiment or analysis, it has to be synthesized properly to be understandable to human perception)




Module and Equipment analysis: Let us look at a few of the items in MWO that modify the total flow of information in the game and inspect their total possible impact on players’ decisions.

First let us take the sensor range booster module. This module boosts your sensor range by 25%. Recall, sensor range is one of the 3 basic parametric limitations to information gathering in MWO, the other two being arc and LOS. Mathematically this has the potential to vastly increase the amount of data you have access to. You have a base sensor range of 800 meters, so adding this module will let you detect enemies with your own sensors out to 1000m. This will additionally allow you to take full advantage of datalayers 2-6 as well. Meaning that you will be able to identify, scan, and lock targets at that range without the need for allies in LOS and closer.

This can allow you to use LRMs to their maximum range solo, as well as plan whether you should stay in LOS by determining enemy weapon loads (or if you should hide and sneak up on them). Also, given that your computer will synthesize the data for you in a very convenient manner; it is easy to notice how many enemies are in a group and heading a particular direction. This is can be enormously useful for scouting and for sniping. Additionally, any information you glean from your additional range, is information that might be shared with allies, letting your entire team know what you know.

Potentially, this is very powerful indeed. However, it is not always of use. Many enemies will not expose themselves to your LOS until they are well below 800 meters, making your extra detection range useless. Also, enemies may not be in your arc, again disallowing you to gain information about them, but it is LOS which is the biggest hindrance. Also, the number of things you can do with information at that distance are largely relegated to strategy and planning. Only LRMs and snipers will be able to actively use detection at that range to engage the enemy.
But a key lesson should be clear. Detection is the keystone of the entire information warfare suite.



Take a second piece, the Beagle Active Probe equipment. It also increases detection range by 25%, but it has the additional benefit of a boosted scanning rate. This has numerous advantages. At long range it will let you pick up enemy loadouts faster from farther, letting you decide the appropriate strategy (possible before they even detect you in return if conditions are favorable). Furthermore, in brawls, gathering paper doll information on opponents rapidly is a high priority as it allows you to know how badly they are damaged, which will in turn dictate whether you should continue attacking them or move on to an ally (a full health atlas is rarely a good target to swap too mid fight, but a half dead Cataphract is a great target to start chewing on).

And additionally, seeing the paper doll of damaged targets faster can be quite useful as it lets you know where to shoot for maximum effect. Knowing your first volley should go into a damaged side torso can put an end to an enemy several precious seconds earlier than you would have without that information. Finally, BAP counters one last caveat to detection, enemy mechs that are shutdown cannot be detected normally, but BAP will let you do it at close range. So mechs that are hiding or overheated will never fool you at close range, you’ll know they are still live opponents and how bad they’re hurting and where.




Now, why all these refreshers? Why did I just write an essay on how information warfare works in MWO?

ECM

If information warfare is a pillar of MWO’s design, then ECM is the demolition crew that gets to take your opponent’s pillar from them.

Inside 180m it prevents enemies from using data layers 4 and 5a entirely, as well as causing datalayers 2, 3, and 6 to have functional difficulties as well.

You cannot lock any target. Missile guidance becomes unavailable to you. This is potentially crippling depending on your loadout and situation. Datasharing via 5a becomes non-functional. Allies cannot respond to enemies they are not informed of. And attempting to use 5b would require you take your hands off the controls and hope they understand information in a far less organized, convenient, and familiar medium and that they even bother to read it and that they even bother to react to reading it. This also immediately cuts you off from all data about your allies, including their positions. So unless you have visual contact or a good memory, you may not even know where to go for help if they aren’t coming to you.

And since you aren’t getting any of their targeting data, you automatically lose track of the rest of the battle. You have no situational awareness beyond the field of vision afforded to you while dealing with the ECM mech.

Additionally, ECM slows the rate at which you gather advanced target data (i.e. scanning), making it take longer to cycle targets and figure out which one you should attack (so long in fact, that you won’t get to make an informed decision, you just have to pick one and start shooting, you’ll be 3 volleys in before you get a readout).

And lastly, ECM also messes with your computer’s capacity to synthesize the data. Your HUD will render targets you can detect, but does so in a visually different manner, however your battlegrid will cease to function while you remain within range of an active enemy ECM.
No wait, that wasn’t lastly. That was lastly with respect to the flow of information, ECM still has other effects. Grouping bonuses from NARC, TAG, and Artemis are all null against any enemy mech within 180m of an active enemy ECM.

Between 180 and 200m (soon to be expandable with the sensor range booster to ~250m), the ECM still has multiple effects. It will still cause datalayer 3 to feed slowly. It will cause datalayer 4 to be obtained much slower as well. In terms of information warfare, this area is comparable to the inverse of BAP, which allows faster scanning, though ECM has an advantage in this respect as it also slows missile locks while BAP does not accelerate them.

Also, aside from its information warfare benefits, it also retains its countering of all clustering bonuses within the bubble.

Beyond 200m (soon to be ‘shrunk’ against opponents with the sensor range module to ~250m), the ECM has its most powerful effect. It denies enemy units access to datalayer 1. Recall, every other piece of the information warfare puzzle is dependent on datalayer 1. That means that every conceivable player decision that can be effected by what information they have access to via the information warfare pillar of MWO is entirely negated with ECM while in this zone.

The only information players have left to react to is visually acquired enemies and text via 5b. However, humans, being limited in sensory prowess and awareness, will inevitably miss many pixels worth of enemy mechs on their screen which they will now not be able to react to at all. Furthermore, only a very very small fraction of mechs any player sees throughout the match will be reported via 5b, which brings almost total death to information layers 5 and 6.
The amount and type of information you deny to your opponent is almost too much to be explained.

And that is why this document is so long. Everything that preceded this is no longer available to the opponent of ECM.

They no longer get to check target’s designations to coordinate fire. They no longer get to scan enemies for loadout or even mech type. They get no paper dolls at all, let alone updates. They get no automated communication and coalescing of information. The few enemies they do note they must relay via clumsy text. They do not know what maneuvers to make to counter their foe. They will miscount their numbers more often. They will wander about the battlefield looking for information to react to because no one on their team knows or can transmit it to them.
Oh, and they still get immunity to all missile clustering bonuses.

How does one counter this equipment? Well, it’s really quite simple on paper. You find the enemy mech using ECM, drive to within 180m, and turn your ECM to disrupt.

…

The biggest advantage to ECM is that it denies you all the information you need to find that ECM guy in the first place. And even if you do notice their ECM guy, his ECM denies you information about his loadout, denying you the ability to decide how best to approach him. You also can’t read anything about his allies, and any of them that are in LOS that you don’t notice will only make it that much more of a mistake for you to approach him. Especially since a friendly a different angle might notice his three buddies right around a corner that you don’t see, but don’t know your ally sees because he isn’t getting datalayer 1 either. And then, once you do get into range to disrupt him, you’re less likely than him to have your team help you, because you had to leave your team and entire their cluster to get the disrupt working.

Which means all the enemies know exactly where you are and how you’re tyring to beat them, while you’re allies only may notice your efforts. And if the enemy has 2 ECMs (which you won’t know till you flip yours to disrupt), you won’t be transmitting your info to anyone, meaning your allies will almost definitely not help you while you get your face wrecked.

This also means that ECM’s only true counter is ECM. Which means escalation is the name of the game. Granted, the first one is by far the most powerful because it denies the enemy datalayer 1. But having more is always better because you can keep that advantage (and the numerous other ones) if an enemy is so positioned (and equipped) to try to strip you of this advantage.


TAG. In MWO, this stands for Target Acquisition Gear, and it serves two functions. Originally it was just to help guide LRMs, giving them faster tighter groupings. But now it also serves to remove the denial of datalayer 1 (which anyone familiar with real world military technology will recognize the denial of datalayer 1 as being precisely the goal of anything coined “stealth”). It isn’t terribly easy, as the TAGging only lasts for a second, and so must be continuously held (easier with the sensor decay module). However, TAG only works at 180-750m, and more importantly, only works against targets you are aware of and have purposefully singled out to TAG.

This means you did not gain awareness of this target through any of MWO’s datalayers, you were still denied those. You are now merely trying to feed a single stealthed enemy mech into your teams’ data network. Most often, this is only done by players who are both good, and need the target lock for their own LRMs. Why doesn’t everyone carry TAG?

The cost is higher than ECM. Yes, TAG is one crit and one ton, while ECM is two crits and 1.5 tons. But TAG uses an energy hardpoint. The mech mounting TAG has to give up at least 1/9 of its weapon loadout. Furthermore, if that mech isn’t using LRMs, his only use for TAG would be to feed data through MWO’s I-War system to his teammates. Which means he’s using a weapon slot to only partially counter ECM, to give passive information benefits to allies, which is hardly the kind of thing you notice immediate results for (and hence people generally think is worthless to do).

He also has to stay exposed to do this, and ECM has moved the MWO environment to being brawl heavy, so he feels better off using that tonnage for brawling, especially if he doesn’t know for certain that he’ll have allies who will properly gang up on the ECM mech or rain LRMs on to his TAGged targets. And of course, the TAG is completely useless if the enemy ECM mech gets within 180m, because only the firing mech can see his own TAG (for some reason) and he will now not only not transmit his datalayer 1 via his datalayer 5a, but he will also not be able to obtain his datalayer 4 due ECM’s effects in that zone.

The end result is that TAG is only a very soft counter to ECM. A hard counter would simply detect straight through the ECM, much as a real world ‘home on jam’ mode does against typical ECM jammers. Similarly PPCs are in the same boat. You have to be using a particular type of loadout to take PPCs, and they only have the same soft counter effects to ECM (assuming you hit your opponent). Again, all the powerful benefits of ECM went unchecked long before you even had a chance to temporarily disable it.

Additionally, given the state of ECM and its benefits, it is quite common (especially for premades) to stack ECM and stick in a group, so even disabling an enemy ECM does nothing to let you detect many enemies as they are often covered by 2-4 ECMs. Its aoe sharing of its abilities again impales anything but a full hard-counter, which MWO completely lacks.



Competitive Game Comparisons: I’ve played my share of games, as I’m sure most of you have as well. So let us recall a few examples too see how different games handle information warfare. There are two key elements I want to mark out with these examples. The first is the cost associated with the benefits. The second is the distribution of the capacity.

I could use any RTS as an example, but I’m going to go with one that I’m familiar with Supreme Commander 1 & 2. The first SupCom had units that were invisible to radar (but not visual), much like ECM in MWO. Every one of these units had a cost associated with them. Either the unit was terrible at combat (early game scouts) or was an expensive end-game unit that could be detected with omni-radar (easily accessed by that point in the game).

SupCom2 has an even more interesting example. In that incarnation they have the opposite of ECM, they have a device which reveals the entire map to you and every enemy unit on it (with direct visual and the best radar, nothing escapes its view and only the largest of maps are not totally revealed by it). So how much does this device cost for the one faction that can use it? That seems like an important question in a competitive game, because having more information that your opponent lets you plan properly.

The answer: It is one of the two most expensive things the entire faction can build and requires you to climb an entire tech tree to unlock it. Its cost in research and construction is rivaled only by their facility which lets you teleport your units anywhere on the map. Let that sink in. The cost of total gaining a total information advantage over your opponent is on par with being able to instantly move your army anywhere you want. Yet in MWO, we are handed landslide advantages in information warfare with no operational downside and only a pittance in cost.

For a second example consider Call of Duty. Even if you hate the game consider how it handles information warfare. Every player can affect it, but it’s evenly and always with a cost. If you want better radar coverage, you can take a UAV as a kill streak, but its limited in time, has to be earned to be activated, can be shot down, and requires that you give up on a kill streak that could actually directly kill someone. Want to not show up on radar when you shoot your weapon? You can take a silencer, but you’ll do less damage at range making it a bit harder to kill people at anything except point blank. Want to deny the enemy their radar coverage entirely? You can take a counter UAV, but it’ll against cost you a valuable kill streak slot, be limited in duration, be destructible, and must be earned to be activated. And again, just about every player has access to these options. No CoD game limits UAVs to snipers or silencers to SMGs. And almost every broad information warfare aspect has a counter. UAVs have counter UAVs, and both can be shot down. Perks will help you stay off the enemy UAVs, etc.

Yet in MWO we have a single equipment piece that is restricted to a few chasis (partly/largely for fluff reasons, partly because if every mech could equip it, it would just be a tax to just about every mech as you would only forego it in competative 8mans when you knew the rest of your team already had sufficient ECM cover). And on top of almost the entire information warfare load of MWO being relegated to these few chasses, there is no substantial cost to taking it, no limit in its use, and nothing that counters its most powerful attribute, the total denial of datalayer 1.




Conclusion: Any fix to ECM must address its most powerful attribute, the denial of basic information gathering at normal combat ranges. It may be acceptable to implement devices/equipment that reduce the range at which enemies can detect you, however, that is by far the most powerful thing any piece of the information warfare pillar can ever hope to achieve. Yet ECM does it with almost complete dominance and no passive counters. I recommend removing this cloaking field entirely. Leave detection range reductions to a different module (the opposite of the sensor range booster, basically, giving a fair reduction in the range at which you can be detected that would be negated by the sensor booster, leaving everyone on normalized ground).

The biggest secondary concern for ECM is in its total denial of datalayer 4 within 180m of its opponent. Mitigating equipment is fine, but completely negating 2/3 of an entire category of weapons makes those weapons very dubious choices to bring to any match. Imagine if someone implemented a second device called the “Focused Field Disruptor” which severely messed with the magnetic fields in an enemy mech you have targeted within X meters. It causes the field coils in a gauss rifle and the containment fields in PPCs/ERPPCs to be non-functional. They simply won’t fire. That would seriously cripple both the viability of builds with those weapons and the fun people had driving them. It isn’t merely, “haha, I have stuff that makes you less effective”, its “haha, you’re entire build is totally negated because I’m standing near you!” So secondarily, remove the lock cancelling effect.

Even without these advantages, ECM will still be an incredibly powerful piece of equipment. You’ll be able to isolate enemies from their allies because you’ll still be cutting off their communication when within 180m (denying datalayer 5). You’ll also still be denying all missile grouping bonuses, effectively making tag, narc, and artemis wasted tonnage on your opponent’s team, which also will still magnify the effectiveness of your AMS because you’ll be taking LRM hits all over your mech instead of it being as heavily concentrated on your central torso, meaning you’ll survive a salvo or two more than you would without it. And finally, you'll still be significantly increasing the lock times of enemy missiles. In conjunction with the new warning associated with an enemy targeting you, players will have more time than ever to seek cover against enemy LRMs.




Notes: I am concerned about the PUG game here. If 8man’s aren’t currently being detrimentally effected by ECM, then great! But the above shows the cause of the problems the PUGgers are plagued with, as well as why the denial of datalayer 1 has such horrendous and pervasive effects. Furthermore, my suggestions will certainly not unbalance 8mans. If ECM becomes unrequired for competitive matches, then so be it. We can have our mech variety back too.
Even if this incarnation of ECM brought the sort of gameplay to MWO’s 8man scene that PGI wanted, it was absolutely not worth what it has done to the rest of the matches. And at that, many of the players of 8mans dislike the current state of the game due to issues that stem from ECM’s current implementation. Thus, there are even more reasons than have been presented here that should compel PGI to change ECM. However, I have spent my time and energy pointing out the specific problems associated with the denial of datalayer 1 with respect to non-8man matches.

[Thorqemada]

You are right - there is nothing left to say but "you're right".
Kudos for the WoT (Wall of Text).

PS: I did in fact read it - From top to bottom through the middle and to me it was no riddle.

Edited by Thorqemada, 19 February 2013 - 10:58 PM.

[Rawrshuga]

Nice post. Good to have a clear breakdown like this.

I completely agree with you. I've said this on a number of other ECM related posts--the cloaking effect is totally unbalanced and MUST go. However, having read your breakdown I have an alternative solution: -

Keep ECM as it is, but make total information available via the battlegrid and minimap. That means I can see all and any friendly and enemy battlemechs at all times as icons via the minimap/battlegrid (for example via an overhead satellite feed), except those covered by ECM. In which case, non-detection becomes detection by elimination. No enemy seen? They have ECM. Someone pops up... there's the extent of their cloak. Sure it's akin to solving one unfair system by using another unfair system, but at this point I'm willing to fight fire-with-fire.

(note: - By total information I do mean that you can see the icons on your maps but that by no measure means that you get the targeting box and can lock on them. That would still require someone your team to get LOS and actively target them. What you'd get is merely positional information, not targeting information.)

[Lmxar]

Just read the post in its entirety. Very well put. I hope PGI reads this and considers your post in future patches.

[Krzysztof z Bagien]

As much as I agree with you I am also sure that PGI won't do anything with ECM to balance it, they will merely add or change some other stuff and say that's the fix.

[HammerSwarm]

Well said. I agree with you and your conclusions don't let any one tell you that you didn't think about this.

[Erasus Magnus]

push.
i think you are spot-on with pretty much everything you have pointed out. at least i cannot come up with a single argument against it.

why are there so few responses to this thread?

[Training Instructor]

Double like.

This is a fantastic analysis of why ECM in its current state is completely broken.