38 replies to this topic

[Theobald Hauser]

I gave you a link.
You can participate there, or anywhere else. But you won't be heard by the higher powers if you want to just remove it.
Do as you want from here.

[Codejack]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 02:43 PM, said:

I gave you a link.
You can participate there, or anywhere else. But you won't be heard by the higher powers if you want to just remove it.
Do as you want from here.

Um, we are heard by the "higher powers" anywhere?

[Theobald Hauser]

If you think so, why all the drama ?

[Codejack]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

If you think so, why all the drama ?

Because I hold out hope that someone, somewhere, will read it, realize that this is a great project being run by incompetents, buy them out and fire everyone.

[the huanglong]

ECM is overpowered because only ECM users effectively have access to streaks. This is where it needs to be fixed.

[Theobald Hauser]

Codejack, on 26 January 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Because I hold out hope that someone, somewhere, will read it, realize that this is a great project being run by incompetents, buy them out and fire everyone.

And you do that in their own forum ? AND YOU JUST SOLD THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN AWAY !

[Sasuga]

focuspark, on 25 January 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

TAG yes, NARC does nothing vs ECM.

Oops, yeah. My bad.

Invest in TAG.

[CancR]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

No. Facing is equivalent to facing in TT is equivalent.
Again you're making arbitrary definitions.

No, I covered this in talking about the nature of 1:1 translation from TT to VG you are just saying no because you don't have anything to support an argument other then pure nay saying.

Quote

All weapons are locked and fired in the forward arc. Again, you're making up things.

more nay saying because that is all you have to go on. Streaks will make 90 degree turns to hit a mech If they fired in a straight flat arc like in MW:LL would be a vast improvement.

Quote

Yeah, because everyone that disagrees or proves you wrong has to be a call of fan. *sigh*
There goes your credibility and your dignity.

No, just the ones that never played another MW game..ever but post a video as a source for their argument which on;ly proved me right along are the CoD scrubs. It would explain why you are so very terrible at debate.

Quote

No. TT ECM doesn't deactivate TAG. It deactivates C3s, NARCs and BAPs, and in MWO, too. It deactivates ARTEMIS too, and that is not in MWO.

I never said deacitvate, i said nullify the bonus, which it does. It does every last external radar device even the ones I didn't mention for time constraint.

Quote

Good lords, there IS something already there that you are aware of and don't want to change pretexting TT rules.

because it is already in line with the table top, as is nearly all of MWO. There are some things that are fine, like cycle time for weapons and heat build vs dissipation but lacking any sort of knowledge about any of the able top which is evidence by you posting from the wiki and guessing what it means, there is far more in line with the TT then is out of line.

[Theobald Hauser]

CancR, on 26 January 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

more nay saying because that is all you have to go on. Streaks will make 90 degree turns to hit a mech If they fired in a straight flat arc like in MW:LL would be a vast improvement.

Well, it's so easy, given you only say wrong things. And lies. That's kinda the same.

Quote

No, just the ones that never played another MW game..ever but post a video as a source for their argument which on;ly proved me right along are the CoD scrubs. It would explain why you are so very terrible at debate.

There's something between you and this CoD, really. Did he take your mom away from your dad ? It was difficult to live with ?

Quote

I never said deacitvate, i said nullify the bonus, which it does. It does every last external radar device even the ones I didn't mention for time constraint.

TT ECM doesn't deactivate the bonus from TAG. Learn to read before telling others to learn to.

Quote

because it is already in line with the table top, as is nearly all of MWO. There are some things that are fine, like cycle time for weapons and heat build vs dissipation but lacking any sort of knowledge about any of the able top which is evidence by you posting from the wiki and guessing what it means, there is far more in line with the TT then is out of line.

NOW I understand, when you mean "TT" you mean your OWN HOUSE RULES of the TT.
Thus said it's now crystal clear !

Sadly, it's far more easier to quote the sarna.net than scanning some book page.

Wait a minute, WAIT A MINUTE.

YOU'RE ACTUALLY NOW SAYING THAT THE SARNA LIES TOO ?!

Man, you need help.
I mean it.

Edited by Amarius, 26 January 2013 - 04:30 PM.

[Theobald Hauser]

LOL.

Edited by Amarius, 26 January 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[blinkin]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

Man, you need help.
I mean it.

unfortunately on forums you must have links directly to reliable sources AND quotes from those sources in your posts to have some believe you. this is especially true with people who disagree. many people on forums think that, admitting they are or could be wrong, is some kind of unforgivable sin.

tldr: if you have evidence beat people who are unwilling to listen over the head with as much evidence as possible until they either admit defeat or prove themselves to be blatant morons.

Edited by blinkin, 26 January 2013 - 04:47 PM.

[Codejack]

A few points:

1) We threw out TT when they decided to double armor. That hosed everything.

2) TT was turn-based; some things certainly have to be changed in the transition to a real-time game. That being said, TT was well-balanced and PGI would be wise not to stray too far from the original systems, as they have done with ECM.

3) Is there anyone, anywhere, who ever said at the beginning of a match, "Uh-oh, we don't have any streakcats on our side, might as well just power down right now"? But that happens with ECM.


ECM should not prevent locks, and while TT didn't even decrease detection range, I would be comfortable with that change if it didn't decrease it quite so much; 50% would be reasonable, 75% is not.

[Theobald Hauser]

blinkin, on 26 January 2013 - 04:47 PM, said:

unfortunately on forums you must have links directly to reliable sources AND quotes from those sources in your posts to have some believe you. this is especially true with people who disagree.

It seems that's not enough, even. CancR here and me have quite a history of him denying sources, now.
See. SARNA is not a source now. The funnier part is that he hasn't named the books he's refering to.

Quote

many people on forums think that, admitting they are or could be wrong, is some kind of unforgivable sin.

That's the "need help" part. Furthermore, noone cares that he's wrong in fine, we don't know him in real life, and he won't lose anything in regard of social relations or anything like that.
Still, he drowns himself in a widening megalomaniac maelstrom of denying and making things up, that will cost him credibility. So he's losing what he's battling for.

That's like a greek tragedy.

Codejack, on 26 January 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

ECM should not prevent locks, and while TT didn't even decrease detection range, I would be comfortable with that change if it didn't decrease it quite so much; 50% would be reasonable, 75% is not.

You and I should really speak abour what I pointed you to.

Edited by Amarius, 26 January 2013 - 05:12 PM.

[blinkin]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

You and I should really speak abour what I pointed you to.

please make it clear where quotes come from i do not want to be blamed for things i have not said. i doubt this was intentional and am not blaming you, but i would prefer not to be caught in unnecessary crossfire.

[Theobald Hauser]

Blamed by whom ? For what, speaking ?

[Codejack]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

You and I should really speak abour what I pointed you to.

What's that?

[blinkin]

Amarius, on 26 January 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

Blamed by whom ? For what, speaking ?

i was talking about the unmarked quote that you were responding to. it came after a couple of my quotes.

[Theobald Hauser]

Yeah I understood. I corrected it. I'm still asking myself by whom and for what.


I sent you a pm Codejack.

[Yanlowen Cage]

Direct line of sight defeats ecm for say target locking..... I really like that idea. Also what about mag,vibration, and 360 sensors? We all upset about ECM, but honestly I would just like to be able to see behind me and mount rear firing weapons. derp