67 replies to this topic

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Hoaggie, on 08 January 2014 - 02:31 PM, said:

John, as of today, you have had an account for exactly four months, please explain the game mechanics to the founders. Mmm kay? Could you do that? Could you please tell us all about it, I just dont understand.

It took me less than a month of playing to figure everything out, and that was back when stuff still changed significantly between patches, there was less information to find and I wasn't on comms.

Sure, there's a learning curve. But being a Founder doesn't give you a leg up over anyone who isn't a raw newbie. I see this attitude all the time - the assumption that it takes as long as you've been playing to learn as much as you do about the game.

And this is coming from someone who got his beta invite just before the Founders' program was announced. I started playing shortly after.

[sneeking]

me has no direction me cant figure it all out me takes nothing seriously me loves beer too much me talks **** on forum my lerning curve is convexed its been eight weeks I has no direction...

sorry I repeats myself

it ain't rocket science

[Hoaggie]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 09 January 2014 - 04:10 AM, said:

It took me less than a month of playing to figure everything out, and that was back when stuff still changed significantly between patches, there was less information to find and I wasn't on comms.

Sure, there's a learning curve. But being a Founder doesn't give you a leg up over anyone who isn't a raw newbie. I see this attitude all the time - the assumption that it takes as long as you've been playing to learn as much as you do about the game.

And this is coming from someone who got his beta invite just before the Founders' program was announced. I started playing shortly after.

It's not that it take a long time to learn the basics of the game, it's that some people totally miss or never advance past the basics. Somebody that's been playing for four months, and post comments like John does is obviously missing something.

If you ever think you will stop learning in a PVP game, you're wrong. My founder's tag does not give me the leg up, it's the thousands of rounds I've played that give me an advantage, if you think otherwise you are incredibly incorrect.

GRiPSViGiL, on 09 January 2014 - 01:00 AM, said:

This is what I saw.

Ok, you come from a respectable clan; could you point out, specifically, where you see that in the video?

[GRiPSViGiL]

Hoaggie, on 09 January 2014 - 01:01 PM, said:

Ok, you come from a respectable clan; could you point out, specifically, where you see that in the video?

The first 2 targets served themselves up to you guys on a platter. Like was stated already the enemy was disorganized and once you guys focused fired they retreated like PUGers would without mitigating any damage by torso twisting. You guys had good coordination and good focus fire which should have had the outcome we saw even while losing a few guys. Which should happen to your front line when engaging fresh enemies that keep filtering in. The narrow confines of the enemy entry point also helped your situation as it controlled how many enemies could actually get in there from the side they came from.

I think the the thread title should have been more about composure and maintaining the Lance integrity of communication and focus. I think the title throws off how people watch it but I wouldn't consider it a no win situation due to the advantages your lance actually had.

Good work on your guys part though.

[Nyel86]

For all your nay sayers out there, go make your own video. Spend time creating a video that you hope will be of some benefit to players. Then after spending your time creating a fairly well designed video, have someone say it's wrong because the title is misleading. Maybe another person could chime in and tell you that you're juvenile for taunting (because none of you have ever done that).

Here's an idea. Rather than **** on someone who is trying to help newer players, you could either keep your mouth shut or see the value in creating videos and sharing experiences so you all become better players. Or you could make childish remarks about someone else being childish. Or nitpick someone's comment and say they are ignorant and lack tactical understanding, without sharing how or why you think that.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that forums are full of trolls, but come on people. The guy is trying to help the community. Try something radical, join in.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Nyel86, on 09 January 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Maybe another person could chime in and tell you that you're juvenile for taunting (because none of you have ever done that).

Hoaggie's text comments in the video seemed fine, not commenting on the audio. But did you not read what his teammate typed into chat after dieing?

[Nyel86]

Yes, I did. And?

No one is a saint. None of the people in the video even pretend to be a saint. You can still learn from not nice people.

[Arnold J Rimmer]

Nyel86, on 09 January 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Here's an idea. Rather than **** on someone who is trying to help newer players, you could either keep your mouth shut or see the value in creating videos and sharing experiences so you all become better players.

Man, the number of hours I've put into New Player Help...

[Nyel86]

Arnold J Rimmer, on 09 January 2014 - 04:23 PM, said:

Man, the number of hours I've put into New Player Help...

I too have put numerous hours into New Player Help... via lasers and missiles. I teach them to learn from their mistakes.

[GRiPSViGiL]

Nyel86, on 09 January 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

For all your nay sayers out there, go make your own video. Spend time creating a video that you hope will be of some benefit to players. Then after spending your time creating a fairly well designed video, have someone say it's wrong because the title is misleading. Maybe another person could chime in and tell you that you're juvenile for taunting (because none of you have ever done that).

Here's an idea. Rather than **** on someone who is trying to help newer players, you could either keep your mouth shut or see the value in creating videos and sharing experiences so you all become better players. Or you could make childish remarks about someone else being childish. Or nitpick someone's comment and say they are ignorant and lack tactical understanding, without sharing how or why you think that.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that forums are full of trolls, but come on people. The guy is trying to help the community. Try something radical, join in.

Well the title is misleading plain and simple. I gave constructive criticism, I can't help that offense was taken by it. Anyone knowledgeable about the map and the game in general that watches can clearly see the advantages your Lance had so the tutorial doesn't portray what the title says it will. I gave credit where I considered it was due.

The trash talk doesn't bother me but the real bosses around here do it before the fact..

[Nyel86]

I don't understand how the title is misleading. Granted, there are probably better titles for what the video's author portrays, but I don't see how this title doesn't apply.

I don't think offense is taken from any real constructive criticism, but all I see in this thread is a bunch of backhanded compliments following minor quibbles about the video.

I dunno, maybe I'm just naive for believing people should focus on the advice the video is trying to relay.

EDIT: Also, the real "bosses" don't need to boast at all.

Edited by Nyel86, 09 January 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Hoaggie]

Nyel86, on 09 January 2014 - 06:53 PM, said:

I don't understand how the title is misleading. Granted, there are probably better titles for what the video's author portrays, but I don't see how this title doesn't apply.

I don't think offense is taken from any real constructive criticism, but all I see in this thread is a bunch of backhanded compliments following minor quibbles about the video.

I dunno, maybe I'm just naive for believing people should focus on the advice the video is trying to relay.

Exactly.
Thank you.
I get that the title of the thread could be better, but I cant change that.

Edited by Hoaggie, 09 January 2014 - 06:55 PM.

[John Branon]

Nyel86, on 09 January 2014 - 06:53 PM, said:

I don't think offense is taken from any real constructive criticism,

Read again. I started with constructive criticism, but it was dismissed with the same bloated attitude that is apparent in the video. I am still waiting for any rational counterargument to my reasoning. Your "go make your own video" and your "keep your mouth shut" can join "I'm a founder" and "I can do a lot of damage" in that regard.

Quote

say they are ignorant and lack tactical understanding, without sharing how or why you think that.

To which part do you have questions?

[Nyel86]

You are persistent. You've given no argument besides "You don't win or lose as a lance, you do it as a team." Neat thought, but you have given nothing to support your opinion that would make me think it is fact, as you seem to.

John Branon, on 04 January 2014 - 04:35 AM, said:

I see good coordination within your lance, but I don't see a No-Win Situation. If you think otherwise, you are probably focusing too much on your lance and not enough on your team.

Neat opinion. Not constructive. Perhaps instead of sticking to the whole "This isn't what I think a No-Win situation is", you could've asked for clarification.

John Branon, on 04 January 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

My point is you don't win or lose as a lance. You win or lose as a team. As the titel says no-win situation, I was expecting the overall tactical picture.

Why? You expected something different than what was presented because of the title, rather than focusing on the content in the video. Hoaggie posted a reply to you and said the video was not about the broader picture.

Xavier Wulf, on 04 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

Most of the time, if a single lance is in this type of situation, they often fail to deal equal damage to the enemy team and will result in a massive disadvantage for the rest of the team.

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

You were facing disorganised enemies who arrived one lance at a time, while you had a serious weight advantage over the first mechs you encountered. As I said your coordination was good, but it's not a situation where "most" other lances "fail to deal equal damage to the enemy team".

I beg to differ. From what I’ve seen, most lances do fail to deal equal damage to the enemy team in those situations. You also assume the enemy is disorganized because you could only hear the VOIP of the one side.

Xavier Wulf, on 04 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

So, I think that every engagement is important

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

Do you really? That is exactly my point.

This confused me. If your point is that every engagement is important, wouldn’t that mean lances have significant tactical importance, possibly deciding the outcome of a match? This seems to be the opposite of what you have been saying.

Xavier Wulf, on 04 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

Had our lance not worked together as it did, I would bet that we would have lost.

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

I don't think so.

Again, why? You give no reason for disagreeing with Xavier’s post, so why even make the comment?

Xavier Wulf, on 04 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

I do not put much faith in pubbies

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

Yeah, I got that...

Here you cut Xavier’s sentence short. He said he doesn’t put much faith in pubbies because they lack communication (I assume he means VOIP, but there is still in game chat they could use) and are typically not that good. I agree with that. Lots of people just want to jump in their giant stompy robot and fire lasers at other giant stompy robots, tactics be damned. Most don’t even read the chat, so attempting to communicate through text tends to be a fruitless endeavor.

To be continued.

Edited by Nyel86, 10 January 2014 - 08:58 AM.

[Nyel86]

Xavier Wulf, on 04 January 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

So yes, you do infact win or lose as a lance.

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

This sentence shows an astounding ignorance to the game mechanics, a lack of tactical understanding and a problematic attitude on your part.

Problematic attitude on your part? You just insulted him in three different ways because he disagreed with you, when Xavier had sad nothing negative about you.You attack Xavier for no good reason. He gave a reasonable argument for why he believes matches are won on a lance by lance basis. You pick apart his paragraph sentence by sentence and end it with insults. Nothing you have said is constructive to this point.

John Branon, on 08 January 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

OK, I'll make it the version for 3 year olds, in the hope you will be able to follow:
There are two teams. One wins, the other one loses. In the winning team, every player wins. In the losing team, every player loses. In both of those teams may be players with cocky attitudes like Hoaggie or Xavier Wulf, but if their mommy finds out about their behavior, they will be sent to bed without supper.

This just makes no sense. This is your response to Hoaggie saying “Tell us founders how the game works” You’re mocking them and implying they are 3 year olds. It’s clear that you are the one with the problematic attitude.

John Branon, on 10 January 2014 - 03:38 AM, said:

Read again. I started with constructive criticism, but it was dismissed with the same bloated attitude that is apparent in the video. I am still waiting for any rational counterargument to my reasoning. Your "go make your own video" and your "keep your mouth shut" can join "I'm a founder" and "I can do a lot of damage" in that regard.

So we come to your last post. As shown above, you have contributed nothing to this thread except for stating your opinion as fact, and insulting the people in the video. They didn’t dismiss your “constructive criticism”. They disagreed. You gave no evidence to support your theory or any reasoning. I’m not sure what “rational counterargument” you’re looking for, but they gave their reasons why they think battles are won by lances. You responded with sarcasm and insults.

I don’t know what regard you are referring to, but my “go make your own video” and “keep your mouth shut” points were clearly missed by you.

I suggested people make their own videos on tutorials because, for some reason, people were angry about this video. A slightly misleading title and everyone flips out. I wanted to put people in Hoaggie’s shoes and have them see how it feels when people insult you repeatedly when all you were initially trying to do was help.

If that was too much for some people, then I figured if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything. By nice I mean relevant feedback about the video, positive or negative.

John Branon, on 10 January 2014 - 03:38 AM, said:

To which part do you have questions?

See above.

Sorry for the rant, but I think my points were being missed.

[John Branon]

Nyel86, on 10 January 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

You've given no argument besides "You don't win or lose as a lance, you do it as a team." Neat thought, but you have given nothing to support your opinion that would make me think it is fact, as you seem to.

I elaborated on that with the simplest words I could:
"There are two teams. One wins, the other one loses. In the winning team, every player wins. In the losing team, every player loses."

Your answer was: "This just makes no sense."
If this really makes no sense to you, then I'm sorry for you, but there is not much I can do to make it any less confusing.

You said you don't take it as fact. That makes me curious. Have you any evidence of a game where one or more players of the winning team somehow did not get credited with a win?

Quote

Neat opinion. Not constructive.

Of course it's constructive. I told him to focus more on the success of the team instead of how much damage his lance deals to the enemy.

Quote

Why?

Why what?

Quote

You expected something different than what was presented because of the title, rather than focusing on the content in the video. Hoaggie posted a reply to you and said the video was not about the broader picture.

I was focusing on the content in the video just fine.
I was giving feedback on how the title influenced my expectations and Hoaggie has (more recently) accepted that. What is your problem exactly?

Quote

From what I’ve seen, most lances do fail to deal equal damage to the enemy team in those situations.

Me and other viewers of the video disagree with your assessment.

Quote

You also assume the enemy is disorganized because you could only hear the VOIP of the one side.

No, I assess the enemy is disorganized by reviewing the game footage. No assumptions there.

Quote

This confused me. If your point is that every engagement is important, wouldn’t that mean lances have significant tactical importance, possibly deciding the outcome of a match?

Exactly. Every engagement is important, and every lance can influence the outcome of the game. That means if Hoaggie's lance did great the game could still be lost, or if they did poorly the game could still have been won.

Quote

This seems to be the opposite of what you have been saying.

Maybe you misunderstood me. What I was saying is, that the result of all encounters together, victory or defeat, is shared by the whole team.

[John Branon]

Quote

Again, why? You give no reason for disagreeing with Xavier’s post, so why even make the comment?

Xavier didn't give any reasons, he just said he "would bet". Why are you not demanding a reason from him?

Quote

Here you cut Xavier’s sentence short.

I made that deliberately to hint at his not-teamplay-focused playstile.

Quote

Lots of people just want to jump in their giant stompy robot and fire lasers at other giant stompy robots, tactics be damned.

I agree. It would be nice if somebody who wants to offer an "advanced tutorial" would make a greater effort for team tactics than those people do, though.

Nyel86, on 10 January 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

Problematic attitude on your part?

Maybe. But again, you have no problem with the problematic attitudes from Hoaggie and Xavier, so I don't think you should criticize me when I respond in kind.

Quote

This just makes no sense.

See above.

Quote

I wanted to put people in Hoaggie’s shoes

I got that, but as I said it's not an argument. It doesn't make any criticism any less valid.

[Nyel86]

Your "One team wins, the other loses" didn't make sense because I couldn't believe you were being serious. You are serious and that is just depressing.

I am at a loss as to how or why you continue to butcher the context of comments and alter them into something entirely different. This just leads me to believe you are trolling for pleasure.

[Hoaggie]

John Branon, on 10 January 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

I was focusing on the content in the video just fine.
I was giving feedback on how the title influenced my expectations and Hoaggie has (more recently) accepted that. What is your problem exactly?

No, I assess the enemy is disorganized by reviewing the game footage. No assumptions there.


Exactly. Every engagement is important, and every lance can influence the outcome of the game. That means if Hoaggie's lance did great the game could still be lost, or if they did poorly the game could still have been won.

John Branon, on 10 January 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

I got that, but as I said it's not an argument. It doesn't make any criticism any less valid.

At the point our engagement was over, our lance accounted for killing or assisting in killing over half the enemy team while out team was only down by three mechs. We have had much more impressive matches, but I really felt that this match could be a valuable learning tool. That's the point of the video tutorial, to demonstrate how to effectively work as a team in what would normally be a no-win situation.

You would be surprised how many people, even on voice coms, cannot accomplish this.


You criticism fails to be constructive, at that point it becomes argumentative and insulting. You are making wild assumptions and accusations while contributing nothing. Look, you've given Nyel86 a conniption.

William said:

...a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an *****, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Edited by Hoaggie, 10 January 2014 - 03:00 PM.

[Sigifrid]

John Branon, on 10 January 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

I made that deliberately to hint at his not-teamplay-focused playstile.

Not teamplay focused playstyle...really? The restriction on forming premades limits each team to only 4 mechs grouped together, unless you have enough people to field the full 12 (not a relevant situation here; see below). Therefore, working together with your lance is teamwork/teamplay.

Of course if a team loses all players on the team are credited a loss. If an individual lance fails to contribute, then that lance's team is more likely to lose. Conversely, if an individual lance provides a greater contribution than the rest of the team, that lance is more likely to carry that team to victory.

12-man teamwork: Tight coordination on this scale is impractical unless the entire team is using VOIP together: an unlikely situation outside of a 12-man premade. Therefore, the largest effective team size that can actively coordinate together under fire is a 4 man lance. It is impractical to try and coordinate with the in-game chat while you are underfire, and with MWO's premade group limit it is unlikely that more than 1 lance will be able to use VOIP to communicate together outside the 12-man queue. Thus, the best teamwork that can be achieved will be done on a lance by lance basis.