245 replies to this topic

[BFett]

Why not make a poll on the issue and leave it at that. There's no point arguing about opinions.

[Master Maniac]

BFett, on 19 March 2014 - 09:13 PM, said:

Why not make a poll on the issue and leave it at that. There's no point arguing about opinions.

The OP wasn't asking opinions, he was voicing his own. And a poll is nothing more than "arguing about opinions," only without the added benefit of seeing other peoples' point of view. It's just "rah rah rah majority wins rah rah rah," and if the current majority offers any indication, then awful win-button weapons are fine and dandy.

Of course, that's only until they eventually get bored of how shallow and worthless that experience is and just move to something else. Then again, Call of Duty is about doing the same repetitive action over and over and over again for nothing more than the apparent satisfaction of doing it... so maybe people will stay entertained after all. I don't know. I guess I'm witnessing the death of the species.

*shrug*

[Shredhead]

It's funny how all those who see the problems with the LRM buff are all "PPC/AC poptarters", "metahumpers" and what not, called that by people that rely on no-skill crutches to feel "competitive" at least once in this game.
Fact is, LRMs are a low skill weapon that should never even be remotely comparable to any weapon that needs proper aim. Period.

[Master Maniac]

Shredhead, on 19 March 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

It's funny how all those who see the problems with the LRM buff are all "PPC/AC poptarters", "metahumpers" and what not, called that by people that rely on no-skill crutches to feel "competitive" at least once in this game.
Fact is, LRMs are a low skill weapon that should never even be remotely comparable to any weapon that needs proper aim. Period.

You are so very, very correct. A lot of these guys keep referring to TT to justify the power of Narc and Tag when discussing the effectiveness of LRMs, but they fail to realize that LRMs themselves are NOT meant to be mech killers. They're meant to soften an enemy up for a proper assault. That's it.

"LRMs are garbage because you're not getting the killing blow yadda yadda yadda"

That's the thing. That's it. You are NOT supposed to be gutting Mechs with LRMs. At all. Finishing off a wounded enemy is one thing, but LRMs should not insta-screw an assault the INSTANT he steps out of cover. That is ridiculous, and that's what's happening right now thanks to this blatantly bone-headed patch.

EDIT: by "insta-screwing," I do not mean to imply that LRMs are one-shotting people (yet - wait until the next patch). I mean that they can chew off 16% or more of an assault's armor in one salvo, all without requiring the slightest modicum of skill, right at first contact, effectively crippling what is supposed to be a sturdy brawler with one click of the left mouse button.

That is a problem.

Edited by Master Maniac, 19 March 2014 - 09:36 PM.

[Osric Lancaster]

Eldagore, on 19 March 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

LOL.Wait, LRM were/are good at flushing out poptarts? have you ever played a poptart or watched one even? Effective LRM CREATED poptarts. They are the one weapon that can not counter a jumpsniper, because you cant lock them till they jump, and you cant shoot missles through the rock they are behind when they land.

*walks forward around rock*
*Shoots*
*walks backward around rock*

Oh my god. . . LRMs created walking!

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Your ability to reference buzzwords is phenomenal. I'm simply taken aback by your clearly superior intellect.
You read like a HuffPost comments troll. So...congrats.

If you had formulated a logical argument not based on hypocritical name calling or logical fallacies I'd have responded to you properly. As it is I'm content to say - all weapons are a two way street. Missiles don't bother me. I can deal with them. I can use cover. I use missiles, but no more than any other weapon. I primarily use a Battlemaster and don't equip missiles because it's not worth the huge side torso. I'm sorry if you're having problems, but I don't think it's everyone else's lack of skill that's getting you killed.

[Master Maniac]

Osric Lancaster, on 19 March 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

*walks forward around rock*
*Shoots*
*walks backward around rock*

Oh my god. . . LRMs created walking!


If you had formulated a logical argument not based on hypocritical name calling or logical fallacies I'd have responded to you properly. As it is I'm content to say - all weapons are a two way street. Missiles don't bother me. I can deal with them. I can use cover. I use missiles, but no more than any other weapon. I primarily use a Battlemaster and don't equip missiles because it's not worth the huge side torso. I'm sorry if you're having problems, but I don't think it's everyone else's lack of skill that's getting you killed.

"Logical fallacies." Goodness, you HuffPuff commenters are practically clones of one another. I wonder if you could hold a conversation for more than five minutes without referring to a cheat sheet.

My logical argument was about two posts ago. Too bad you disagree. Bye, now. Run along.

Honestly, to be fair, I stopped at this:

Osric Lancaster, on 19 March 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

*walks forward around rock*
*Shoots*
*walks backward around rock*

Oh my god. . . LRMs created walking!

Nice "logical argument."

"Logical." That's our word for today, kids!

Edited by Master Maniac, 19 March 2014 - 09:38 PM.

[SiliconAngel]

I'm pretty new to the forum though not to the game. I just wish to say. I hate all the lrm spam. I hate getting targeted going "ok here comes missiles going around a bunch of buildings, and hugging the sides of them and all the missiles hitting me anyway. even though no one can even see me and I'm hugging a large building." I hate dying to that and its unbearable in a slow mech.
I don't want to get rid of missiles they do belong in the game. I actually love the things in mechwarrior 3. I just wish there was more skill, maybe some type of aiming, or they can't target you as well if no one can see you anymore. that sort of thing.
Also I wish this community would quit bashing each other all the time. I may disagree with what you say but I don't have to make up stupid sounding names to call you.

Edited by SiliconAngel, 19 March 2014 - 09:40 PM.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

lrms was clearly overdone, anyone that dont see this is insane, thay should fire thair gameplay testers inmediataly and hire some more reasonable ones

[Master Maniac]

You know, I honestly wouldn't have a problem with LRMs if they required a little effort. There should be some sort of penalty for piggybacking locks - a harder to acquire lock with a shorter duration when contact is lost, or *something* - anything to reduce the maddening ridiculousness of "INCOMING MISSILES! INCOMING MISSILES!" click spamming literally 20 seconds into a match like friggin' clockwork.

This would actually reinforce the teamwork aspect by requiring spotters to contribute a little bit more than just LOOKING AT SOMEONE FOR A HALF-SECOND to get a lock others can read off of.

Edited by Master Maniac, 19 March 2014 - 09:47 PM.

[Void Angel]

Mcgral18, on 19 March 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:

They've also talked about looking into ACs in the Vlog#3....I'm not sure what to think.

But, improvements were made yesterday, and I am happy with those.

Specifically, they said that autocannons are "slightly" overperforming (and a balance fix is in the works now,) and that poptarting is too easy currently - but they still view it as part of gameplay. Which is pretty ok by me.

[Master Maniac]

Void Angel, on 19 March 2014 - 09:48 PM, said:

Specifically, they said that autocannons are "slightly" overperforming (and a balance fix is in the works now,) and that poptarting is too easy currently - but they still view it as part of gameplay. Which is pretty ok by me.

Oh, God. It begins. It's a good thing I've given up on the game already.

Aiming = OP. Deflection shooting = cheating. Right. Let's all load up on spam weapons! YAY!

I suppose I will concede that AC/2s are thoroughly ridiculous. But they're practically in a class all their own. I cannot begin to imagine the butchery that they will commit when they savage ballistics to satiate the rabid non-skillers.

[Void Angel]

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 09:29 PM, said:

You are so very, very correct. A lot of these guys keep referring to TT to justify the power of Narc and Tag when discussing the effectiveness of LRMs, but they fail to realize that LRMs themselves are NOT meant to be mech killers. They're meant to soften an enemy up for a proper assault. That's it.

Regardless of the question of current LRM balance, I have to advise caution about thinking of LRMs - or any weapon - as a "support," or "armor-stripping" weapon. All weapons strip armor - that's how you know they're weapons. The idea some people espouse, that it's "ok" for a weapon to deal X damage during a match spread out over the target so that other weapons (which also deal roughly X damage during the match,) can "get the killing blow." This is an erroneous view of weapon functionality. If we "strip" down half a 'Mech's torsos with spread damage, then kill it the rest of the way with punch damage, our spread damage hasn't done anything that couldn't be done more efficiently with punch damage anyway - all things being equal. This is not to say that spread damage should kill as quickly as punch damage, or that there cannot/should not be synergistic effects between different types of weapon. But spread damage needs to have something extra, whether range, sustainability (heat/damage,) etc in order to be worthwhile.

Edited by Void Angel, 19 March 2014 - 10:14 PM.

[Master Maniac]

Void Angel, on 19 March 2014 - 10:09 PM, said:

Regardless of the question of current LRM balance, I have to advise caution about thinking of LRMs - or any weapon - as a "support," or "armor-stripping" weapon. All weapons strip armor - that's how you know they're weapons. The idea some people espouse, that it's "ok" for a weapon to deal X damage during a match spread out over the target so that other weapons (which also deal roughly X damage during the match,) can "get the killing blow." This is an erroneous view of weapon functionality. If we "strip" down half a 'Mech's torsos with spread damage, then kill it the rest of the way with punch damage, our spread damage hasn't done anything that couldn't be done more efficiently with punch damage anyway - all things being equal. This is not to say that spread damage should kill as quickly as punch damage, or that there cannot/should not be synergistic effects between different types of weapon. But spread damage needs to have something, whether range, sustainability (heat/damage,) etc in order to be worthwhile.

"Synergism" is an extremely dangerous word to use, as well. That can lead to all sorts of nasty forced-role nonsense. I see a lot of people pointing to that extreme, which is quite a bad thing. Just saying.

"Punch" damage requires accuracy, timing, and focus. "Spread" damage is usually quicker and easier to place on target. It's not a matter of the punch doing what spread can do but better. That is and never was an issue, and although many would suggest otherwise, it is silly to do so. Twitch weapons do more precise damage, but you have to earn it - and if your aim is less than perfect, you get nothing for your attack. Spread weapons at least reward you with some damage done, even if your aim is off quite considerably.

But I digress.

Weapons can and should do only the amount of damage that a player is capable of successfully dishing out. The only limit should be the player's skill and ability. I'm not saying that LRMs should be incapable of doing massive damage in the right hands, nor am I saying that LRMs should be unable to kill Mechs altogether. What I am saying is that they are currently ridiculously overpowered and require minimal effort. This can easily be addressed by requiring more accuracy by the user, and rolling back this ridiculous velocity boost that ensures that anything slower than a medium is going to get hit no matter what they do in response.

LRMs are worthwhile in that they require very little focus and do not punish you nearly as much for poor aim as any other weapon will. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. But I agree with another poster when they say that LRMs must not be even remotely as damaging as a weapon that requires direct, focused aiming. LRMs can do tremendous damage when grouped, and at little to no risk for the user. My superoverpoweredmegadeth Gauss Rifle of +1 OMG that's so unfair destruction delivers its 15 damage only if I have direct line of sight with my target. That is not taking into account nearby obstacles blocking the shot, user-imposed reticule drift, deflection, weapon convergence (and yes, that is a thing), and damage falloff. To score this shot, I must expose myself to my target, on top of all that.

To compare, an LRM 20 can deal its 20 points of damage with none of the above considerations. The only complications are "is there something between him and me," and "does somebody have him locked." That's it. They are a zero risk weapon. They achieve lock too fast, the missiles travel unerringly to the target 90% of the time, and now the missiles are almost unavoidable for most moving targets. For this reason, they should not be held to the same standards of performance as other weapons.

I would retool them completely, myself. I'm all for having LRMs in the game. I'm even all for making LRMs extremely powerful and breaking canon to do it. But in order to be powerful, I would maintain that the player should have to do something to *earn* that power. LRMs suck as they are now, and are quite simply the laziest weapon in the game. That's right. They are *lazy.*

Edited by Master Maniac, 19 March 2014 - 10:34 PM.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Tetra One, on 19 March 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

Offtopic: how do you have different name ingame than on forums?

They're the same name.

[Void Angel]

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 09:51 PM, said:

Oh, God. It begins. It's a good thing I've given up on the game already.

Aiming = OP. Deflection shooting = cheating. Right. Let's all load up on spam weapons! YAY!

I suppose I will concede that AC/2s are thoroughly ridiculous. But they're practically in a class all their own. I cannot begin to imagine the butchery that they will commit when they savage ballistics to satiate the rabid non-skillers.

Uhm... not really.
First, the AC/2. The AC/2 is indeed a powerful weapon for its tonnage, but its rapid heat buildup limits its effectiveness in practice. A triple AC/2 Jaeger (which I seldom see any more) either really wants the longest range possible, or simply hasn't done the math. For two tons (and three slots) more, the AC/5 provides 2.5 times the pinpoint damage at a respectable 620m effective range. The AC/2, by comparison, has a far higher projectile speed (200 v. 1300) and 720m effective range, as well as over 2.8 times the rate of heat buildup. By the time you've put in two DHS to make up the tonnage difference, you're actually down two slots; hope you bought a big engine - that's a lot of heat for the benefits. The AC/2 is a highly accurate weapon, but for effective destruction at any but the longest ranges, the AC/5 is an acceptable substitute.

Second, what's been happening up till last patch is that brawlers were marginalized. Poptarts had been curbed a bit, but the changes aimed at that part of the meta ended up making dakka/snipers relatively more attractive. So between the two, it was really hard for a brawler to get into effective range without taking too much damage to function, and any poor newb who walked out of cover at the wrong time would be wearing his ejection chair for a hat. Thus, most matches settled into a comfortable routine; well, it was comfortable if you were either variety of sniper. Everyone would move to the same places on the map until someone shot at them, then find their favorite drinking rock. The next 5-10 minutes of the match would be spent peeking around the corners of said rock trying to get some damage in while liquoring up for the endgame. Once enough liquid courage had been consumed, one team or the other would start pressing forward, any brawlers not catatonic from boredom or dead from impatience would get to actually play the game, and the match would draw down to its conclusion. Conquest often followed the same pattern, with the exception that lights would break off to cap more often, and that the teams would sometimes split into smaller elements in different parts of the map.

This was very silly.

The LRM buff is designed to curb the impact of snipers. Players with ER Lasers and autocannons can no longer fire with impunity from extreme range, secure in the knowledge that nothing but another dakka/sniper can retaliate. The LRMs can keep the hill-humpers' heads down so that the brawlers might possibly make it to the enemy with most of their limbs still attached, bringing brawling back from the darkness into which it had been cast. It might work, though I have my reservations - regardless, it's designed to put a little variety back in the game and provide a counter to snipers other than, well, other snipers.

[Osric Lancaster]

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 09:34 PM, said:

Nice "logical argument."
"Logical." That's our word for today, kids!

Yeah, actually that's a logical argument. I was being facetious, but demonstrating that his reasoning behind the claim that LRMs somehow created poptarting was specious. Cover isn't the exclusive domain of poptarters. You can walk into cover. LRMs didn't create poptarting. Why are you so hung up on my wording, by the way? You're tripping all over those bottom two levels of Graham's hierarchy.

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 09:43 PM, said:

You know, I honestly wouldn't have a problem with LRMs if they required a little effort. There should be some sort of penalty for piggybacking locks . . .
This would actually reinforce the teamwork aspect by requiring spotters to contribute a little bit more than just LOOKING AT SOMEONE FOR A HALF-SECOND to get a lock others can read off of.

If you didn't have such a hard on for shouting down anyone who isn't wholeheartedly agreeing with you, you might have noticed when earlier in the thread I pointed out that LRMs are overwhelming in an indirect fire role when multiple LRM platforms can be fielded by one spotter, and suggested a way to balance that. As individual weapons however, LRMs are not overpowered. A speed increase didn't turn them into super weapons, and yes you can still use cover exactly as effectively as you could before the speed increase.

Master Maniac, on 19 March 2014 - 10:31 PM, said:

To compare, an LRM 20 can deal its 20 points of damage with none of the above considerations. The only complications are "is there something between him and me," and "does somebody have him locked." That's it. They are a zero risk weapon.

So why don't you hate lasers? They're low risk, instant travel time, require no lock and can be focused on one section of a 'Mech. As far as convergence goes, that's instant between similar weapons. The only consideration is when you have split direct fire weapons between your arm and your torso or are firing multiple ballistic type weapons. Also, what's your accuracy with an LRM 20? I doubt you even average 10 damage out of that after AMS and cover.

Edited by Osric Lancaster, 19 March 2014 - 11:19 PM.

[LTGear]

lazy LRM shooters would only appreciate the patch. why dont just PGI take away all the heat managment and make this game more fun to play with huh if that's the case

[Appogee]

I hardly ever use LRMs (I find them boring) but I agree some LRM speed buff was needed, so they could hit Lights once again.

As it stands, LRMs aren't a problem... multiple Mechs boating them is the problem.

In a PUG match, it's rare to be able to get together enough of a posse to successfully go back and take out the LRM boats spamming remote locks from on the opposite side of the map. And one player usually can't take out say three boats by themself.

But hopefully the casual boaters will get bored with them and the game will go back to something more approaching normal within a week or two.

Edited by Appogee, 19 March 2014 - 11:29 PM.

[Master Maniac]

Appogee, on 19 March 2014 - 11:27 PM, said:

I hardly ever use LRMs (I find them boring) but I agree some LRM speed buff was needed, so they could hit Lights once again.

As it stands, LRMs aren't a problem... multiple Mechs boating them is the problem.

In a PUG match, it's rare to be able to get together enough of a posse to successfully go back and take out the LRM boats spamming remote locks from on the opposite side of the map. And one player usually can't take out say three boats by themself.

But hopefully the casual boaters will get bored with them and the game will go back to something more approaching normal within a week or two.

LRMs *are* the problem if they are a problem when boated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT: below, I am addressing "the other guy."

"You're tripping all over those bottom two levels of Graham's hierarchy."

lmao, you're adorable.

"If you didn't have such a hard on for shouting down anyone who isn't wholeheartedly agreeing with you"

Deflection. Troll tactics. Ignored.

"So why don't you hate lasers? They're low risk, instant travel time, require no lock and can be focused on one section of a 'Mech."

Oooh, so close. You got 1 out of 3. Ding ding ding! They're hitscan weapons, so they do indeed have instant travel time. And though they CAN be focused on one section of a 'Mech, this effect can be instantly negated with a maneuver as simple as a torso twist, turn, or...well...any kind of actual movement. If you sit still and take it, that's on you. And low risk? ROFL. Yeah, sure they are. If you're a light with an ER halfway across the map, I guess. Because last I checked you need line of sight AND you need to keep the beam on target for its burn duration if you actually want to do anything more meaningful than scratching the other guy's paint.

You keep trying, munchkin.

"A speed increase didn't turn them into super weapons"

Nobody said they're superweapons. People are saying they're overpowered. There is a big difference between those claims. LRMs are NOT "individual" weapons in that they are entirely player controlled. They are algorithm controlled. The player merely picks their victim. In this, they are not to be judged the same as a direct fire weapon. As I stated before, LRMs cannot *not* be broken (double negatives for emphasis, baby) if they're "okay individually" but "a problem when boated." Nooo. That's not how it works. If they're a problem when boated, that means they're a problem, given the complete lack of a need for skill to use them effectively. Player error is only about 10% of the equation where LRMs are concerned.

They must be changed. The core mechanics of them are sloppy, lazy, and patently unrefined. They were broken and skill-free before, and the LAST thing that should have been done was to arbitrarily make them *better.*

Foremost, acquiring and keeping a lock needs to be more difficult, especially where "piggybacking" other locks is concerned. Direct line of sight should be speedy, sure, but there needs to be some form of penalty when locking someone else's contact. It quite simply needs to be harder than "mouse over the big red box." That is ridiculous.

Screen shake needs to go. LRMs are WAY exploitable because of the sheer amount of screen shake caused by their impact. LRM 5 boats are jerks and they know it.

Heat levels need a blanket increase. Seriously. Every other weapon in the game is choked by heat, EXCEPT for LRMs, which can be fired constantly with chainfire from a safe position with barely a pause between targets.

I'm not advocating the removal of LRMs from the game, as much as I personally bear a distaste for indirect fire tactics. I really do. But I am aware they have a rightful place in the game, and they should not be useless or ineffective. I merely advocate that they require a little more skill than "hover cursor over red box, hold LMB until dead." That's where they are right now, and making them even more effective in that role is insanity.

I don't really give too much of a care regarding canon, as BT rules were made for a tabletop board game. This does NOT in its purest form make for a good real-time simulation. So, that being said, I'm all for the idea of, say, increasing LRM damage so that the weapons are more powerful, and less about spam. They could require a steady hand, a degree of patience, and good timing with shots. If you're going to take a support role, then you need to coordinate with your spotters, because piggybacking should take a bit more time to get tone than direct line of sight. The tradeoff should be improved accuracy and better damage.

Now, again I repeat - I SAY AGAIN - LRMs should be a part of the game. They should be powerful, even if TT says that they're only for "softening up mechs." This is a combat simulation, and nobody really wants to be a paint scratcher. That sucks. So buff 'em up. Make them powerful. I've got no problem with that. The endless, constant, thoughtless missile spam is and always has been detrimental to the game, and that's the real problem. That barely-interrupted constant stream of cheap, easy damage. Give aiming, locking on, and letting rip with missiles some meaning.

In short, fix this crap, PGI. Seriously. This was the dumbest thing I've seen in a while.

"I doubt you even average 10 damage out of that after AMS and cover. "

lol, "cover." Somebody doesn't get the problem with the flight speed increase. lolololol

Actually, I know that you do. You're just deflecting. Which is fine. Have a lovely day, now.

Edited by Master Maniac, 20 March 2014 - 01:17 AM.

[Appogee]

Master Maniac, on 20 March 2014 - 12:23 AM, said:

"You're tripping all over those bottom two levels of Graham's hierarchy."

lmao, you're adorable.

"If you didn't have such a hard on for shouting down anyone who isn't wholeheartedly agreeing with you"

Deflection. Troll tactics. Ignored.

"So why don't you hate lasers? They're low risk, instant travel time, require no lock and can be focused on one section of a 'Mech."

Oooh, so close. You got 1 out of 3. Ding ding ding! They're hitscan weapons, so they do indeed have instant travel time. And though they CAN be focused on one section of a 'Mech, this effect can be instantly negated with a maneuver as simple as a torso twist, turn, or...well...any kind of actual movement. If you sit still and take it, that's on you. And low risk? ROFL. Yeah, sure they are. If you're a light with an ER halfway across the map, I guess. Because last I checked you need line of sight AND you need to keep the beam on target for its burn duration if you actually want to do anything more meaningful than scratching the other guy's paint.

You keep trying, munchkin.

"A speed increase didn't turn them into super weapons"

Nobody said they're superweapons. People are saying they're overpowered. There is a big difference between those claims. LRMs are NOT "individual" weapons in that they are entirely player controlled. They are algorithm controlled. The player merely picks their victim. In this, they are not to be judged the same as a direct fire weapon. As I stated before, LRMs cannot *not* be broken (double negatives for emphasis, baby) if they're "okay individually" but "a problem when boated." Nooo. That's not how it works. If they're a problem when boated, that means they're a problem, given the complete lack of a need for skill to use them effectively. Player error is only about 10% of the equation where LRMs are concerned.

They must be changed. The core mechanics of them are sloppy, lazy, and patently unrefined. They were broken and skill-free before, and the LAST thing that should have been done was to arbitrarily make them *better.*

Foremost, acquiring and keeping a lock needs to be more difficult, especially where "piggybacking" other locks is concerned. Direct line of sight should be speedy, sure, but there needs to be some form of penalty when locking someone else's contact. It quite simply needs to be harder than "mouse over the big red box." That is ridiculous.

Screen shake needs to go. LRMs are WAY exploitable because of the sheer amount of screen shake caused by their impact. LRM 5 boats are jerks and they know it.

Heat levels need a blanket increase. Seriously. Every other weapon in the game is choked by heat, EXCEPT for LRMs, which can be fired constantly with chainfire from a safe position with barely a pause between targets.

I'm not advocating the removal of LRMs from the game, as much as I personally bear a distaste for indirect fire tactics. I really do. But I am aware they have a rightful place in the game, and they should not be useless or ineffective. I merely advocate that they require a little more skill than "hover cursor over red box, hold LMB until dead." That's where they are right now, and making them even more effective in that role is insanity.

"I doubt you even average 10 damage out of that after AMS and cover. "

lol, "cover." Somebody doesn't get the problem with the flight speed increase. lolololol

Actually, I know that you do. You're just deflecting. Which is fine. Have a lovely day, now.

I'd appreciate if you'd make it clearer that all the text after the gif that you responded to didn't actually come from me. You could perhaps add an additional quote tag for whoever did say those things.