373 replies to this topic

[Prezimonto]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 April 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

Skill???

To be fair, the skill isn't just a in clicking a button, but in the fine motor control needed to line up snap shots AND click the button without disturbing aim.

This is a single very specific skill that's highly prized by eSports players who play in highly contrived environments with low random variables. Until the game provides a method of dealing with recoil, windage, the ability to crouch, crawl, stabilize a weapon, or any number of realistic variables an actual machine of war needs to account for to achieve success, there's not much different between ANY weapon the game for overall skill needed.

DFW need the afforementioned twitch, while LRM's need a larger dose of situation awareness, but less fine motor control.

Streaks are perhaps the lowest skill weapon the game as they remove the need for greater situation awareness without adding in fine motor control. As a compensation they now suck for most uses, at least until we Clan streak packs again. I'm just waiting for the crying about them then. I'd much prefer if streaks and SRM's could both be fired off a lock, but only travel in about a 30° arc off the centerline of fire and bone target. SRM's would be slow, and could be fired without targeting for terrible spread, SSRM's should do less damage and travel at least 2x as fast to the target, but can't be fired without a lock. The weapons shouldn't heat seek and still only hit if you've got a target that stays right in front of you.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

Somebody's angry!

Not at all. Have you ever seen the interview scene from Step-brothers? You are Pamn.

[Roland]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Not at all. Have you ever seen the interview scene from Step-brothers? You are Pamn.

I have not seen that, but you seem kind of angry.

Also, I just read the other thread where you state that you basically never use LRM's indirectly. lol

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

I have not seen that, but you seem kind of angry.

Also, I just read the other thread where you state that you basically never use LRM's indirectly. lol

Yes? Why would I? I am running them in a Shadow Hawk. Why would I want to use them indirectly? What does that have to do with this conversation?

I'm not angry, more like supremely disappointed.

You know how part of this conversation is a discussion about reading people and expectations of their actions?

Well, the disappointing part was, I thought you were a rational smart person. I failed miserably in that read.

So I need to get back to work on that.

[Wolfways]

*checks the time*
Still fighting?

Btw, i have diabetes. I hate you all

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Wolfways, on 04 April 2014 - 07:07 AM, said:

*checks the time*
Still fighting?

Btw, i have diabetes. I hate you all

My wife's place does pretty good gluten free cupcakes. Come to Delaware, I'll hook you up.

[Roland]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

Yes? Why would I? I am running them in a Shadow Hawk. Why would I want to use them indirectly? What does that have to do with this conversation?

Well, it would suggest that perhaps you have limited experience in what we're discussing here. Generally, using LRM's indirectly is a pretty massive aspect of their use, since it's their unique strength. And given that we're talking about indirect fire of LRM's using a spotter, it's kind of central to the discussion.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

Well, the disappointing part was, I thought you were a rational smart person. I failed miserably in that read.

So I need to get back to work on that.

It may be that you are perhaps a bit too close to the problem, and are letting your emotions cloud your judgement here.
Now, I'll admit, I was a bit abrasive earlier... Generally, because I have little patience for folks who use guided weapons but then try to trivialize skill used in UNguided weapons by calling them "point and click". So that caused me to be a bit less friendly than usual, and I appologize for that.

But at this point, where folks are saying that predictions of inherently unpredictable things constitutes a "skill", it's just silly.. and I think if you step back, you'll see that quite clearly.

If you are firing missiles indirectly, and the spotter switches targets for no good reason, it's not an indication that you made a MISTAKE in choosing to fire those LRM's. Or Asmudius' example, where he happened to get a lucky headshot on the spotter and kill him instantly. The guy firing LRM's didn't make a MISTAKE in choosing to fire them...because there's no possible way he could have predicted that Asmudius was going to get a lucky headshot.. because it was LUCK.

Put aside my prior abrasiveness, accept my appology for that, and then accept the obvious reality of what I'm saying here.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

*

So because I'm currently using 2 LRM 10's on a Shadow Hawk, with limited ammo...and thus choose to make 90% of my shots via direct fire...that means I've never used LRM's indirectly and don't understand the conversation?

I have over 4000 posts, MANY of them are in discussion of LRM's over the last year and a half. I've used them in every way, shape or form. During LRMageddon's and when they were complete trash, I've still tried to use them.

You on the other hand, obviously do not use them and are butt hurt because you die to them.

[Roadkill]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

Put aside my prior abrasiveness, accept my appology for that, and then accept the obvious reality of what I'm saying here.

What's most important is that you like pie even though it is a low skill dessert. On that we are in agreement. ;-)

I still disagree with you regarding prediction. People make careers out of predicting what you're calling "inherently unpredictable" things, and they're very good at it. It isn't impossible, it's just hard. It isn't precise, either, but over time it is possible to be more accurate than not.

And that's a skill. After all, we're really just talking about human behavior here. And despite the apparent chaos human behavior is very predictable.

[Roland]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

So because I'm currently using 2 LRM 10's on a Shadow Hawk, with limited ammo...and thus choose to make 90% of my shots via direct fire...that means I've never used LRM's indirectly and don't understand the conversation?

Dude, try not to read it as an insult. It's just pointing out that you, by your own admission, almost never use missiles indirectly.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

You on the other hand, obviously do not use them and are butt hurt because you die to them.

What exactly makes you think that I don't use them?

I've run tons of LRM mechs in MWO, and ran LRM support mechs for my unit in MW4 for the better part of a decade.

The fact that I don't consider them to be high skill weapons doesn't stem from me NOT using them. It stems from me using them extensively, compared to other weapons I use extensively.

Roadkill, on 04 April 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

I still disagree with you regarding prediction. People make careers out of predicting what you're calling "inherently unpredictable" things, and they're very good at it. It isn't impossible, it's just hard. It isn't precise, either, but over time it is possible to be more accurate than not.

And that's a skill. After all, we're really just talking about human behavior here. And despite the apparent chaos human behavior is very predictable.

Only in certain cases, and generally only on the macroscopic level.

In the situation I described, there is no prediction involved, because the spotter is making a decision based purely upon an internal state. It's not based upon information that you, as the shooter, actually have any access to. Thus, you cannot be expected to predict that action.

Asmudius's example is even better. You could not possibly have predicted that he would get a lucky headshot on your spotter. The fact that your LRM's missed in that case was something completely beyond your control. No skill would have allowed you to predict that outcome. It was random chance.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

OH COOL YOU USED LRM's in MW4?

Congrats dude! That helps!

[Roland]

You should probably read the whole sentence there.

[Harathan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

OH COOL YOU USED LRM's in MW4?

Congrats dude! That helps!

Now you're just trolling dude. If you're going to attempt to counter an arguement, at least use substance.

...

I don't like popcorn, but if I did, I'd be eating some while reading this thread. It's better than a movie, and free.

[Roadkill]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

Asmudius's example is even better. You could not possibly have predicted that he would get a lucky headshot on your spotter. The fact that your LRM's missed in that case was something completely beyond your control. No skill would have allowed you to predict that outcome. It was random chance.

I'm still not really sure what your point is.

I never claimed that the skill is always applicable, so I'm not sure why it's so important to prove that a case exists where it isn't useful. Without feeling the need to actually list one, I freely admit that such a case surely exists.

Twitch skill isn't always applicable for a PPC sniper, either. So what?

What point are you trying to make in all this?

[Roland]

Roadkill, on 04 April 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

I'm still not really sure what your point is.

I never claimed that the skill is always applicable, so I'm not sure why it's so important to prove that a case exists where it isn't useful. Without feeling the need to actually list one, I freely admit that such a case surely exists.

To be clear here, you actually did claim that whether your LRM's hit or missed was ALWAYS due to your skill as the shooter.. that if they missed, it was due to a lack of skill. This is what I took issue with there, because I don't think it's true at all.

Certainly though I would agree that there most definitely is some degree of skill though, in that there are many situations where a shooter has information which will inform a more skilled player about the liklihood of his LRM's hitting.

My objection was merely to the notion that this was always the case, and that all misses were due to a lack of skill... Due to the nature of LRM's in indirect fire mode, there are just some things which are out of the control of the shooter. It's actually one of the things that makes me dislike using LRM's a lot of the time in PUG games, because you are often depending on PUGs to not be jackasses, which is saddly too much to expect much of the time.

Roadkill, on 04 April 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

Twitch skill isn't always applicable for a PPC sniper, either. So what?

Well, with a PPC, if I miss it's pretty much always going to be entirely my fault. The outcome with direct fire weapons is pretty much entirely dependent upon my skill as the shooter.

[Wolfways]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

My wife's place does pretty good gluten free cupcakes. Come to Delaware, I'll hook you up.

I live in Wallsend, England. Delaware is a little bit out of the way to go for cupcakes. Hmm... exactly how good are they?

Back on topic (sort of)...
Isn't there a MW RPG? I'd assume that it contains weapon stats for RPG which are completely different from TT stats. I know GW released RPG stats for all their WH40k weapons.
Wouldn't it make more sense to base MWO on those stats seeing as we aren't controlling our own small army of mechs? I have no idea if they exist or what, if they do, those stats are though.

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

Well, with a PPC, if I miss it's pretty much always going to be entirely my fault. The outcome with direct fire weapons is pretty much entirely dependent upon my skill as the shooter.

You've never hit a friendly who walked out from behind cover between you and your target? Ahh...the amount of CDA's i've TK'd...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Harathan, on 04 April 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

Now you're just trolling dude. If you're going to attempt to counter an arguement, at least use substance.

...

I don't like popcorn, but if I did, I'd be eating some while reading this thread. It's better than a movie, and free.

There is definitely some trolling now. A bunch of us have tried having a proper conversation with Roland, but that hasn't worked. BUT HIS PROWESS WITH MW4 LRM'S HAS CHANGED MY MIND.

Wolfways, on 04 April 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

I live in Wallsend, England. Delaware is a little bit out of the way to go for cupcakes. Hmm... exactly how good are they?

I know, I saw you were from England, but figured I'd be nice and offer anyway.

I'd say pretty darn good, for Gluten-Free anyway. Now the Vegan ones they do...blech.

[Roland]

Wolfways, on 04 April 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

You've never hit a friendly who walked out from behind cover between you and your target? Ahh...the amount of CDA's i've TK'd...

Generally, if I accidentally shoot a friendly, it's my fault. There are definitely times when a teammate is in a stupid location, and so I might not CARE if I accidentally shoot him, and take the shot anyway... but due to the relatively short travel time of weapons, it's extremely unlikely that you could take a shot, and THEN have a teammate run into the path of the bullet.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 April 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

There is definitely some trolling now. A bunch of us have tried having a proper conversation with Roland, but that hasn't worked. BUT HIS PROWESS WITH MW4 LRM'S HAS CHANGED MY MIND.

1) Other folks here and I seem to be having a proper conversation, right now.
2) The mention of MW4 LRM's was designed to show that even going back prior to MWO's existence, I actually ran LRM's quite often, so I'm not opposed to their usage as you mistakenly assumed. It's also worth noting that in that same sentence, I point out that I've used LRM's extensively in MWO. You apparently didn't read the whole sentence though.

[Roadkill]

Roland, on 04 April 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

To be clear here, you actually did claim that whether your LRM's hit or missed was ALWAYS due to your skill as the shooter.. that if they missed, it was due to a lack of skill. This is what I took issue with there, because I don't think it's true at all.

If you would be so kind as to point out where I made that claim I would appreciate it, because I do not believe that I did.

I claimed that it applied to a situation that you described, and we disagree about that, but I never claimed that it always applied.

Quote

Well, with a PPC, if I miss it's pretty much always going to be entirely my fault. The outcome with direct fire weapons is pretty much entirely dependent upon my skill as the shooter.

Unless that guy you're shooting over decides to jump right as you pull the trigger.

Or that guy running away from the target you're shooting at decides to swerve right into your line of fire.

Or some dumbass comes running up from behind you and crosses right through your perfectly visible continuous stream of fire.

All things that have happened to me many times.

But I was specifically talking about twitch skill, which is useless if, say, some assault decides to face hug you in the futile hope that PGI has implemented Stackpoling since the last patch. ;-)

[Roland]

Roadkill, on 04 April 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

If you would be so kind as to point out where I made that claim I would appreciate it, because I do not believe that I did.

I claimed that it applied to a situation that you described, and we disagree about that, but I never claimed that it always applied.

In the scenario I described, which was specifically set up as one which you couldn't really predict the actions of the spotter, you claimed that the miss was due to your lack of skill as a shooter.

However, at this point if we agree that there are cases where a miss is determined by factors outside the shooter's control, then we can just chalk this up to misunderstanding each other.

Quote

Unless that guy you're shooting over decides to jump right as you pull the trigger.


Or that guy running away from the target you're shooting at decides to swerve right into your line of fire.

Or some dumbass comes running up from behind you and crosses right through your perfectly visible continuous stream of fire.

All things that have happened to me many times.

As mentioned above though, those things are almost always under your control as the shooter, in that the actual time between firing direct fire weapons and their impact is always extremely short. There's just not that much stuff that can really happen there. Certainly there's a LITTLE bit of wiggle, but in virtually all cases, if you miss with direct fire weapons, it's totally on you as the shooter.

Quote

But I was specifically talking about twitch skill, which is useless if, say, some assault decides to face hug you in the futile hope that PGI has implemented Stackpoling since the last patch. ;-)

You know what, I actually had a dream a few days ago of mech explosions being implemented in MWO... and actually did it in a cool way, where it wasn't a nuclear explosion, but you saw the mech kind of start shaking and then explode in a fairly small radius of damage.

Honestly, in MW4, mech's exploding was definitely a GOOD thing for gameplay... because it added a number of interesting decisions on the parts of pilots.

For a crippled mech, you still had something you could do... You could still go out in a blaze of glory even after losing all your guns. Likewise, when killing mechs, you had to be cognizant of the fact they were going to explode, and make sure that you and your teammates were clear of the blast radius before they went.