72 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 03:15 PM, said:

Continued "askance," huh?

You mean here:


and here:



and here, here, here, and here....:





You're right, I don't get where you asked him about his parameters. (Those are all of your posts in this thread)

Meanwhile, here's my first post:

yes, every post mentioning team settings, etc? But don't let the facts stop you any more than they have yet.

[Bishop Steiner]

Pjwned, on 27 February 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

Like I said earlier I do agree that BAP isn't very useful for a build like OP posted, but I don't really see how those benefits are much less useful in a PUG setting if your build does benefit from BAP more fully.

Because the benefit is minimal for the build itself? But potentially more useful with a team taking advantage of it, somethign that seldom occurs in PUG matches?

Or are you saying that the what, 3% of match time spent sniping at legs at 1000 meters is regularly more useful to an enforcer, especially in a solo queue, than the 10 kph would be?

The advantage is situational at best, and in a situation seen far less than where the extra speed would be helpful. Those two facts are not separate from one another. The entire OP is what is more worthwhile, for the OP to use on his Enforcer. BAP or 10 kph more speed? The only contingent that would lean things in favor of BAP, for the OP, using an Enforcer, is for supporting a team.

The Enforcer is already a piss-poor sniper, overall, with only a single hardpoint high enough to make it overly good at the job. If we were talking about a Shadowhawk-2K, with 2-3 ERLLasers in a high mount, then the factors would sway back into favor potentially of using BAP. But since the majority of the ENFs hardpoints are waist high, it's already a bad candidate for the "sweep legs at 1000 metres" role.

Are there theoretical instances where he might benefit from BAP? Yes. That is not what the OP asked though. Dock can theorycraft all kind of potentialities to support his BAP fixation, but anyone looking at the whole picture, would generally agree that that is NOT the role that the ENF is especially suited for.

Every choice for good builds is comes down to "do the net sum of pros and cons support using the item in question".

In the case of the Enforcer, in the scenario posted with the OP, one doesn't need to know his exact build for that to be a categoric "NO". Because if he is using his mech for that theoretical 1000-1200 meter laser shot with any regularity, he has already chosen poorly by picking the Enforcer. Conversely, with it's speed, agility, tankiness and hardpoint location, the ENF IS almost invariably going to benefit from more speed.

[Dock Steward]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 04:36 PM, said:

yes, every post mentioning team settings, etc? But don't let the facts stop you any more than they have yet.

Yup, you mentioned them and how you think they relate to this and that, but you never actually asked the OP what THEIR parameters were, let alone asked continuously. You just made a bunch of assumptions and started dictating what should be used and how. Sure, you gave the obligatory, "but do what you want," which was directed at me, like pretty much all of your posts, but, nope, you never actually asked the OP to specify his/her needs in any way.

See, I like to fully understand the problem before I try to diagnose it. Hence my FIRST statement regarding needing to know the OP's intentions. You know, the thing you claim to have asked, but never actually did?

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 04:48 PM, said:

Yup, you mentioned them and how you think they relate to this and that, but you never actually asked the OP what THEIR parameters were, let alone asked continuously. You just made a bunch of assumptions and started dictating what should be used and how. Sure, you gave the obligatory, "but do what you want," which was directed at me, like pretty much all of your posts, but, nope, you never actually asked the OP to specify his/her needs in any way.

See, I like to fully understand the problem before I try to diagnose it. Hence my FIRST statement regarding needing to know the OP's intentions. You know, the thing you claim to have asked, but never actually did?

Yes, you make a stink of my "disparaging the OPs aim" to support your argument, yet apparently are willing to disparage his intelligence and ability to pick out from the context of the conversation. Bravo.

As stated in the post above, the ONLY potentiality that would lead to being in favor of a BAP of the speed would be to support the team. Period. End of story. In any other scenario the ENF is already a poor choice for the role that one one take advantage of the BAPs abilities, AGAIN, unless one literally had nothing else to use that tonnage on. But by all means, keep gnashing your teeth and looking for arguments.

I trust the OP to be intelligent enough to read the replies and discern that on his own.

But by all means, keep beating that dead horse til you win the internet.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 27 February 2015 - 04:55 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

Yes, you make a stink of my "disparaging the OPs aim" to support your argument, yet apparently are willing to disparage his intelligence and ability to pick out from the context of the conversation. Bravo.

As stated in the post above, the ONLY potentiality that would lead to being in favor of a BAP of the speed would be to support the team. Period. End of story. In any other scenario the ENF is already a poor choice for the role that one one take advantage of the BAPs abilities, AGAIN, unless one literally had nothing else to use that tonnage on. But by all means, keep gnashing your teeth and looking for arguments.

I trust the OP to be intelligent enough to read the replies and discern that on his own.

Okay, please point me to the part where you asked if the OP was playing with or without a team.

Look, I can very obviously point to where I ACTUALLY said I needed to know the OP's intentions in order to answer their question, but if you want to claim that by arguing with me, the OP could discern the answer for themself, fine. I'm not the OP and cannot say what was or was not gleaned by them from you statements. Personally, if I was the OP, and some jackass started arguing with some other jackass without actually bringing me into my own conversation, I wouldn't pay attention to either of them.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

Okay, please point me to the part where you asked if the OP was playing with or without a team.

Look, I can very obviously point to where I ACTUALLY said I needed to know the OP's intentions in order to answer their question, but if you want to claim that by arguing with me, the OP could discern the answer for themself, fine. I'm not the OP and cannot say what was or was not gleaned by them from you statements. Personally, if I was the OP, and some jackass started arguing with some other jackass without actually bringing me into my own conversation, I wouldn't pay attention to either of them.

Yes, you did, then I echoed the very same sentiment when REPLYING TO THE OP. I'm sorry if you can't figure that out by the context, that you know, a comment made directly in reply to the OP might just be for the OPs consumption, but hey, I trust the OP to be a little quicker on the uptake than you are choosing to be, apparently.

As for the "jackass", again look in the mirror sparky. My points for the OP to not use BAP are plainly spelled out. Whether you get that or not, or approve, I frankly could not give a crap less about.

So again,

enjoy yourself. And welcome to my ignore list, where I put all the other people who are more interested in trying to "win their argument" than the actual question at hand. (And manage to do a sensationally bad job at supporting that argument, to boot)

Buh bye.

[Dock Steward]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 05:05 PM, said:

Yes, you did, then I echoed the very same sentiment when REPLYING TO THE OP. I'm sorry if you can't figure that out by the context, that you know, a comment made directly in reply to the OP might just be for the OPs consumption, but hey, I trust the OP to be a little quicker on the uptake than you are choosing to be, apparently.

As for the "jackass", again look in the mirror sparky. My points for the OP to not use BAP are plainly spelled out. Whether you get that or not, or approve, I frankly could not give a crap less about.

So again,

enjoy yourself. And welcome to my ignore list, where I put all the other people who are more interested in trying to "win their argument" than the actual question at hand. (And manage to do a sensationally bad job at supporting that argument, to boot)

Buh bye.

Ike, are you saying we ain't friends? Because if you said we weren't friends, why, I don't think I could bare it.

See ya. I'll be here, still looking for the post you made directly to the OP...

[Felio]

mogs01gt, on 27 February 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Why would he need to cancel ECM?

It's less important now that we have VOIP, but canceling ECM is pretty darn great for alerting teammates to enemies. And even with VOIP, you still need to cancel ECM for LRM support.

[Pjwned]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 04:47 PM, said:

Because the benefit is minimal for the build itself? But potentially more useful with a team taking advantage of it, somethign that seldom occurs in PUG matches?

Or are you saying that the what, 3% of match time spent sniping at legs at 1000 meters is regularly more useful to an enforcer, especially in a solo queue, than the 10 kph would be?

The advantage is situational at best, and in a situation seen far less than where the extra speed would be helpful. Those two facts are not separate from one another. The entire OP is what is more worthwhile, for the OP to use on his Enforcer. BAP or 10 kph more speed? The only contingent that would lean things in favor of BAP, for the OP, using an Enforcer, is for supporting a team.

The Enforcer is already a piss-poor sniper, overall, with only a single hardpoint high enough to make it overly good at the job. If we were talking about a Shadowhawk-2K, with 2-3 ERLLasers in a high mount, then the factors would sway back into favor potentially of using BAP. But since the majority of the ENFs hardpoints are waist high, it's already a bad candidate for the "sweep legs at 1000 metres" role.

Are there theoretical instances where he might benefit from BAP? Yes. That is not what the OP asked though. Dock can theorycraft all kind of potentialities to support his BAP fixation, but anyone looking at the whole picture, would generally agree that that is NOT the role that the ENF is especially suited for.

Every choice for good builds is comes down to "do the net sum of pros and cons support using the item in question".

I guess it wasn't clear enough that I wasn't just talking about the use of BAP on Enforcers, I agree it's not very useful on them.

Quote

In the case of the Enforcer, in the scenario posted with the OP, one doesn't need to know his exact build for that to be a categoric "NO". Because if he is using his mech for that theoretical 1000-1200 meter laser shot with any regularity, he has already chosen poorly by picking the Enforcer. Conversely, with it's speed, agility, tankiness and hardpoint location, the ENF IS almost invariably going to benefit from more speed.

I agree.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 05:09 PM, said:

Ike, are you saying we ain't friends? Because if you said we weren't friends, why, I don't think I could bare it.

See ya. I'll be here, still looking for the post you made directly to the OP...

I would certainly hope you don't bare it. I certainly don't need nude images of you on top of the rest of this nonsense. That would be unbearable.

Pjwned, on 27 February 2015 - 05:15 PM, said:

I guess it wasn't clear enough that I wasn't just talking about the use of BAP on Enforcers, I agree it's not very useful on them.



I agree.

Yeah man, not trying to argue with you, though you probably did get some bleed through from Dock. But this Topic is about the ENF. There are certainly tons of other scenarios and mechs where you would indeed flip the script. Like the SHD-2K, etc.

[Dock Steward]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 05:15 PM, said:

I would certainly hope you don't bare it. I certainly don't need nude images of you on top of the rest of this nonsense. That would be unbearable.

What? I thought I was ignored?!

So now you've made a liar of yourself TWICE in one thread...

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 05:17 PM, said:

What? I thought I was ignored?!

So now you've made a liar of yourself TWICE in one thread...

morbid curiosity out about what foolishness you are going to spout next just keeps me clicking the "view anyhow". I really need popcorn, you are just a gift that keeps giving.

Moar plz?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 27 February 2015 - 05:20 PM.

[Pjwned]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 05:17 PM, said:

Yeah man, not trying to argue with you, though you probably did get some bleed through from Dock. But this Topic is about the ENF. There are certainly tons of other scenarios and mechs where you would indeed flip the script. Like the SHD-2K, etc.

Agreed again, I guess I was just trying to discuss its benefits on other mechs because it seemed a little bit like you were saying that BAP didn't have many benefits with long range direct fire even on other mechs/builds, but that's more clear now

[Bishop Steiner]

Pjwned, on 27 February 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

Agreed again, I guess I was just trying to discuss its benefits on other mechs because it seemed a little bit like you were saying that BAP didn't have many benefits with long range direct fire even on other mechs/builds, but that's more clear now

Not a problem. Sometime the context gets diminished as a thread moves along. Now, you got me thinking about dusting off my SHD-2K........

[Dock Steward]

Pjwned, on 27 February 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

it seemed a little bit like you were saying that BAP didn't have many benefits with long range direct fire even on other mechs/builds

However could you have gotten that idea...?

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

It's an Enforcer. No missiles. So unless he is supporting teammates with missiles, regularly? Not worth it.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 05:35 PM, said:

However could you have gotten that idea...?

Pjwned, on 27 February 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

Agreed again, I guess I was just trying to discuss its benefits on other mechs because it seemed a little bit like you were saying that BAP didn't have many benefits with long range direct fire even on other mechs/builds, but that's more clear now

just to help you with your reading comprehension.

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

It's an Enforcer. No missiles. So unless he is supporting teammates with missiles, regularly? Not worth it.

keep flailing. It's cute.

[Dock Steward]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 February 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

just to help you with your reading comprehension.




keep flailing. It's cute.

It's called an implication. You made one. Many actually, but listen, I'm going to call it a night. I look forward to reading your self-aggrandizing hypocrisy in, well, pretty much every other thread. Night.

[Spades Kincaid]

In some people's opinion and I happen to agree; the only real reason to choose BAP on that mech would be it's known benefit to teammates. In that case there's no need to ask anything, when you can easily cover both possibilities in a simple reply.

If you're playing it solo? - No BAP
If you're using it as part of a team? - Perhaps BAP if teammates benefit.

or

The only reason to use BAP on that mech is if you're playing with teammates who will benefit from it.

Answered and done. I don't need to know which he intends first, when I can cover both possibilities in one statement and allow him to apply it to his intentions. If I ask first....my answer isn't changing. What's the point?



Now perhaps it's not such a binary choice in your opinion. That's fine, offer your own advice. You may need to ask questions first to cover all the nuances of this complex issue.

There was nothing wrong with Bishop's response, because his answer doesn't require knowing the intentions first. All that really matters is intention A or intention B. You can disagree with his assessment, but making such a huge fuss over the presentation is just.... did someone pee in your Cheerios this morning?

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Word of the day: puerile.

[SilentWolff]

Ill take 25% to sensor range, 25% to target info gathering (which is a big deal imo) and a counter to ECM lights, over 10 kph, but thats just me. Its a bit easier to swallow on a clan mech however, only costing 1 ton.