126 replies to this topic

[Feindfeuer]

You are calling everyone out on only flaming and beeing unconstructive, and you are right to a certain degree... but you yourself did not provide any argument (ie, constructive information) why this suggestion is worth implementing besides "i like it that way" and "it fits my personal idea of realism". All while shooting down arguments that care to explain why and how they think it is a bad idea, or trying to find a middle ground/compromise.

Short;
you're beeing just as unconstructive as you claim everyone else to be, ingoring valid arguments. It's kind of sad, but for me it looks like you're the person doing the most damage to your suggestion atm.


Maybe just take a deep breath and reorganize your thoughts before answering, cause i'm not here to insult you or belittle your idea. Maybe edit the OP (marking what you edited) expanding on your idea and how you envision this would benefit gameplay, gameflavor or overall feeling of the game, etc.
For example the Idea of Crazy DIP is realy not that bad, it would allow for information of specific calibres, etc on certain AC variants used on different mechs, while also maintaining the canon category, making the whole thing easy to browse. Another good argument for that would be, that you could create a money-sink, as not all AC/20 variants would fit all mechs, making it not that easy to switch them between different chassis.... this is of course not a good argument for a player, but for ingame economy, its a good point.

Edited by Feindfeuer, 01 July 2012 - 12:49 PM.

[Mchawkeye]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

Why do you keep alternating between accounts anyway?

...Between what accounts?

[BFalcon]

Guys, you can't argue with a someone as close-minded as he seems to be - let's stop feeding the troll now. We tried.

[Future Perfect]

Agent CraZy DiP, not sure if the capital letters went on the right place.

[Aesaar]

Future Perfect: So are you or are you not interested in having a civilised discussion about your idea? You haven't done much to show you aren't just a troll.

Edited by Aesaar, 01 July 2012 - 12:51 PM.

[Future Perfect]

Aesaar, on 01 July 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

Future Perfect: So are you or are you not interested in having a civilised discussion about your idea? You haven't done much to show you aren't just a troll.

It's really not my fault if some people feels butthurt with my suggestion.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

AC/2-5-10-20 is ****** proof, that's the weapons damage rating. Why would you want to change it?

[Mchawkeye]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

Agent CraZy DiP, not sure if the capital letters went on the right place.

I know you don't like explaining your theories about, well, anything, but we are quite clearly two separate individuals; word choice and syntax are very different...
So why do you think we are one and the same?

[Aesaar]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

It's really not my fault if some people feels butthurt with my suggestion.

You pretty much ignored every reasonable response people made. Not everyone was insulting you.

You still haven't explained why your change should be made or what it would add to the game. Change for the sake of change isn't a good reason to do anything.

Edited by Aesaar, 01 July 2012 - 01:02 PM.

[Future Perfect]

Mchawkeye, on 01 July 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

I know you don't like explaining your theories about, well, anything, but we are quite clearly two separate individuals; word choice and syntax are very different...
So why do you think we are one and the same?

Yeah he seems to be running out of mountain dew there in the arizona desert.

[Agent CraZy DiP]

Mchawkeye, on 01 July 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

I know you don't like explaining your theories about, well, anything, but we are quite clearly two separate individuals; word choice and syntax are very different...
So why do you think we are one and the same?

Plus, I'm too lazy to make a sig! So there! =P

[Mchawkeye]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Yeah he seems to be running out of mountain dew there in the arizona desert.

What on earth does that actually mean, and in what way does it answer my very simple question?

[Spleenslitta]

I know this guy from other threads. He behaves like this constantly. You can't reason with him.

No matter how much information or good reasoning you place in front of him he just ignores it regardless of how much proof you have.

[CutterWolf]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

I don't care what you like, I care what I like.

Proof he is nothing but a Troll. Nothing to see here any more guys move along now

[Xandre Blackheart]

This is a totally stupid idea. They should be renamed to BGFG20, BFG10, LRG5, and PLINK2.

Because it amuses me.

[Codex]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

Because you name a cannon after it's caliber and not on how much damage it does.

And when I think about it the 150MM Autocannon should be 30 points of damage and not 25.

I'm not sure thinking is really working out for you. May wanna stop before you hurt yourself.

As for the AC/* conversation, you are attempting to complicate things. They have already said they are trying to stick with the rules that have been established for almost 30 years, and you're walking in saying this needs to get changed, and this needs to be renamed, and that is archaic, blah blah blah. Your drivel that you posts as arguments to back up your reasons are as shortsided as others (and I am sure, mine) desire to stick to the canon. You are so intent on changing things to suit yourself that you aren't giving credit to the developers of the original game, let alone credit to the current game developers that are trying to bring a faithful adaptation of the original core game back into the world.

If you want Phased Plasma Cannons or renamed ACs, why don't you go play Armored Core or something like that. This is an established genre, and won't change on the whims of one little troll obsessed with his own mediocrity.

[Fire for Effect]

Future Perfect, on 01 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

I'm trying to bring some elements more into the realms of reality but you have your nose stuck too close to some old rulebook.

Well since "this old rulebook" is in its 5th edition and is around maybe longer than you live and strangely the names for weapons have stayed the same it is obviously something that anyone could understand and the majority has agreed to use it.

So maybe you are just stuck with the name but just to show that i am a kind guy I could give you a hint just ask the Devs if you can have a client just for yourself in which you can name the AC/20 maybe "wammyholemaker" or watever you want and then you are happy and other people can keep their standard. If you are at it you could try to ask if the world might change the standard measurement of length "meter" to lets say FP-toes (but specify if right or left).

[ArctykWolf]

Ok 1st of all this IS NOT!!!!! World of tanks so quit trying to bring that crap over to this game. Mechwarrior takes place far into the future. Auto cannons will remain AC's no matter how much you cry. As far as machine guns good luck on that as well....the guns used are not multiple barrel so Rotary <-- lol guns need not be renamed as well. Multi-barreled guns commonly known as Gatling guns or just machine guns will keep their place.

There is no need to dumb things down for people as they always have World of Warcraft to keep their minds busy if this game is to rough. If you never played Battletech or Mechwarrior there's tons of info and you'll be up to speed fairly quick. If you have played then you know renaming stuff will only mess up things not fix or prevent anything.

Playability and game mechanics are what should be discussed as they have relevance to all players. The names of stuff is pointless and even a new player will grasp them all fairly fast.

[Karl Streiger]

I haven't seen a vid where the player fired a AC different to a AC 20. Are the small caliber single shot too? So the only difference is v0 and shell size? What a pitty i would really i had hope to see a Pontiac 100..in action - firing a long burst of 60mm shells - or the triple burst of a ChemSet - all we may have is the single high explosive assault mortar

Edited by Karl Streiger, 02 July 2012 - 03:37 AM.

[Future Perfect]

They fire a single shell that does all the damage and not a stream of shells that divides that damage between them and also the size of the shell cases seems to be about three times the caliber in length and not like modern tank cannon cases that are somewhere between six and seven calibers in length.

So I propose that the AC/20 are in fact shooting shells the size of 200MM, the AC/10 fires shells the size of 150MM and finally the AC/5 fires shells the size of 100MM.

Oh, did I forget the AC/2?

Well that would fire shells the size of 50-60MM and probably should be too puny to penetrate the multi-layerd armor of a battlemech.

And machineguns then?

Well, I can't really think that they would do any damage at all to a mech.

Edited by Future Perfect, 09 July 2012 - 11:23 PM.