80 replies to this topic

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 09:55 AM, said:

Also, I find people focus too hard on the total alpha damage of an Oxide or Jenny II.... but unless it's within about 50 meters...those missiles will be spread across all 3 torso on my Medium. With a Medium's speed and agility, it's not quite as easy for a Jenny to park in my back pocket as it is to do on a DWF. But I also find myself exposed a bit more often, all things considered.

Yup... the cSRM6s on the Jenner IIC are basically a melee weapon

[RePlayBoy101]

the only mech that shuld have 10 points of rear armour is the dire becouse it can turn ... the rest shuld be 4 or less(if u got more armour than 4 on anyother mech than a dire ...ur doing it wrong)

[Kmieciu]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

Well believe it or not, having rear armor is the result of my analyzing 25k matches.

"Don't train alone, it only embeds your errors." - Vesemir from Witcher3.

I know a couple of MWO pilots that act just like you. Thousands of PUG matches taught them bad habits that simply cannot be corrected anymore. When we play in group queue, they are the ones with the lowest scores, often getting overrun, dying and blaming it on the OP light mechs.

[Tarogato]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

You can call it the result of being bad if you like. Doesn't change the fact that it's the reality of my playing that it helps a heck of a lot more to have than not.

This honestly puzzles me. He's basically saying that you're not doing something optimally, and that it could be the result of bad playing habits. He's an extraordinarily experienced extremely high level player - instead of taking the opportunity to learn from him, you're basically saying 'sure, maybe I'm bad, but I'm going to keep doing it my way anyways.'

This makes no sense to me. Do you have no ambition?

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarogato, on 12 July 2016 - 03:31 AM, said:

This honestly puzzles me. He's basically saying that you're not doing something optimally, and that it could be the result of bad playing habits. He's an extraordinarily experienced extremely high level player - instead of taking the opportunity to learn from him, you're basically saying 'sure, maybe I'm bad, but I'm going to keep doing it my way anyways.'

This makes no sense to me. Do you have no ambition?

1) one size doesn't fit all, no matter who promotes it.
2) no, I don't have ambition. It's a body game.

If that's so hard for you to grasp, I suggest putting down your keyboard, and getting some sunlight.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 July 2016 - 03:41 AM, said:

1) one size doesn't fit all, no matter who promotes it.
2) no, I don't have ambition. It's a body game.

If that's so hard for you to grasp, I suggest putting down your keyboard, and getting some sunlight.

I find it interesting that you've been going on about how you use a lot of rear armor and how people who use very little rear armor are bad for 3 pages now and are the one suggesting putting down the keyboard.

I run low rear armor myself, usually 2-6 depending on weight class, I did it because I find armor that isn't used is a waste, and its much easier to use armor on the front of your mech than the back, my structure is strong enough to survive most attacks to the rear anyway. I run mechs from all the weight classes often enough, if I took a point of armor off my rear every match that a few points of frontal armor could have helped I'd be running 0 on the backs.

I definitely don't have the 25000 matches you do, but in my current less than 2000 I know getting stuck in my ways and failing to make a change that can help me do better just to be different and give myself a reason shout down others just doesn't make any sense.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dakota1000, on 12 July 2016 - 04:02 AM, said:

I find it interesting that you've been going on about how you use a lot of rear armor and how people who use very little rear armor are bad for 3 pages now and are the one suggesting putting down the keyboard.

I run low rear armor myself, usually 2-6 depending on weight class, I did it because I find armor that isn't used is a waste, and its much easier to use armor on the front of your mech than the back, my structure is strong enough to survive most attacks to the rear anyway. I run mechs from all the weight classes often enough, if I took a point of armor off my rear every match that a few points of frontal armor could have helped I'd be running 0 on the backs.

I definitely don't have the 25000 matches you do, but in my current less than 2000 I know getting stuck in my ways and failing to make a change that can help me do better just to be different and give myself a reason shout down others just doesn't make any sense.

I find it interesting that either your reading comprehension is bad or you are intentionally twisting what I said, since I never once said people using light rear armor are Bad, or Wrong.

I have said that not one playstyle fits every player, for any umber of reasons, and that for some of us, running around with a naked back actually doesn't work. It's not really rocket science to discern.

Anything else you care to lie about?

[Yellonet]

Perhaps one could keep frontloading more and more until you have about 50/50 in death by front and rear shots (while keeping overall deaths at the same or lower level of course).

[meteorol]

Yellonet, on 12 July 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

Perhaps one could keep frontloading more and more until you have about 50/50 in death by front and rear shots (while keeping overall deaths at the same or lower level of course).

If your positioning isn't utterly terrible (and by that i mean really really really terrible) you will never die as much from rear shots as you do from front shots even if you play with zero rear armor.

[Yellonet]

meteorol, on 12 July 2016 - 05:16 AM, said:

If your positioning isn't utterly terrible (and by that i mean really really really terrible) you will never die as much from rear shots as you do from front shots even if you play with zero rear armor.

But your overall deaths might rise with 0 rear armor, which isn't good.

Edited by Yellonet, 12 July 2016 - 05:20 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

meteorol, on 12 July 2016 - 05:16 AM, said:

If your positioning isn't utterly terrible (and by that i mean really really really terrible) you will never die as much from rear shots as you do from front shots even if you play with zero rear armor.

this is true, unless you regularly fight with your back to the enemy. Which given the lack of rear weapons, is probably detrimental. You also will usually get hit in the upper body more than your legs... so should I run my legs naked, too?

The problem is I don't see it as an all or nothing thing. I have matches where I don't get a scratch at all. SO I guess all 10 tons of armor was wasted that match? (Yes, hyperbole). Obviously not. You are probably going to get shot, the majority of the time, so that armor is there for if and when that happens. Obviously one get shot in the back LESS that in the front... which is why mechs have more front armor than rear, even stock. But yes, some of us have found, that the minimal amount of armor we strip from the front really bears little to know impact on our overall survivability, whereas it HAS on more than one occasion saved us from an ambush to have that minimal amount on our rear.

It's true in a perfect match, I won't get my back hit. That little bit of armor is there for when I don't have a perfect match. And has allowed me to contribute to the match afterward, in cases where I would have simply been dead without it.

I simply have not found an instance where 5-8 pts frontal armor was really the difference between life or death, except on maybe a Light Mech. Doesn't mean the Comp Guys are "doing it wrong" because what they do maximizes the probabilities for their play styles, tactics, etc. I have found, for whatever reason one wants to label it, that having a modest amount of rear armor dos the same for me.

Again, it's really not a one size fits all thing.

[Raso]

On heavies and assaults I leave between 10 and 14 on my rear. On some mediums I have as little as 8 or 5 (sometimes less depending on the mech).

Lights, however, I try to keep no less than 7 on my rear ST and 10 on my rear CT. With the higher mobility I find I need to distribute the armor more. It's not armor is the main selling point of lights, to begin with. I just want to be sure a few ACs up the tail pipe don't do me in.

[Templar Dane]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 July 2016 - 05:26 AM, said:

this is true, unless you regularly fight with your back to the enemy. Which given the lack of rear weapons, is probably detrimental. You also will usually get hit in the upper body more than your legs... so should I run my legs naked, too?

The problem is I don't see it as an all or nothing thing. I have matches where I don't get a scratch at all. SO I guess all 10 tons of armor was wasted that match? (Yes, hyperbole). Obviously not. You are probably going to get shot, the majority of the time, so that armor is there for if and when that happens. Obviously one get shot in the back LESS that in the front... which is why mechs have more front armor than rear, even stock. But yes, some of us have found, that the minimal amount of armor we strip from the front really bears little to know impact on our overall survivability, whereas it HAS on more than one occasion saved us from an ambush to have that minimal amount on our rear.

It's true in a perfect match, I won't get my back hit. That little bit of armor is there for when I don't have a perfect match. And has allowed me to contribute to the match afterward, in cases where I would have simply been dead without it.

I simply have not found an instance where 5-8 pts frontal armor was really the difference between life or death, except on maybe a Light Mech. Doesn't mean the Comp Guys are "doing it wrong" because what they do maximizes the probabilities for their play styles, tactics, etc. I have found, for whatever reason one wants to label it, that having a modest amount of rear armor dos the same for me.

Again, it's really not a one size fits all thing.

If you are turning your back to the enemy so that the rear armor you lumped up back there can absorb some damage, you aren't returning fire.

Most of my mechs have 5 rear armor at most, usually just one or two.

[Rampancy]

I don't really get the rear-armor stripping. I play mostly short-ranged builds though, so that's probably a pretty big part of it.

In the thick of a brawl, if you're twisting worth your salt, you'll be exposing your back to your target's buddies. And a smart buddy is going to plant an alpha in that delicious exposed torso of yours. With 10-12 back armor on an assault, you might be able to spread most of it with your twisting. With 2-4? You're looking at a lot of potential crits on your guns and any ammo bins.

[Bishop Steiner]

Templar Dane, on 12 July 2016 - 06:07 AM, said:

If you are turning your back to the enemy so that the rear armor you lumped up back there can absorb some damage, you aren't returning fire.

Most of my mechs have 5 rear armor at most, usually just one or two.

If you're dead from getting ambushed by a sneaky light, you aren't returning fire, either. Funny how that works.

[meteorol]

RampancyTW, on 12 July 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

You're looking at a lot of potential crits on your guns and any ammo bins.

Ammo crits are a myth. The chance is so comically low it can always be ignored (when it comes to placing ammo or armor, or using a case, which is just wasted weight)

[Bishop Steiner]

RampancyTW, on 12 July 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

I don't really get the rear-armor stripping. I play mostly short-ranged builds though, so that's probably a pretty big part of it.

In the thick of a brawl, if you're twisting worth your salt, you'll be exposing your back to your target's buddies. And a smart buddy is going to plant an alpha in that delicious exposed torso of yours. With 10-12 back armor on an assault, you might be able to spread most of it with your twisting. With 2-4? You're looking at a lot of potential crits on your guns and any ammo bins.

I'll admit, that's heavier than I put on all but my most sluggish assaults, but if that is what you find works best for you, I'm certainly not going to tell you to change it. Which is my issue with a goodly number of posts here. If skill level, playstyle, individual reflexes, hardware, etc weren't all actual factors that can critically change the game play experience from one player to the next, I would embrace the "one size fits all" philosophy.

But all those variables ARE real, and somethings, like lag, hardware, reflexes might quite simply not be able to be overcome, no matter how "gitgud" one wishes to try to git. Even if I wanted to be an Ubercomp (which is way too much work for a game these days, sorry) no amount of tactical awareness changes the fact I'm a (son to be) 41 year old guy with a crippled right hand and a potato laptop usually playing at a massive 20 FPS. So what a twitchy 20 year old with a 10 ping and bleeding edge system might be able to react to, and what I can react to, will always be two different things.

But apparently those points are lost on the raging UberComp mind.

meteorol, on 12 July 2016 - 06:15 AM, said:

Ammo crits are a myth. The chance is so comically low it can always be ignored (when it comes to placing ammo or armor, or using a case, which is just wasted weight)

getting your big gun critted, is not.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

RampancyTW, on 12 July 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

I don't really get the rear-armor stripping. I play mostly short-ranged builds though, so that's probably a pretty big part of it.

With brawlers, it can help to stack rear armor since in a scrum you can't always protect it like you can at range.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 12 July 2016 - 06:43 AM, said:

With brawlers, it can help to stack rear armor since in a scrum you can't always protect it like you can at range.

and in QP, most Medium Flankers, end up more likely to be brawling, than not. CN9 and HBK (except the GI) aren't really long range rigs. Or dealing with some lights out hunting the flankers, and usually in pairs, so to be facing one, the other is usually nipping at your heels.

The point being, by your own words... different playstyles, builds and tactics and scenarios, different standards. I'll frontload my GaussJager or KDK3 a lot more than I will mt HBK or CN9, or even my Brawler KDK4.

[Wintersdark]

Templar Dane, on 12 July 2016 - 06:07 AM, said:

If you are turning your back to the enemy so that the rear armor you lumped up back there can absorb some damage, you aren't returning fire.

Most of my mechs have 5 rear armor at most, usually just one or two.

Hardly. Twisting during cool down, be it cycle time or heat - there plenty of.time you're not firing g in any fight other than dinky poke trading.

Any serious brawl, it's easy to flash your rear to draw an attack of opportunity from your opponent. What's fun is doing that basically wastes your opponent's shot, and costing him that time/heat can make all the difference.

Just because you have non-zero rear armor doesn't mean you're not spending that armour.

One can argue it's there "just in case"; and if the "just in case" situation doesn't happen you can spend it later anyways.

"Better safe than sorry"?