94 replies to this topic

[Kaeb Odellas]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

Full on redundant arguing here. Last time I will go back with you on this point as we do not nor will we ever agree here.

When you cap in assault, your actions could be ignored or it could split the team. Both of these situations can cause a game to be won (or lost). Knowing how to do so intelligently is the key. Saying that is stupid but then arguing standing next to an lrm boat is smarter is a bizarre argument.

Where did I say standing next to an LRM boat is a smarter move? What are you talking about?

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

Bringing ams itself gives positions away by the very nature of its dumb firing at every missile coming within a thousand metres (exaggeration for effect).

You can turn it off at the start of the match, then turn it back on when the missiles start flying in earnest.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

I am under that impression and have said so repeatedly. You disagree I get that. Yet that is not only my impression but it is functionally how the game currently works by design. So getting paid for bringing ams is not something that you have been able to argue deserves payout under the what skill is involved in equipping it in the mechlab argument. Staying with the team is not a skill. Especially if the team is just following one guy or chasing their own lights and you follow right along with them. Sorry it just isn't.

You have never actually communicated why it is raw twitch skills and standing in boxes are the only thing that need to be rewarded in this game. Doing the right thing is something to be rewarded too. If the enemy has a shitload of LRM boats targeting one of your dudes, the right thing is to go up and help that dude if you have the equipment to do so.

And again, it's not just equipping it in the mechlab. You have to position yourself to use it. An ECM Raven off by himself does not cover the team with ECM, so he gets no reward for bringing it save personal protection. Same with AMS. Stop reducing the argument to "getting paid for equipping a thing". It's dishonest.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

So your argument is go stand towards the enemy lurms or even to add to your argument, triangulate if there are multiple lurms from multiple directions even to give the best coverage... Great. You know what is even more effective and useful? Going and shooting the lurmers to death. So no I am not buying your best place to stand scenerio as skill based and having trouble with the idea that you actually believe it too. I just think you really want bonus bucks for mechlab choice.

It's not as simple as going up and shooting the LRMers to death. This game is a team effort. If your team is not in the position to support your attack, you're just going to die poiintlessly. In the meantime, protecting your team from enemy fire with ECM and LRMs is a good thing to do, and requires some degree of situational awareness.

And **** off with your horseshit insinuations. I only ever bring AMS when I have extra tonnage I can't fill another way. I couldn't give two shits about getting an extra 500 Cbills per match, or whatever pittance this would pay out. I like to see teamplay rewarded.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

There is a bonus. Survival. Then you get to put out measurable offense and profit.

What offense? A competent enemy won't stop shooting you until you're disarmed or worse. You're not going to put out any measurable offense if you're dead or weaponless. Should you not be rewarded for tanking hundreds of points of damage for your team in a push, while dying in the process?

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 07 February 2017 - 04:45 PM.

[MacClearly]

Kaeb Odellas

Where did I say standing next to an LRM boat is a smarter move? What are you talking about?

Think that is my fault. You did not mention standing next to an lrm I believe you were simply referring to being with the team.




You have never actually communicated why it is raw twitch skills and standing in boxes are the only thing that need to be rewarded in this game. Doing the right thing is something to be rewarded too. If the enemy has a shitload of LRM boats targeting one of your dudes, the right thing is to go up and help that dude if you have the equipment to do so.

No I have repeatidly said over and over that it is an offensive move that requires good sense and awareness. I have said it is an objective. I have also mentioned it possibly being risky. I have however absolutely never at any point ever alluded or said anything close to it being in any way raw twitch. Nor have I used that term at all. Not my argument and no reason to bring it up.

So if the enemy has lrms and lasers they should also get rewards under your system for bringing them...except no. No rewards for bringing equipment is my position.

Right now you are bringing up something that was not my point or part of my reasoning and repeating your point over and over. WE WILL NEVER AGREE THAT RUNNING OVER AND PROVIDING AMS TO HELP SOMEONE SHOULD BE REWARDED, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR ARGUMENT IS TO JUST REPEAT YOURSELF OVER AND OVER.


And again, it's not just equipping it in the mechlab. You have to position yourself to use it. An ECM Raven off by himself does not cover the team with ECM, so he gets no reward for bringing it save personal protection. Same with AMS. Stop reducing the argument to "getting paid for equipping a thing". It's dishonest.

No it is not dishonest. It is absolutely how I feel and how PGI apparently feels also. Again to be very, very direct and clear with you, I don't think that ecm should be rewarded either and have said as much more than once. Same with ams. Equiping something and sticking by team might be helpful but it is not a skilled thing to do. What is dishonest is the mental gymnastics you are trying to leap through to come up with some way that it is somehow skillfull in any way. Until you can come up with a way that it is requiring anything more than following the other little blue icons about than you don't have a counter to what I am saying.



It's not as simple as going up and shooting the LRMers to death. This game is a team effort. If your team is not in the position to support your attack, you're just going to die poiintlessly. In the meantime, protecting your team from enemy fire with ECM and LRMs is a good thing to do, and requires some degree of situational awareness.

I never said it was bad. I said it was not deserving of rewards via space bucks. It requires minimal situational awareness at best. You are talking about it as if it is something that has a learning curve. It does not. Like I said when I even expanded on your argument, looking up in the air to see where the missiles are coming from is not in any way, shape or form a difficult thing to do. You can say over and over that it is but you can't show in any appreciable way that you have a case for that.

And **** off with your horseshit insinuations. I only ever bring AMS when I have extra tonnage I can't fill another way. I couldn't give two shits about getting an extra 500 Cbills per match, or whatever pittance this would pay out. I like to see teamplay rewarded.

Ok...that was not an insinuation. It was me saying directly what I believe you want. So you want teamplay rewarded great! You have that already in a bunch of ways. I still don't want one of those ways to be because you strapped someting on in the mechlab.




What offense? A competent enemy won't stop shooting you until you're disarmed or worse. You're not going to put out any measurable offense if you're dead or weaponless. Should you not be rewarded for tanking hundreds of points of damage for your team in a push, while dying in the process?

My answer doesn't change because you repeat your question. If you don't tank well you die. No reward. If you tank well and live you get to put out damage or your team benefits and they put out the damage.

Not sure if it is intentional and your style is to just keep repeating the same thing over and over or you are just completely incapable of coming up with a reason for ams to earn cbills because you want it to. You have shown no where, that it is skilled. I find it hard to believe you genuinely feel that standing with the team actually has much to it. You haven't even seemed to have the foresight to bring up the 'situational awareness' of which teammate to protect being of value and that judgement being a skill.

So please come up with some sort of reason why it is skilled or even why most people don't even bother to bring it because of how little value it actually has in the game right now.

Edited by MacClearly, 07 February 2017 - 06:01 PM.

[Ori Disciple]

I'd be fine with AMS giving c-bills/xp, but only as long as it's shooting down missles that are targeting someone other than you.

[Galenit]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 10:29 AM, said:

So you are saying you would like the rewards the OP is asking for to be as negligible as as ecm is? Ok.

No, i just asked if you ever noticed the ecm rewards, based on your farming argument.

Come back if you stop assuming and twisting words,
my time is too valuable to waste it on that infantile ****.

Edited by Galenit, 07 February 2017 - 07:20 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 06 February 2017 - 07:47 PM, said:

What you are doing now is a personal attack and being insulting. It is classic you. You can try and deflect with nonsense and jargon but you have not made a valid point, and you have not stayed on subject.

If you want to bring game theory or macro economics you have to tie them into the converstion. You haven't done that nor are you even likely capable of doing so.

Edit: Stop trying to assume what I want as you are really terrible at it and way off base.

You have clearly stated what you what... were you unaware of that? So it is not an assumption of anything on my part, but the full understanding of what you are saying (which I will fully concede you could be unaware of what you are advocating for, that would fit my personal perception of you but I try to give people credit.)

Game Theory or Macro Economics both clearly show how Behavior is influenced by Incentives and Rewards, so it is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT relevant to the discussion about the Reward System. It is why people play Cancer Mechs (RVN-3L 2 or 3 ERLL, CDA-3M 3 ERLL or 2 ERPPC, Night Gyr 2 Guass/ERPPC, Pokebear 2 Guass/2 ERPPC) so much... cause they are Rewarded for hiding behind their teammates and sniping, in contrast to functioning as a TEAM. Those builds are completely irrelevant in well over 95% of games to a teams victory or loss... but that is why they are played, cause they do well as an individual regardless of the Win or Loss.

That is the topic at hand... should the Reward System be expanded so that more than a very narrow and often times misleading part of the totality of the game be the solely worthy of rewarding and judged. You saying that "Yes it should stay the same" are in point of fact arguing for the further devolution of meta PPFLD hiding mechs as everyone is only concerned with getting the most rewards they can instead of learning how to work together as a TEAM. You know... cause this is an actual TEAM based game unlike the "teams" of Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1 which is what you want this game to be, whereas this is a cooperative strategy game with the added fun of the pieces shooting at each other.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 07 February 2017 - 07:49 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Galenit, on 07 February 2017 - 02:57 AM, said:

Your handicapping your firepower to make your team life longer.
Sacrifice some damage/cbills to gain better chance of winning.

"Standing around" with the tiny ecm bubble or the little more ams bubble?
Farming and exploiting?`Did you ever noticed the ecm-rewards?

They should give all actions the same rewards.
Capping, doing damage, ecm, counter-ecm, lance-formation, killing, spotting, ...
but the most of the money should come from wins, not simple point&click.
This would lead to more teamplay and thinking and would do alot against all the moneyfarmers that ignore mission-objectives and just pad their damage and k/d stats.

But this is just a dream as a "thinking mans shooter" is,
its dumbed down and the rewards are matching for that simple play-style.

Your logic is sound... unfortantly you are directing it at one of the "moneyfarmers" who only cares about Stats like KDR, so it is wasted logic and reason since he does not care about any of it.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 07 February 2017 - 07:24 PM, said:

You have clearly stated what you what... were you unaware of that? So it is not an assumption of anything on my part, but the full understanding of what you are saying (which I will fully concede you could be unaware of what you are advocating for, that would fit my personal perception of you but I try to give people credit.)

Game Theory or Macro Economics both clearly show how Behavior is influenced by Incentives and Rewards, so it is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT relevant to the discussion about the Reward System. It is why people play Cancer Mechs (RVN-3L 2 or 3 ERLL, CDA-3M 3 ERLL or 2 ERPPC, Night Gyr 2 Guass/ERPPC, Pokebear 2 Guass/2 ERPPC) so much... cause they are Rewarded for hiding behind their teammates and sniping, in contrast to functioning as a TEAM. Those builds are completely irrelevant in well over 95% of games to a teams victory or loss... but that is why they are played, cause they do well as an individual regardless of the Win or Loss.

That is the topic at hand... should the Reward System be expanded so that more than a very narrow and often times misleading part of the totality of the game be the solely worthy of rewarding and judged. You saying that "Yes it should stay the same" are in point of fact arguing for the further devolution of meta PPFLD hiding mechs as everyone is only concerned with getting the most rewards they can instead of learning how to work together as a TEAM. You know... cause this is an actual TEAM based game unlike the "teams" of Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1 which is what you want this game to be, whereas this is a cooperative strategy game with the added fun of the pieces shooting at each other.

It's an FPS.

You should not get rewards for ams.

Galenit, on 07 February 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

No, i just asked if you ever noticed the ecm rewards, based on your farming argument.

Come back if you stop assuming and twisting words,
my time is too valuable to waste it on that infantile ****.

No I have noticed them and they aren't very much hence my statement.

Not sure how you think that is twisting words but cool. Don't waste your time as we are likely not going to agree.

Edit: Spelling.

Edited by MacClearly, 07 February 2017 - 08:46 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 07:52 PM, said:

It's an FPS.

You should not get rewards for ams.



No I have noticed them and they aren't bery much hence my statement.

Not sure how you think that is twisting words but cool. Don't waste your time as we are likely not going to agree.

the TTK and actual playing of the game quickly disproves your assertion that this is an FPS like Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 07 February 2017 - 07:59 PM, said:

the TTK and actual playing of the game quickly disproves your assertion that this is an FPS like Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1

Only you have brought up other games.

The creator of the game have created it as an FPS, invalidating anything you have to say on the matter.

Sorry it is not what you want it to be in your head.

Edited by MacClearly, 07 February 2017 - 08:47 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 08:45 PM, said:

Only you have brought up other games.

The creator of the game have created it as an FPS, invalidating anything you have to say on the matter.

Sorry it is not what you want it to be in your head.

the creators of this game have implemented a Reward System that rewards only the FPS aspect of the game.*

fixed it for since you are too ignorant of the game to understand the full scope of what is happening while the Match is unfolding... cause you only care about your stats like KDR which is pretty much all that PGI shows even though they track everything and could show a lot more aspects of what constitutes a Match.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 07 February 2017 - 08:50 PM, said:

the creators of this game have implemented a Reward System that rewards only the FPS aspect of the game.*

fixed it for since you are too ignorant of the game to understand the full scope of what is happening while the Match is unfolding... cause you only care about your stats like KDR which is pretty much all that PGI shows even though they track everything and could show a lot more aspects of what constitutes a Match.

No you are incapable of fixing anything because you want to argue what the creators of game in fact created. They get to decide not you, sorry! The mechanics are also a pretty big indicator. It seems you just are unable to comprehend what the difference is between game genres. Kinda sad really for the guy throwing around terms like Game Theory erroneously thinking he understands their meaning and can't relate them to this game. This game which he can't even properly identify...

Edited by MacClearly, 07 February 2017 - 09:15 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 09:08 PM, said:

No you are incapable of fixing anything because you want to argue what the creators of game in fact created. They get to decide not you, sorry! The mechanics are also a pretty big indicator. It seems you just are unable to comprehend what the difference is between game genres. Kinda sad really for the guy throwing around terms like Game Theory erroneously thinking he understands their meaning and can't relate them to this game. This game which he can't even properly identify...

I can identify it quite easily... hence why the game is best played when all 12 people scatter across the map and do not coordinate at all while searching for their own personal glory??? Oh wait... it is not in fact Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1 like I already correctly pointed out. So your premise is completely invalidated by any experience in the actual game... making you intentionally fallacious in your reasoning. But then I have pointed out your lying many times in our interactions cause you do it a whole lot.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 07 February 2017 - 10:29 PM, said:

I can identify it quite easily... hence why the game is best played when all 12 people scatter across the map and do not coordinate at all while searching for their own personal glory??? Oh wait... it is not in fact Titanfall2/CoD/Battlefield1 like I already correctly pointed out. So your premise is completely invalidated by any experience in the actual game... making you intentionally fallacious in your reasoning. But then I have pointed out your lying many times in our interactions cause you do it a whole lot.

Really you don't understand how to identify what lying is?

What is your obsession with these other games your bring up?

How is it that you think you can argue what type of game this is when mechanically is operates as an FPS?

How do you think you can argue against what the creators themselves have labeled it as?

Even all the major review sites etc, properly identify the game for what it is....yet you think you know better than they do?

Are you really not aware that there are FPS's that are team based?

As I have established in our previous interactions you are uneducated and incredibly as evident by your lack of reasoning and ability to form a structured argument that makes sense or understand the concept of evidence. Hence why you use obfuscation and silly anecdotes for evidence because you don't appear to understand the basic concept of discussion or debate. Clearly no formal training or experience doing these things. Then you dive straight into name calling and accusations when logic and common sense are used to beat your asinine attempt at making a point into oblivion.

It is clear as day that you do not have the capacity to even understand what makes an FPS an FPS or the difference between them and say for instance an RTS. Not being able to grasp this basic premise makes it hard to have any kind of conversation with you so it basically disolves into mindless arguing. This time you have done much better on focus however so there is that. So keep trying and I apprecaite you are firmly on attack mode. Attack away Zuul, I can take it.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 11:17 PM, said:

Really you don't understand how to identify what lying is?

What is your obsession with these other games your bring up?

How is it that you think you can argue what type of game this is when mechanically is operates as an FPS?

How do you think you can argue against what the creators themselves have labeled it as?

Even all the major review sites etc, properly identify the game for what it is....yet you think you know better than they do?

Are you really not aware that there are FPS's that are team based?

As I have established in our previous interactions you are uneducated and incredibly as evident by your lack of reasoning and ability to form a structured argument that makes sense or understand the concept of evidence. Hence why you use obfuscation and silly anecdotes for evidence because you don't appear to understand the basic concept of discussion or debate. Clearly no formal training or experience doing these things. Then you dive straight into name calling and accusations when logic and common sense are used to beat your asinine attempt at making a point into oblivion.

It is clear as day that you do not have the capacity to even understand what makes an FPS an FPS or the difference between them and say for instance an RTS. Not being able to grasp this basic premise makes it hard to have any kind of conversation with you so it basically disolves into mindless arguing. This time you have done much better on focus however so there is that. So keep trying and I apprecaite you are firmly on attack mode. Attack away Zuul, I can take it.

it is really easy to spot lying... someone says something that is untrue. Now it can be they are lying unintentionally cause they are dumb or intentionally cause they know the truth, but it does not change it being a lie either way. I will grant that most of yours have been the former kind but that last one was clearly the latter.

because those are actual FPS but they function VERY differently than MWO, therefore they serve as decent examples for how you are obviously incorrect in your premise. I play Titanfall2 a little... but I do not play the other two I use as examples, they were chosen for their popularity and familiarity that people reading it would have with them.

It operates as a Tactical Shooter if anything not a FPS, those are 2 separate sub-genres of the shooter genre... but then I expect you to not know basically anything at this point cause then I am never surprised.

If they think this is an FPS then they are just as ignorant as you... the world is full of ignorance, there is by far more of that than Knowledge on a whole.

Team based FPS are called Tactical Shooters, so yes I do know that there are team based shooters just like yes I know that they are called Tactical Shooters not First Person Shooters. This game transcends even Tactical Shooters because of the longer TTK but I would at least listen to an argument that it is a Tactical Shooter, that could be relevant unlike your ignorant FPS claims.

Your lack of information is staggering especially when it would take less than 5 minutes to google and learn about the things I talk about... so your ignorance does not constitute as a valid premise for your lack of understanding what I am saying. I went to State on my Debate team so it is probably in actuality the Formal Training & Experience that I have in deconstructing points that puts us on different levels. There has been no accusations or name calling... just statements of facts. When you lie, I call you out for lying... when you are ignorant, I call you out for ignorance. Those are neither name calling or accusations inherent in that.

All of which is not really relevant to the topic on hand... or why if your premise that it is only an FPS is true why adding an expanded reward system would be harmful overall. If adding in things that rewarded people for engaging in more team based behavior did not in fact pay them off in XP & cbills, they would quickly stop doing it. Game Theory & Macro Economics as two fields of science on the behavioral effects of humans proves that... so it would be at best a completely moot point you are arguing against. Which leads to the question why would you be arguing against what you believe to be a moot point???

Which is easily answered because you know it is untrue, you are intentionally lying again cause that is in your self interest. You want this to be the most arena shooter it possibly can be, and retaining the flawed reward system that has skewed this game by training players that is the only real way to be rewarded for playing will keep the game in its current state. Encompassing the Reward System into a vast array of things would open up player behavior because they can be rewarded for playing many different Roles on the battlefield instead of being piegon holed into just Arena Deathmatch style.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 07 February 2017 - 11:53 PM.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 07 February 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

it is really easy to spot lying... someone says something that is untrue. Now it can be they are lying unintentionally cause they are dumb or intentionally cause they know the truth, but it does not change it being a lie either way. I will grant that most of yours have been the former kind but that last one was clearly the latter.

because those are actual FPS but they function VERY differently than MWO, therefore they serve as decent examples for how you are obviously incorrect in your premise. I play Titanfall2 a little... but I do not play the other two I use as examples, they were chosen for their popularity and familiarity that people reading it would have with them.

It operates as a Tactical Shooter if anything not a FPS, those are 2 separate sub-genres of the shooter genre... but then I expect you to not know basically anything at this point cause then I am never surprised.

If they think this is an FPS then they are just as ignorant as you... the world is full of ignorance, there is by far more of that than Knowledge on a whole.

Team based FPS are called Tactical Shooters, so yes I do know that there are team based shooters just like yes I know that they are called Tactical Shooters not First Person Shooters. This game transcends even Tactical Shooters because of the longer TTK but I would at least listen to an argument that it is a Tactical Shooter, that could be relevant unlike your ignorant FPS claims.

Your lack of information is staggering especially when it would take less than 5 minutes to google and learn about the things I talk about... so your ignorance does not constitute as a valid premise for your lack of understanding what I am saying. I went to State on my Debate team so it is probably in actuality the Formal Training & Experience that I have in deconstructing points that puts us on different levels. There has been no accusations or name calling... just statements of facts. When you lie, I call you out for lying... when you are ignorant, I call you out for ignorance. Those are neither name calling or accusations inherent in that.

All of which is not really relevant to the topic on hand... or why if your premise that it is only an FPS is true why adding an expanded reward system would be harmful overall. If adding in things that rewarded people for engaging in more team based behavior did not in fact pay them off in XP & cbills, they would quickly stop doing it. Game Theory & Macro Economics as two fields of science on the behavioral effects of humans proves that... so it would be at best a completely moot point you are arguing against. Which leads to the question why would you be arguing against what you believe to be a moot point???

Confirmed you don't know what lying means either.

Now you are saying it is an FPS? Great welcome to what we already know. Arma is however a tactical shooter and that you are arguing against what PGI has classified as a 'Thinking Man's Shooter'. They even marketed it that way. It is a special kind of ignorance you display in reeling against it. I love it though. Like you voluntarily putting on a cone hat and struting around in it for all to see.

That you went to state on any debate team is an egregious lie and very amusing. Thank you for the giggle.

However you continually bring up google which I used a while back to shatter some of your nonsense. That you are trying to throw it back and stick it to me is another source of great pleasure. Obviously I got you and it stuck out and bothered you or you wouldn't be trying so hard to bring it up.

Also what you are doing here is arguing and fighting with me and going completely off topic. If I continue to engage you, I would be helping you hijack the thread and I think we could actually both get in trouble for violating the CoC. So from this point forward I will reply to you in only a way that encourages you to stay on the topic of why there should be rewards for strapping ams to your mech. Thank you in advance for your cooperation on this matter.

[Kaeb Odellas]

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

No I have repeatidly said over and over that it is an offensive move that requires good sense and awareness. I have said it is an objective. I have also mentioned it possibly being risky. I have however absolutely never at any point ever alluded or said anything close to it being in any way raw twitch. Nor have I used that term at all. Not my argument and no reason to bring it up.

So if the enemy has lrms and lasers they should also get rewards under your system for bringing them...except no. No rewards for bringing equipment is my position.


Right now you are bringing up something that was not my point or part of my reasoning and repeating your point over and over. WE WILL NEVER AGREE THAT RUNNING OVER AND PROVIDING AMS TO HELP SOMEONE SHOULD BE REWARDED, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR ARGUMENT IS TO JUST REPEAT YOURSELF OVER AND OVER.

Standing in a box requires absolutely no good sense or good awareness, nor does standing in a box. Standing in the box at the right time may reward you with a win. Standing in the box at the wrong time will still reward you with CBills and XP.

Bringing lrms and lasers don't reward monetarily you unless you use them by shooting a guy. ECM doesn't reward monetarily you unless you use it to shield a teammate. AMS wouldn't reward you monetarily unless they shoot down missiles attacking a friendly. They're the same goddamn thing.

And don't tell me that using weapons requires "skill". Shooting the enemy is the simplest part of this game by far, given how big and slow the targets are. Well, I guess lights are harder to hit. Should you reward damage against lights more because it requires more skill to do?

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

No it is not dishonest. It is absolutely how I feel and how PGI apparently feels also. Again to be very, very direct and clear with you, I don't think that ecm should be rewarded either and have said as much more than once. Same with ams. Equiping something and sticking by team might be helpful but it is not a skilled thing to do. What is dishonest is the mental gymnastics you are trying to leap through to come up with some way that it is somehow skillfull in any way. Until you can come up with a way that it is requiring anything more than following the other little blue icons about than you don't have a counter to what I am saying.

You don't get to claim what PGI feels, given none of them has said AMS use shouldn't be rewarded. In fact, someone on the dev team has stated the intent to add this (Russ I think?). Just because they haven't done it yet doesn't mean they don't want to do it. If we go by that logic, PGI doesn't want to implement IK, nor did they want to add CW for the first 2 years of the game.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

I never said it was bad. I said it was not deserving of rewards via space bucks. It requires minimal situational awareness at best. You are talking about it as if it is something that has a learning curve. It does not. Like I said when I even expanded on your argument, looking up in the air to see where the missiles are coming from is not in any way, shape or form a difficult thing to do. You can say over and over that it is but you can't show in any appreciable way that you have a case for that.

Shooting an enemy requires even less situational awareness. You don't even have to aim some of the weapons.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

Ok...that was not an insinuation. It was me saying directly what I believe you want. So you want teamplay rewarded great! You have that already in a bunch of ways. I still don't want one of those ways to be because you strapped someting on in the mechlab.

Evidently insinuation wasn't a strong enough word. How about accusation? You can **** off with your horseshit accusation that I'm just in it for the glorious C-Bills. Christ.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

My answer doesn't change because you repeat your question. If you don't tank well you die. No reward. If you tank well and live you get to put out damage or your team benefits and they put out the damage.

Tanking well entails minimizing the effect of enemy damage on your mech, but can never prevent the damage outright. You could be the best tanking Atlas in the world, but you'd still lose both side torsos against a team that knows how to shoot.

MacClearly, on 07 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

Not sure if it is intentional and your style is to just keep repeating the same thing over and over or you are just completely incapable of coming up with a reason for ams to earn cbills because you want it to. You have shown no where, that it is skilled. I find it hard to believe you genuinely feel that standing with the team actually has much to it. You haven't even seemed to have the foresight to bring up the 'situational awareness' of which teammate to protect being of value and that judgement being a skill.

So please come up with some sort of reason why it is skilled or even why most people don't even bother to bring it because of how little value it actually has in the game right now.

I end up repeating myself because you're either too dense to comprehend what I'm saying, or too stubborn to even entertain them. And I'm too stubborn to let this pointless waste of time go, because evidently I ******* hate myself.

And for someone who likes to point out other people repeating themselves, you do a lot of repeating yourself. You've still not told me why you think "skill" is the only thing that should be rewarded here.

[MacClearly]

Kaeb Odellas


Standing in a box requires absolutely no good sense or good awareness, nor does standing in a box. Standing in the box at the right time may reward you with a win. Standing in the box at the wrong time will still reward you with CBills and XP.

That is your opinion. You are wrong and obviously don't understand the basic strategy involved in the game. That makes sense because you want awards for strapping stuff to his mech. Awesome.

Bringing lrms and lasers don't reward monetarily you unless you use them by shooting a guy. ECM doesn't reward monetarily you unless you use it to shield a teammate. AMS wouldn't reward you monetarily unless they shoot down missiles attacking a friendly. They're the same goddamn thing.

Except that it isn't and it is so clear and basic that it isn't it is why you can't prove that are and instead just say it over and over without rhyme or reason. *Yawns*

And don't tell me that using weapons requires "skill". Shooting the enemy is the simplest part of this game by far, given how big and slow the targets are. Well, I guess lights are harder to hit. Should you reward damage against lights more because it requires more skill to do?

So getting into position and aiming your weapons is the easiest part of the game? Ok, whatever. Somehow in your mind however standing around with ams should be awarded. We disagree and furthermore PGI doesn't agree with you either (or why isn't it in already?).


You don't get to claim what PGI feels, given none of them has said AMS use shouldn't be rewarded. In fact, someone on the dev team has stated the intent to add this (Russ I think?). Just because they haven't done it yet doesn't mean they don't want to do it. If we go by that logic, PGI doesn't want to implement IK, nor did they want to add CW for the first 2 years of the game.

No, I get to extrapolate why. You don't have to agree, I don't care at this point because you are just arguing. I could be wrong but you are completely incapable of showing that.


Shooting an enemy requires even less situational awareness. You don't even have to aim some of the weapons.

Ok...



Evidently insinuation wasn't a strong enough word. How about accusation? You can **** off with your horseshit accusation that I'm just in it for the glorious C-Bills. Christ.

That or you can grow up and try and have a civil conversation although we seem to be past that, judging your reaction.



Tanking well entails minimizing the effect of enemy damage on your mech, but can never prevent the damage outright. You could be the best tanking Atlas in the world, but you'd still lose both side torsos against a team that knows how to shoot.


That's funny you just said shooting doesn't take skill...what's there to know then? Never mind I don't care what you think.


I end up repeating myself because you're either too dense to comprehend what I'm saying, or too stubborn to even entertain them. And I'm too stubborn to let this pointless waste of time go, because evidently I ******* hate myself.

Or you struggle to make a point and out of frustration keep repeating the nonsense you think makes sense. It doesn't however. As far as you thinking I am dense, why exactly would I care what you think? You can't even keep it civil when I challenged you to actually come up with a point or some sort of compelling reason.

And for someone who likes to point out other people repeating themselves, you do a lot of repeating yourself. You've still not told me why you think "skill" is the only thing that should be rewarded here.

I have it just appears to have gone right over your head.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 08 February 2017 - 12:23 AM, said:

Confirmed you don't know what lying means either.

Now you are saying it is an FPS? Great welcome to what we already know. Arma is however a tactical shooter and that you are arguing against what PGI has classified as a 'Thinking Man's Shooter'. They even marketed it that way. It is a special kind of ignorance you display in reeling against it. I love it though. Like you voluntarily putting on a cone hat and struting around in it for all to see.

That you went to state on any debate team is an egregious lie and very amusing. Thank you for the giggle.

However you continually bring up google which I used a while back to shatter some of your nonsense. That you are trying to throw it back and stick it to me is another source of great pleasure. Obviously I got you and it stuck out and bothered you or you wouldn't be trying so hard to bring it up.

Also what you are doing here is arguing and fighting with me and going completely off topic. If I continue to engage you, I would be helping you hijack the thread and I think we could actually both get in trouble for violating the CoC. So from this point forward I will reply to you in only a way that encourages you to stay on the topic of why there should be rewards for strapping ams to your mech. Thank you in advance for your cooperation on this matter.

How ridiculous are you??? I utterly defeated your incorrect premise that it was an FPS while demonstrating that you do not even know what an FPS is... yet you think you won. Hence what makes you the pigeon in the chess playing scenario... knock over the pieces, $hit on the board, then strut around like you accomplished something. You are a sad little person

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 08 February 2017 - 04:01 AM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 February 2017 - 01:03 AM, said:

I end up repeating myself because you're either too dense to comprehend what I'm saying, or too stubborn to even entertain them. And I'm too stubborn to let this pointless waste of time go, because evidently I ******* hate myself.

And for someone who likes to point out other people repeating themselves, you do a lot of repeating yourself. You've still not told me why you think "skill" is the only thing that should be rewarded here.

Dude... I told you he was terrible to try to talk to, if Ignorance is Bliss then he is the happiest person in the history of the world.

[Sjorpha]

The problem with AMS is that it is very weak, and to make things worse it's a weak counter to a weak weapon system. That is why it isn't used, same reason why pure support mechs is rarely used, their game impact is very low.

You don't solve that by rewards. If you want weak moves to become stronger you have to design the game so that they matter more for winning.

It's not a good idea to reward weak moves in games because it creates a perverse incentive, it makes you want to play bad on purpose. Ams is also a completely passive move, i don't see any reason to reward it any more than rewarding putting armor on your mech. The reward is surviving longer to do more in the match.