404 replies to this topic

[Shifty McSwift]

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MischiefSC, on 29 April 2017 - 07:39 AM, said:

Okay. This thread went to crazy town. Both someone not understanding that 2 corners of cover < 8-10 and over 400m of exposed space to cross for useful cover < 260m with partial cover and then creationist woo.

Good luck y'all.

Except that requires the enemy team to be in a place they will NEVER be in to "not have cover" while I proved that you have PERFECT COVER from where they actually will be because the Level Changes preclude Line of Sight from even being possible. You are not that stupid... stop pretending to be obtuse

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 29 April 2017 - 09:42 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 29 April 2017 - 09:31 AM, said:

Except that requires the enemy team to be in a place they will NEVER be in to &quot;not have cover&quot; while I proved that you have PERFECT COVER from where they actually will be because the Level Changes preclude Line of Sight from even being possible. You are not that stupid... stop pretending to be obtuse

All they have to be is up top. Then they walk down the ramp on either edge and poke from the corner. The big wall and smaller one to the left are about 200m further than the first corner, putting distance to cover while in the open at close to 400m.

Also the cover isn't perfect - especially for pugs. You want pugs as close to 1 pug/corner so they don't block. There is flanking cover the other team can take to corner you out too on either side. If you go to the "south" cover you're especially screwed because the top team can drop into the channel and flank you while the big wall covering the exit prevents your teammates from covering you without walking around the dull depth of the wall, which is more than a mechs width, standing in the open.

You want to test it with teams I'm totally game. However I've played it with teams a lot of times. What works is what works - good positioning is good positioning. That bad positioning works against bads doesn't change that.

[vandalhooch]

Amsro, on 29 April 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

Heh no, we are guardians of the eco system, it reacts how we do. If we take care of it, it will do that same back.

But if you like to believe the propaganda have at it. You probably believe your ancestors were monkeys...

What you think you know about the plane(t) we live on and what your really know are 2 VERY different things. Welcome to zombieland america where brainwashing starts at grade 1.

Poe's Law?

[Christophe Ivanov]

To me, it's not about getting rid of them, it's giving each mech some kind of reasonable defense against them. Currently, my DW's do NOT have any kind of defense against them on their own. I have to rely on others for missile protection which I think is a cop out as each mech should have some kind of reasonable protection.

PGI needs to give the DW an Omni pod with AMS and ECM so it can protect itself as it should have in the beginning.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MischiefSC, on 29 April 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

All they have to be is up top. Then they walk down the ramp on either edge and poke from the corner. The big wall and smaller one to the left are about 200m further than the first corner, putting distance to cover while in the open at close to 400m.

Also the cover isn't perfect - especially for pugs. You want pugs as close to 1 pug/corner so they don't block. There is flanking cover the other team can take to corner you out too on either side. If you go to the "south" cover you're especially screwed because the top team can drop into the channel and flank you while the big wall covering the exit prevents your teammates from covering you without walking around the dull depth of the wall, which is more than a mechs width, standing in the open.

You want to test it with teams I'm totally game. However I've played it with teams a lot of times. What works is what works - good positioning is good positioning. That bad positioning works against bads doesn't change that.

You are going from a confused ignorant point of view to a flat out stupid one that is making me lose what respect I have for you. I have already PROVED that they can NOT fire on you from Level 4 while you are on Level 0, it is flat out idiotic to suppose on your part that they would ANYWHERE that would give them clear Line of Sight while the evolution of the maneuver is being completed. To double down on that idiocy to now presuppose that the enemy is going to not only abandon the High Ground but do so in a concentrate force to get to the corner when they do not even know which door the team is going to be leaving for and do so faster than the team can transverse the 200m of either direction of the flanking move towards D5 or F5 is pure retar dation. That is the state you have degenerated into... going from defending a totally valid position on the D5 door maneuver that on TT or in a large Unit is an amazing tactic but an utter failure in PUG to just moronic babbling.

Please stop man... I do not want to think of you in the same category as an utter incompetent like Dee but that is clearly the correct one if you continue with your idiocy.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 29 April 2017 - 12:01 PM.

[Danjo San]

#truestory
when your team successfully wrecks the enemy with "useless" LRMs you are insulted for not having any skill.

Did that in QP, did that in FW, did that against Pugs, did that agains Metas, did that against mixed groups, did that against 12mans.

[Danjo San]

The truth behind the LRM hate is that Meta-Fanboys don't want to play against LRMs. Simple as that. They spread the hate over Chat, over Voip and on the Forums.
LRMS are good and viable weapons. No need to hate if you know how to play them.

We had 2vs2 matches in the private Lobby last week. I, in a Hunchback 4J (Lurmboat), and a P-Hawk demolished 2 Griffin 2N ECM SRM Brawlers. Mic dropped

[Appogee]

Troll post achieves 20 pages. Well done, I guess.

[MischiefSC]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 29 April 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

You are going from a confused ignorant point of view to a flat out stupid one that is making me lose what respect I have for you. I have already PROVED that they can NOT fire on you from Level 4 while you are on Level 0, it is flat out idiotic to suppose on your part that they would ANYWHERE that would give them clear Line of Sight while the evolution of the maneuver is being completed. To double down on that idiocy to now presuppose that the enemy is going to not only abandon the High Ground but do so in a concentrate force to get to the corner when they do not even know which door the team is going to be leaving for and do so faster than the team can transverse the 200m of either direction of the flanking move towards D5 or F5 is pure retar dation. That is the state you have degenerated into... going from defending a totally valid position on the D5 door maneuver that on TT or in a large Unit is an amazing tactic but an utter failure in PUG to just moronic babbling.

Please stop man... I do not want to think of you in the same category as an utter incompetent like Dee but that is clearly the correct one if you continue with your idiocy.

It's like you've never played the map. I posted actual pictures showing the areas in question. I get that you like armchair theorizing but it's irrelevant to the reality of the map. The other team doesnt have to give up the height advantage. The have some cover and the high ground with good lanes of fire into the whole area save the bit hugging the wall. To get to Amy useful cover from which you can shoot back you've got to cross a lot of open space. That cover is still bad in that it's got 2 corners, meaning you can have 2, maybe 4 people poking against 12 at a time.

Your inability to understand the difference between what is actually good vs bad strategy and positioning and what can work out anyway in pug queue because bads are bad is the hallmark of why playing in pug queue is so often facepalm worthy. People who are dedicated to bad ideas and ferociously defend them in the face of good ideas. People who aggressively resist doing things to get better because they view making good choices like "giving in to THE MAN" or whatever absurd justification works for them.

Good positioning is good. Bad positioning is bad. Pug or premade, team or solo. Yes, some tactics require a. Lot of teamwork and as such don't work in pugs but moving into a bad position is not going to work as well as moving into a good position.

Good luck with your armchair stuff though. Don't let that reality or math thing keep you down.

[Ted Wayz]

About a year ago there was a thread on how to Lurm that went 25 pages, full of positive information and discourse. Not a surprise that this is on page 20.

[MischiefSC]

My challenge still stands btw. Team v team. One side takes some LRMs (boated, mixed, whatever) and I'll get a team of direct fire together. LRM team picks the map. If the LRM team wins I'll put up some mech packs to the winners if the person taking the challenge for the LRM side foes the same if the direct fire team wins. Easy way to test that whole "just as good" thing.

[Ted Wayz]

MischiefSC, on 30 April 2017 - 07:23 AM, said:

My challenge still stands btw. Team v team. One side takes some LRMs (boated, mixed, whatever) and I'll get a team of direct fire together. LRM team picks the map. If the LRM team wins I'll put up some mech packs to the winners if the person taking the challenge for the LRM side foes the same if the direct fire team wins. Easy way to test that whole "just as good" thing.

As long as the sides are random and of equal skill level sure. We wouldn't want a biased sample now would we.

[MischiefSC]

Ted Wayz, on 30 April 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

As long as the sides are random and of equal skill level sure. We wouldn't want a biased sample now would we.

Get a group of people who are "great with LRMs" and I'll get a group that's "great with direct fire". You can pick the team size.

[Ted Wayz]

MischiefSC, on 30 April 2017 - 07:35 AM, said:

Get a group of people who are "great with LRMs" and I'll get a group that's "great with direct fire". You can pick the team size.

Cut the crap.

Again, equal in skill if you want to know how effective LRMs are versus direct fire. Oh, and no Gauss/UAC/Laser heat gen macros allowed. Let's see actual player skill, not player programming skill.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 30 April 2017 - 09:02 AM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MischiefSC, on 30 April 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

It's like you've never played the map. I posted actual pictures showing the areas in question. I get that you like armchair theorizing but it's irrelevant to the reality of the map. The other team doesnt have to give up the height advantage. The have some cover and the high ground with good lanes of fire into the whole area save the bit hugging the wall. To get to Amy useful cover from which you can shoot back you've got to cross a lot of open space. That cover is still bad in that it's got 2 corners, meaning you can have 2, maybe 4 people poking against 12 at a time.

Your inability to understand the difference between what is actually good vs bad strategy and positioning and what can work out anyway in pug queue because bads are bad is the hallmark of why playing in pug queue is so often facepalm worthy. People who are dedicated to bad ideas and ferociously defend them in the face of good ideas. People who aggressively resist doing things to get better because they view making good choices like "giving in to THE MAN" or whatever absurd justification works for them.

Good positioning is good. Bad positioning is bad. Pug or premade, team or solo. Yes, some tactics require a. Lot of teamwork and as such don't work in pugs but moving into a bad position is not going to work as well as moving into a good position.

Good luck with your armchair stuff though. Don't let that reality or math thing keep you down.

You posted A picture that does not show what you think it means... I gave a fully colored Map of the different level changes and WHY that gives Total Cover to the area I also defined. You presupposing a bunch of nonsense requiring things that will never happen does not invalidate that. You adamantly refusing to acknowledge how much more the negatives of taking fire from above to the sides and back when using the D5 door in PUGlandia impact the effectiveness of using it is what makes me know that you have NO real understanding of why stuff works.

D5 is undisputedly the BEST possible result... IF YOU ARE PLAYING TABLETOP OR UNIT WHO HAVE HIGH TRUST RELATIONSHIPS & GOOD DISCIPLINE!!!!!!!!!! That is REQUIRED to make it good, what is fundamentally "high morale." It can even work in PUG games... it is just going to fail the vast majority of the time, treat your PUG team like they are Militia not Military. So in SOLO QUEUE WHICH IS WHERE WE WERE... E4 is undisputedly the Best result possible!!!!!!!!!!!

[MischiefSC]

Macros? To do what? A Gauss macro is stupid - it just wastes shots. Nothing else has any use or need for a macro. If you want an official "no macro" rule, okay. If it makes you happy.

As to skill, isn't that the point? The best possible players with LRMs, using LRMs to their best ability. We could also just do a single pool and split them randomly but different people have different preferences. You put people who don't like LRMs on the LRM side you'll get a bad sample, same with people who are good with LRMs trying to use direct fire they're not so good with.

Comparable skill is hard to identify because there really are not any "comp tier" players who would even say LRMs are competitive with direct fire.

Let's start with getting the best LRM team together You can and try to scale down to a comparable direct fire team, though you've already hit on a crux of it. LRMs low skill ceiling means nobody using LRMs is going to be that good. However, I'm game with some intentional bumping of the direct fire team skill level down too. Get a LRM team together and we can use that as a basis for a direct fire team.

[MischiefSC]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 30 April 2017 - 08:03 AM, said:

You posted A picture that does not show what you think it means... I gave a fully colored Map of the different level changes and WHY that gives Total Cover to the area I also defined. You presupposing a bunch of nonsense requiring things that will never happen does not invalidate that. You adamantly refusing to acknowledge how much more the negatives of taking fire from above to the sides and back when using the D5 door in PUGlandia impact the effectiveness of using it is what makes me know that you have NO real understanding of why stuff works.

D5 is undisputedly the BEST possible result... IF YOU ARE PLAYING TABLETOP OR UNIT WHO HAVE HIGH TRUST RELATIONSHIPS &amp; GOOD DISCIPLINE!!!!!!!!!! That is REQUIRED to make it good, what is fundamentally &quot;high morale.&quot; It can even work in PUG games... it is just going to fail the vast majority of the time, treat your PUG team like they are Militia not Military. So in SOLO QUEUE WHICH IS WHERE WE WERE... E4 is undisputedly the Best result possible!!!!!!!!!!!

If the goal is to hide indefinitely and the team on top can't move then maybe I guess? When you attempt to move to a position to fire up at the top team you either have to walk into the open to get Los or follow the ledge down to 1 of 2 corners - which gives you roo. For 2 people to shoot. Those corners are exposed to anyone moving to flank on either side. You can also cross the open space to the high wall, which gives you.... 2 corners after crossing a lot of open space.

You don't get it. It's not about trust or anything else. It's about what the physical position you've gone to is. Every single other exit is a better choice as all of them lead to better cover. Especially with pugs you need 1 corner for every 1 or maybe 2 people.

Again. A bad position is a bad position. Queue is irrelevant. Pushing out into the open or a position where you can only hide but have to go into the open to return fire is inferior to every other option. There's no time that exit is the best option unless all the others are covered.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MischiefSC, on 30 April 2017 - 08:59 AM, said:

If the goal is to hide indefinitely and the team on top can't move then maybe I guess? When you attempt to move to a position to fire up at the top team you either have to walk into the open to get Los or follow the ledge down to 1 of 2 corners - which gives you roo. For 2 people to shoot. Those corners are exposed to anyone moving to flank on either side. You can also cross the open space to the high wall, which gives you.... 2 corners after crossing a lot of open space.

You don't get it. It's not about trust or anything else. It's about what the physical position you've gone to is. Every single other exit is a better choice as all of them lead to better cover. Especially with pugs you need 1 corner for every 1 or maybe 2 people.

Again. A bad position is a bad position. Queue is irrelevant. Pushing out into the open or a position where you can only hide but have to go into the open to return fire is inferior to every other option. There's no time that exit is the best option unless all the others are covered.

Do I need to fully MAP out the entirety of the entire Western side in Level Changes????? Can you not understand what I am showing you? Can you not load into the map and see it yourself? If you need me to... I can load into a private match with you and walk you through it, which it really seems like you need because the concept of Level Change is clearly not being understood by you anymore than what a terrible idea it is to intentionally expose PUGs to being shot in the sides and rear while trying to get them to finish the evolution. The very crux of your positive points are 100% not valid within the context of what we are discussing & the crux of your negatives are utter nonsense.

Seriously... you are a flat out ****** if you are absolutely refusing to acknowledge the HUMAN element in any plans success. That is quite literally the worst military planning possible... so it is MORE then just the hard numbers, in a Unit who practice together them all agreeing that the Hard Numbers makes it worth and that they have built High Trust relationships with each other IS WHAT MAKES IT WORK!!!!!!!!!! Hence the difference between what a Military Unit can do & what a Militia Unit can do are different... your refusal to acknowledge the difference seems to be your failure point overall.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 30 April 2017 - 09:22 AM.