404 replies to this topic

[meteorol]

That lrm damage spread.

[MischiefSC]

Okay. Good luck with that. If you think the human element is relevant to where there is cover or where there isn't that's something that no amount of explaining can fix. There are 4 doors. 3 lead to cover that lets you shoot back, 1 leads to poor cover that lets you hide but not shoot back or a longer open stretch that leads to limited cover. That's irrelevant to trust. The human element comes into play when asking people to push into a firing line, etc. If the enemy is camping an exit, any of the 4, people won't want to push it. If you're pushing out a partially covered or temporarily uncovered exit, you're fixated on the worst on because they're pushing out into the worst position from which to fight the people up top.

I get that you've read some books on game theory or whatever. Glad you're excited about it. Big stompy robbits work a little different from infantry. You keep clinging to being wrong, clearly it makes you happy. The human element is only relevant to a willingness to make a choice in a given situation. Just because you think it's easier to talk them into a daylight charge across the minefield (it isn't, 4 doors is 4 doors in that context, they'll go wherever there's least resistance) doesn't make it a good choice regardless.

Maybe your issue is being proven wrong, maybe you're hung up on bad ideas, don't know don't care. I appreciate that you've adjusted your position a bit to effectively say that it doesn't count under any testable circumstance too. That's cute.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out why armchair would-be pug bosses are always worth ignoring.

meteorol, on 30 April 2017 - 09:34 AM, said:

That lrm damage spread.

Sure, you're still 100% combat effective but when his team loses his stats will be so great!

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MischiefSC, on 30 April 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Okay. Good luck with that. If you think the human element is relevant to where there is cover or where there isn't that's something that no amount of explaining can fix. There are 4 doors. 3 lead to cover that lets you shoot back, 1 leads to poor cover that lets you hide but not shoot back or a longer open stretch that leads to limited cover. That's irrelevant to trust. The human element comes into play when asking people to push into a firing line, etc. If the enemy is camping an exit, any of the 4, people won't want to push it. If you're pushing out a partially covered or temporarily uncovered exit, you're fixated on the worst on because they're pushing out into the worst position from which to fight the people up top.

Ahh... that is where your fundamental failure in understanding is, I get it now. Sorry it took me a while to diagnose WHY you were wrong, your fundamental failure point is that you believe that PUGs are going to play like your Comp team. That getting to Cover to Hide & Poke is the goal to victory... it is not, that Cover which you are fixating on gaining to hide behind is the death of forward momentum which is defeat in PUGlandia. E4 gives you TOTAL COVER while MOVING to where we will fight... you want to achieve Cover TO fight.

See... you lack the understanding of WHY evolutions work & just know WHAT works by rote learning of experiencing stuff as you drift along with your Unit. I knew that but I failed to comprehend what that actually meant in just what a lack of information you have preventing any of it to congeal into functional Knowledge.

My offer still stands to walk you through it and explain WHY it works in PUGlandia, which you do not grasp at all since you lack the informational base to do so. I am still totally willing to teach you the information, since you are merely suffering from ignorance not stupidity & ignorance is easily fixed.

Quote

I get that you've read some books on game theory or whatever. Glad you're excited about it. Big stompy robbits work a little different from infantry. You keep clinging to being wrong, clearly it makes you happy. The human element is only relevant to a willingness to make a choice in a given situation. Just because you think it's easier to talk them into a daylight charge across the minefield (it isn't, 4 doors is 4 doors in that context, they'll go wherever there's least resistance) doesn't make it a good choice regardless.

Basic information is transferable across different scenarios... hence what makes it BASIC. Things like Game Theory & Military Pyschology are still wholly relevant to the application of "big stompy robbits" because it is still the goal of achieving victory... your refusal to acknowledge that you have have a pile of bricks instead of the pile of wood you are accustomed to does not mean they still have the same properties nor that they can be used most effectively in the same way.

Quote

Maybe your issue is being proven wrong, maybe you're hung up on bad ideas, don't know don't care. I appreciate that you've adjusted your position a bit to effectively say that it doesn't count under any testable circumstance too. That's cute.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out why armchair would-be pug bosses are always worth ignoring.

I love being proven wrong... it happens so rarely that I get to enjoy the novelty of the experience as well as accruing me a person who I will always respect because it is not an easy task. You have utterly failed to even approach doing it cause you do not even have the correct starting premise to work from... the totally of your failure stems from fundamentally flawed premise which is that trying to get PUGs to do what Comps team is a desired goal or possibility. Once you grasp that very simple concept then everything should fall into place for you... cause my "position" has never changed, it has always been that D5 is the Best Result Possible and should be used if playing TT or Large Unit & that E4 is the Best Possible Result when in Solo Queue. I have always made the distinction very clear from the very beginning... you on the other hand have constinously insisted that doing what is best for a Comp team is what should be done universally even though there are MASSIVE differences between their composition which is so idiotic that I do not think you even understand the totality of what you are saying. It can easily be attributed to Ignorance though I have tried to teach you this so many times and you keep failing to grasp the concept it could be an inability to do so which would make it Stupidity on your part.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 30 April 2017 - 10:22 AM.

[Electroflameageddon]

By the puss-rotted gods there is so much salt here!

LRM's got me out of Tier 5. LRM's weren't as effective in Tier 4, so I used something different. Tier 3 has invalidated what I used to get out of 4, so now I'm using yet another mech/tactic.

My game play has evolved over time and will probably continue to evolve if I stick with learning and practicing.

LRM's have their place. Mostly to punish people for not using cover and being out of position. That is why they are very effective in Tier 5. They also strip overall armor, which is why i still see them in the QP matches I'm playing in. Weakening an enemy at range is a viable tactic. Damage to the enemy, regardless of who does it, is a good thing.

Personally, I don't really care if there are LRM's in the party as long as they do damage to the enemy. There are tactics that are effective (but are rarely used in PUGlandia) that make any weapon choice almost work. If you want coordinated play, drop in group. If you want to herd kittens, drop in PUGlandia.

Team Killing is an affront no matter what the reason. I would like to see deliberate TK'ers stripped of all of their armor, kicked from the team and given a bright yellow aura in game. Then anyone who shoots them gets 200K C-Bills and the achievement of "Taking Out The Trash". But that is only a dream....

[Brain Cancer]

C'mon, people. CHECK THE DATES.