365 replies to this topic

[nehebkau]

I can't frigging believe that we are still having this argument....

For the record:
Clan mechs are better when used by the same pilot with builds that are not utterly stupid.

Why?

Clan mechs can put on more weapons for a higher alpha because clan mechs have an XL engine that is more durable than an IS XL engine and clan weapons are lower in weight and take up less crit spaces. Fundamentally critical spaces and weight differences make this the case. You can build a better clan mech.

Let me repeat: You CAN build a better clan mech. (Just because you CAN build a better mech doesn't mean you are going to do so. That would require you understand heat management, range and duration differences and any number of other variables.)

A stupid pilot, stupid build, stupid tactics, stupid team-mates or bad-luck can nullify this advantage.

Now can we stop this stupid argument and accept that IS players need to be better at building their mechs, playing to their strengths and working together if they want to consistently win and stop crying about the unfairness of it all. If you are unable to do what is required to be successful in an IS mech, just go to clan already. There are plenty of excellent pilots and teams who would be willing to farm you no matter which side you choose.

edit:

I just saw this and actually laughed out loud.

KHAN ATTAKHAN, on 24 April 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

Oh My God, are I.S. guys still posting these even after all these years??.

I'm not one sided, an Atlas is still the most devastating mech in the field,

AlphaEtOmega, on 25 April 2017 - 08:04 AM, said:

According to PGI the balance problems between Clans and IS are partly because Clans have „higher Skill Tiered players“ and more „high-tier Units“.

https://mwomercs.com...change-12152016
https://mwomercs.com...d-for-20dec2016

... DUH! A competent player who knows which mechs are better is probably going to gravitate to the side that has better equipment ... until other factors come into play (like huge population imbalances/huge wait times).

Edited by nehebkau, 25 April 2017 - 08:09 AM.

[Admiral-Dan]

According to PGI the balance problems between Clans and IS are partly because Clans have „higher Skill Tiered players“ and more „high-tier Units“.

https://mwomercs.com...change-12152016
https://mwomercs.com...d-for-20dec2016

[MovinTarget]

nehebkau, on 25 April 2017 - 07:59 AM, said:

Now can we stop this stupid argument and accept that IS players need to be better at building their mechs, playing to their strengths and working together if they want to consistently win and stop crying about the unfairness of it all. If you are unable to do what is required to be successful in an IS mech, just go to clan already. There are plenty of excellent pilots and teams who would be willing to farm you no matter what side you chose.

The problem is that for every thread screaming "CLAMZ OP!" there is an equal and opposite thread "IS QUIRKZ OP! PLZ NERF!"

I am going to assume this argument is mostly about FP as that's the only place you *know* its all clan vs all IS and the challenge with FP atm is that the buckets are almost TOO consolidated now that you can have all scrubs on one side and groups/premades on the other.

And it doesn't really matter much which side has clan tech or IS, the more organized side tends to win.

So *maybe* clan has some advantages, but I would say its not so much that with *evenly skilled* teams that it is a foregone conclusion.

Clan or IS, if you are struggling to win in FP, check your ego, find good players and LISTEN TO THEM, and group the heck up!

[BLOOD WOLF]

I'm sorry if you can't build a mech that can perform well then something may be wrong with the pilot not the mech. of course we got nerfs and changes because people were crying when they lost.

even in my T.S, whenever we lost is was always something to blame. Quirks or what not......really?

justcallme A S H, on 25 April 2017 - 07:52 AM, said:

... Wait for it... Testing & evidence as the basis for said discussion.

BFF's gotta stick together I see. you talk about one another comes running. Dude, noo, I can easily pull up evidence to the contrary.

but you know what, since you believe in reason and evidence so much I am going to hold you to that. judging by the number of fallacies made in the past doesn't hold me to much hope.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 25 April 2017 - 08:43 AM.

[nehebkau]

MovinTarget, on 25 April 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

Clan or IS, if you are struggling to win in FP, check your ego, find good players and LISTEN TO THEM, and group the heck up!

Most of the players who aren't scrubs recognize the imbalance and that it only becomes an issue when you have two equally skilled teams fighting. For the most part when douche-tard and arse-clown are fighting each other the greatest factor is which one is going to go more potato.

So, my criteria for judging how good or bad a player is by how much they complain about balance. Those who accept the imbalance and recognize that it's usually a non-issue in FW are the 'good' players. Those who obsess about it are just waiting to be cut-up into strips and deep-fried for some yummy french fry goodness.

Edited by nehebkau, 25 April 2017 - 08:20 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

BLOOD WOLF, on 25 April 2017 - 08:11 AM, said:

but you know what, since you believe in reason and evidence so much I am going to hold you to that. judging by the number of fallacies made in the past doesn't hold me to much hope.

Yeah given the amount of false claims, mistruth and discussion sidetracking in your history - I don't hold much hope either. I go far as to say there is no hope.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 25 April 2017 - 08:46 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

justcallme A S H, on 25 April 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

Yeah given the amount of false claims, mistruth and discussion sidetracking in your history - I don't hold much hope either. I go far as to say there is no hope.

can you give "evidence" of that? Evidence of mistruths? evidence of false claims? You just said your a fan of evidence and reason. Please provide evidence where I actually state mistruth's and false claims, because that's slander. You keep repeating these things of me. without ever giving evidence, how about some quotes? you got anything? anything besides lying?

I'll grant you sidetracking but, since they are not my BF's I will say I wasn't the only one sidetracking. I am not good at backing down, but I am pretty OP when it comes to making arguments and recognizing fallacies. You know what the real problem was? I kept believe that some of the more dull knives would recognize me calling them out on their fallacious reasoning and maybe they would change it. So I was really hurting ego's rather than having intellectual dialogue.

nehebkau, on 25 April 2017 - 08:17 AM, said:

imbalance and recognize that it's usually a non-issue in FW are the 'good' players. Those who obsess about it are just waiting to be cut-up into strips and deep-fried for some yummy french fry goodness.

Also complainers are good at never actually getting better. I remember always being exited going against the better teams. That means a better quality match, and I can learn from it. PGI, was also doing a lot of knee jerk balancing, which was leading to poor outlook.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 25 April 2017 - 09:04 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

BLOOD WOLF, on 25 April 2017 - 08:48 AM, said:

can you give "evidence" of that? Evidence of mistruths? evidence of false claims? You just said your a fan of evidence and reason. Please provide evidence where I actually state mistruth's and false claims, because that's slander.

Is your memory that of a goldfish? This is not even a 2 weeks old.

THREAD

BLOOD WOLF, on 20 April 2017 - 07:39 AM, said:

"The only reason Siege does not get seen enough is the was PGI has designed FP4.1 - Fact."

I knew something was off about you, but Now I am more convinced your not as smart as you think you are. Either that or the dictionary definition of an idiot

justcallme A S H, on 20 April 2017 - 07:51 AM, said:

1. PGI redesign of FP4.1 firmly hinges upon QP modes.
2. PGI put Siege only at the end of the bar.
3. PGI only allow Siege for 20% of the bar.
4. PGI aim is to balance the population/matches via tonnage which for 4-5 days a week, is about right, so it's not just a pure planet/territory steamroll (meaning, little Siege).

If PGI designed FP4.1 with Siege counting for 50% of the bar, guess what? We'd be playing it more often.

So tell us then, he who's "ignored me", why does Siege come up so little if it has nothing to do with the above? What does it actually have to do with?

BLOOD WOLF, on 20 April 2017 - 08:09 AM, said:

The "fact" that A S H, said he didn't say anything "factual" even though he claimed that a statement of his was "fact" just because he believes something.

You called me an idiot. So I asked you to provide a reason for your statement. You then claimed what I said was not factual, when it absolutely is. Because you refuse to accept it does not make it untrue. It just kept going after that as well, no surprise.

You just totally avoided that question (in large font/bold) and decided to derail instead. When you are backed into a corner with a statement you know is indeed true, rather than admit you were wrong like a man, you throw the toys outta the pram and cause distraction to take away from the fact you cannot answer.

This is a standard theme, every time. You called me an idiot, now a liar - and once again you've been called out.

So just give it a rest already. Majority of users are sick of it. I can't wait for your next post to see how you're going to derail this time.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 25 April 2017 - 09:49 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

"the only reason why Siege doesn't get seen enough was that PGI deisgned FP4.1-Fact"

first off, NO

second, PGI didn't design it. It was a player idea that was presented at a rountable. So your "fact" was not a fact. the bar moves depending on who is winning so it's dynamic and not ruled by PGI. The correct conclusion is that the reason siege doesn't get seen enough is that whenever you happen to see it either side just can't push it to where it needs to go.


first off nothing you quoted of me is mistruth(whatever that means), or a false claim. You just quoted out of context. which your 1-4 is still pretty sloppy if you ask me.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 25 April 2017 - 10:19 AM.

[Jaybles-The-PegLeg-PotatoCaptain]

The 300 ton advantage that IS holds goes a long way in shifting balance in favor of IS. PGI has also stated that the tonnage advantage was put in place to balance faction population, not as a means of balancing tech. But that 300 tons doesn't matter one iota if people use it to bring crap builds.

[Jaybles-The-PegLeg-PotatoCaptain]

BLOOD WOLF, on 25 April 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Are you just being dishonest for the heck of it, or do you just quote out of context because you don't understand what quoting is?

To save you some trouble. Planets have been flipping, which means the bar has been getting to siege. Now the fact that some people have not been seeing siege does not mean that the bar is constantly over siege. Otherwise planets wouldn't be flipping. Yea, idiot is not the least. So when we see threads saying more siege, well all that means is that people are just not playing when it happens to be siege. There is no fix, unless you make it random or just make it Siege all the time.

People are not playing when it 'happens to be seige' because it takes 4-6 hours for it to get to siege if it even does. I don't know a lot of NA players that can stay up past 12 AM EST just to play siege. And if It did make it to siege it resets just 2 hours later at 2 AM EST. Which is what? 5 or 6 PM in Australia? That's pretty early for those players to make it on to play.

How about changing the windows to 7 hour windows so that the tail end of each happens at different times through out the week?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Jaybles, on 25 April 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

People are not playing when it 'happens to be seige' because it takes 4-6 hours for it to get to siege if it even does. I don't know a lot of NA players that can stay up past 12 AM EST just to play siege. And if It did make it to siege it resets just 2 hours later at 2 AM EST. Which is what? 5 or 6 PM in Australia? That's pretty early for those players to make it on to play.

How about changing the windows to 7 hour windows so that the tail end of each happens at different times through out the week?

well there have been times when the bar was pushed to siege rather early. what they should do is put siege at the end of every block. When you win to the end of one sector, you gotta push it over with siege. incorporate siege with the current mode at the end, rather than put it in between modes.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 25 April 2017 - 10:24 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 24 April 2017 - 04:49 PM, said:

Carl is actually a really nice guy, he just has a low threshold for starch. In fact, he's quite patient with players that are just learning the game, especially those that ask questions about why the meta is the way it is, and look inward to improve instead of blaming everyone else around them. That said, Carl has a really really low threshold for those "I play my own way, kthxbye" attitudes.

Carl did what everyone in AW0L should do and came and played with KCom for a while yesterday. It was good clean family fun.

[nehebkau]

MischiefSC, on 25 April 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

Carl did what everyone in AW0L should do and came and played with KCom for a while yesterday. It was good clean family fun.

LIAR! KCOM has never had clean family fun in their lives! You are all dirty! So very very dirty! Yes, very dirty!

[MovinTarget]

nehebkau, on 25 April 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

LIAR! KCOM has never had clean family fun in their lives! You are all dirty! So very very dirty! Yes, very dirty!

your kind of dirty???





Oh, and in memory of Carl...




























Dunning Kruger Effect!

[justcallme A S H]

BLOOD WOLF, on 25 April 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

"the only reason why Siege doesn't get seen enough was that PGI deisgned FP4.1-Fact"

first off, NO

second, PGI didn't design it. It was a player idea that was presented at a rountable. So your "fact" was not a fact. the bar moves depending on who is winning so it's dynamic and not ruled by PGI. The correct conclusion is that the reason siege doesn't get seen enough is that whenever you happen to see it either side just can't push it to where it needs to go.


first off nothing you quoted of me is mistruth(whatever that means), or a false claim. You just quoted out of context. which your 1-4 is still pretty sloppy if you ask me.

So if PGI didn't design it, create it as we see it... And for such a feature to get into a game, someone needs to design/implement it (surprise) into the game.

Who exactly did that if it was not PGI as you state?

And here endeth the discussion because, you can't answer that question without making yourself look like a fool. Or maybe you will answer it, and you'll still be, a fool.

What we got with FP4.1 was not the suggestion (keyword there, ensure you look up its dictionary meaning) made at the round table.

[Jaybles-The-PegLeg-PotatoCaptain]

BLOOD WOLF, on 25 April 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

"the only reason why Siege doesn't get seen enough was that PGI deisgned FP4.1-Fact"

first off, NO

second, PGI didn't design it. It was a player idea that was presented at a rountable. So your "fact" was not a fact. the bar moves depending on who is winning so it's dynamic and not ruled by PGI. The correct conclusion is that the reason siege doesn't get seen enough is that whenever you happen to see it either side just can't push it to where it needs to go.


first off nothing you quoted of me is mistruth(whatever that means), or a false claim. You just quoted out of context. which your 1-4 is still pretty sloppy if you ask me.

Wait, you are back to claiming it was a player idea presented at a round table? Didn't we just go through this? Evidence please? I'll happily re-post mine if you'd like?

[justcallme A S H]

Yep we went through it and asked him to show us, in its current implementation, where players presented it.

Fact is, they did not. What they presented is a FAR cry from what we ended up with. But again he is just deflecting and derailing, because he knows he has no evidence what so ever and there is plenty to the CONTRARY.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 25 April 2017 - 11:03 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I think Incursion has some good potential for FW. buff the base stats and use the bigger maps and I'd like it more than most Invasion setups.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Jaybles, on 25 April 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

The 300 ton advantage that IS holds goes a long way in shifting balance in favor of IS. PGI has also stated that the tonnage advantage was put in place to balance faction population, not as a means of balancing tech. But that 300 tons doesn't matter one iota if people use it to bring crap builds.

Right on. Clan tech also doesn't mean squat if you are a moron, but are convinced you know stuff....

A few in my unit hope PGI does give us some Clan vs Clan action in some reasonable timeframe. I think for some other Clan loyalists illustration is required (where they can't blame "OP IS quirks", tonnage, etc) on what Clan builds and tactics are viable and what are indeed total garbage/stupidity.

Edited by Marquis De Lafayette, 25 April 2017 - 12:03 PM.