46 replies to this topic

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

except it does directly feed to minmax and further crystallizing metas, along with serious MM headaches.

All this will do is see the rise of only specific chassis/loadouts ever getting used on a given map.

For all your claims of "battletech" being the reason, Battletech was always built around inefficiency and lack of optimal, and making it work, anyhow.

Tag. You're it.

Don't care about metas. Don't care about blah blah blah. Standard feature. Include in game. Everything else is toilet water.

[Novakaine]

Welcome aboard friend, and put on a raincoat.
Your gonna need it.

[JC Daxion]

Goto advanced video options and turn um all down to low. It won't look as good, but you should get fairly smooth frame rates

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister Blastman, on 14 May 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

Don't care about metas. Don't care about blah blah blah.

Yes, obviously. Which doesn't obviate the fact it's an idiotic idea.

Blahblahblah. GOTTA HAS MAH MINMAX !!!!

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 14 May 2017 - 04:24 PM.

[MechWarrior5152251]

Get a desktop, they are way cheaper since you can run everything with a $70 video card.

[Imperius]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 11:55 AM, said:

yup that wouldn't bring the minmaxing power gaming past 9000 or anything.......

Who drops on a hot planet and goes... yeah I'm going to take my hottest build?

[Prof RJ Gumby]

psudonym, on 14 May 2017 - 06:28 AM, said:

Also . . . As a new player, why do we choose the mech and then the map . . .it would make sense to choose the other way round, I should imagine if you have 3 or 4 mechs you could custom fit them for each map?

Such solution would remove a lot of diversity. Some maps would always see only 1-2 playstyles ever. Everybody would take snipers and LRM boats on Polar Highlands and Alpine Peaks, nothing but brawlers on HPG and Mining Collective... Map selection already promotes repeatable matches to an extent (snipers and LRM boats like to vote open maps etc.). Game would get boring sooner. And there are people who play this game for few years running.

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

Yes, obviously. Which doesn't obviate the fact it's an idiotic idea.

Blahblahblah. GOTTA HAS MAH MINMAX !!!!

Gee. Someone is bitter.

[Bishop Steiner]

Imperius, on 14 May 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:

Who drops on a hot planet and goes... yeah I'm going to take my hottest build?

Since in battletech, as Blast was trying to use as justification, each warrior only owns one mech... you run what you brung. This was actually covered in Wolves on the Border (the novel) where the standard practice for military units was to increase the cooldown/recycle times on units to keep people from overheating as easily.

Also, which "habitable" planets only have a single climate/temperature band? And which units have a few dozen spare mechs on hand that they can just cycle through per mission need? That was actually one of the biggest points behind omnimechs, was that they COULD customize per mission need, whereas your typical mech unit could not.

A better question would be why would any House Military use such a scattershot, non standardized approach to building their war machine in the first place. The sheer diversity of mechs was simply to sell books and video game expansions and miniatures...not because there was a sensible reason for it (at least once they largely retconned the Mad Max dystopia out of the 3rd Succession War to give us a kinder gentler succession wars scenario than originally published).

Mister Blastman, on 14 May 2017 - 05:15 PM, said:

Gee. Someone is bitter.

Yes. You should probably see someone about that. Your coping mechanism seems rather frayed.

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

Yes. You should probably see someone about that. Your coping mechanism seems rather frayed.

Tell us how you really feel. Let it all out.

[TELEFORCE]

Welcome to the game! I suggest taking a look at the following places to get an idea of the lore, if you're not already familiar with it:

The BattleTech website, home to the tabletop version of the game and all things BattleTech/Mechwarrior: http://bg.battletech.com/universe/

Sarna.net - the BattleTech wiki: www.sarna.net

I hope you stick around awhile, and I await seeing you in-game!

Edited by TELEFORCE, 14 May 2017 - 05:33 PM.

[Imperius]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

Since in battletech, as Blast was trying to use as justification, each warrior only owns one mech... you run what you brung. This was actually covered in Wolves on the Border (the novel) where the standard practice for military units was to increase the cooldown/recycle times on units to keep people from overheating as easily.

Also, which "habitable" planets only have a single climate/temperature band? And which units have a few dozen spare mechs on hand that they can just cycle through per mission need? That was actually one of the biggest points behind omnimechs, was that they COULD customize per mission need, whereas your typical mech unit could not.

A better question would be why would any House Military use such a scattershot, non standardized approach to building their war machine in the first place. The sheer diversity of mechs was simply to sell books and video game expansions and miniatures...not because there was a sensible reason for it (at least once they largely retconned the Mad Max dystopia out of the 3rd Succession War to give us a kinder gentler succession wars scenario than originally published).


Yes. You should probably see someone about that. Your coping mechanism seems rather frayed.

Well I have about 300 mechs so that doesn't apply to my rich clanner ***

Oh, I did figure you were going to try and justify it with lore. Which MWO has zero to do with.

Second, lore and timeline have always been cop-out responses for certain issues in this game. It's about time we stop attempting to use these crutches don't you think?

Edited by Imperius, 14 May 2017 - 08:06 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister Blastman, on 14 May 2017 - 05:39 PM, said:

Personal attacks again, I see. Anyways, I do just fine no matter how it is. So do many others. But a feature such as the OP suggested is reasonable.

except, I pointed out, quite reasonably, why it was not, and you answer was literally, I don't care, I want it!", before you made it an attack, with the whole "let it out" crap, to which I simply replied in kind... but without the transparent attempt at subtlety you try to hide behind.

But hey, in your own imaginary world you can add as many happy trees as you like.

Imperius, on 14 May 2017 - 05:42 PM, said:

Well I have about 300 mechs so that doesn't apply to my rich clanner ***

Oh I did figure you were going to try and justify it with lore. Which MWO has zero to do with.

Second lore and timeline have always been cop-out responses for certain issues in this game. It's about time we stop attempting to use these crutches don't you think?

probably why I my initial comments were on game balance reasons and not lore, until someone else tried to use lore and "cuz past games (ignoring that past games were created PvE, not PvP) had it!" to justify their stance. You know..before you decided to but into a conversation you weren't even part of? But hey, don't let that stop you. Cuz, well, we both know you wont.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 14 May 2017 - 06:26 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 06:26 PM, said:

except, I pointed out, quite reasonably, why it was not, and you answer was literally, I don't care, I want it!", before you made it an attack, with the whole "let it out" crap, to which I simply replied in kind... but without the transparent attempt at subtlety you try to hide behind.

But hey, in your own imaginary world you can add as many happy trees as you like.

No, you immediately started with personal attacks accusing me of minmax 9000 in a derogatory manner. Look, dude, I get it, sometimes people are having a bad day, but taking it out on other folks on the forums doesn't help things at all. You should probably take a few days off or something.

[Moebius Pi]

https://mwomercs.com...24#entry4674924

can give you somewhere to start, if wanting to give it a go before you upgrade as something of a bandaid. It can take some tinkering to figure out which combination works (particularily on assigning task threads), especially if you have virtual cores to skip, but it may help you as a bandaid for now. It didn't increase my FPS much as I don't use the entire shebang, but it certainly made it less dippy by a very, very noticeable amount just on assigning the water thread, task threads to seperate cpus and so on.

Many of the others lower settings further than the game sliders do while still pumping out a few more FPS (which can help if you're getting nasty dips). While the initial suggested user.cfg doesn't do much for core assigning, it apparently makes a big impact for folks using much more powerful systems that still run into optimization issues (without having to use the lowered settings for other stuff).

Might be a bit much to navigate initially, but consider giving it a go, just make sure to backup your existing user.cfg in case you want to revert, and remember to save as "user.cfg" with the quotations so it doesn't turn into user.cfg.txt on a save.

Edited by Moebius Pi, 14 May 2017 - 07:12 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister Blastman, on 14 May 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

No, you immediately started with personal attacks accusing me of minmax 9000 in a derogatory manner. Look, dude, I get it, sometimes people are having a bad day, but taking it out on other folks on the forums doesn't help things at all. You should probably take a few days off or something.

you should probably take your own advice if you felt that was some deep, harsh personal attack, instead of simply using very commonly used pop culture reference to point out the issue. I guess some folks take offense easy?

[Ryllen Kriel]

Thank you Mister Blastman and Bishop Steiner for giving a new player the first example of Community Warfare...on the forums!

Bishop isn't trying to insult you or attack you. Let's not derail this thread any more please.

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 06:56 PM, said:

you should probably take your own advice if you felt that was some deep, harsh personal attack, instead of simply using very commonly used pop culture reference to point out the issue. I guess some folks take offense easy?

There are things I would like to say but I don't for the sake of civility. If you'd like to meet the _real_ me, we can take it to voice chat sometime.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister Blastman, on 14 May 2017 - 07:05 PM, said:

There are things I would like to say but I don't for the sake of civility. If you'd like to meet the _real_ me, we can take it to voice chat sometime.

honestly from most of our interactions here, I doubt I would really care to. Plus I seldom find chatrooms to filter out the internet bravado. If you are in NorCal over the next month, or near Puerto Vallarta, after, maybe a nice face to face? Have a beer?. I find odd changes happen in face to face, compared to internet anonymity.

But I doubt I'd be impressed by the "real you" in either environment (and the feeling is doubtless mutual, though I'm not sure if I'm supposed to find the "real you" intimidating...or a real "swell guy", or whatever), so I don't really see the point?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 14 May 2017 - 07:16 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 May 2017 - 07:15 PM, said:

honestly from most of our interactions here, I doubt I would really care to. Plus I seldom find chatrooms to filter out the internet bravado. If you are in NorCal over the next month, or near Puerto Vallarta, after, maybe a nice face to face? Have a beer?. I find odd changes happen in face to face, compared to internet anonymity.

But I doubt I'd be impressed by the "real you" in either environment (and the feeling is doubtless mutual, though I'm not sure if I'm supposed to find the "real you" intimidating...or a real "swell guy", or whatever), so I don't really see the point?

I don't travel much, especially to the west coast, so doubt that would happen anytime soon.

Don't care much about impressing--especially with how you have been acting in various threads as of late. There are things certain users can get away with on the forums that other users can't. I'll leave it at that. I'm done with this conversation. Have a great whatever is left of wherever you're at.