58 replies to this topic

[Escef]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Escef, lol.

It's not a rule, it's a personal code of ethics to not use something that is skilless as a crutch.

If anyone is a scrub, it's people spamming strikes.

Not using strikes is handicapping yourself because of ego. And then s**t talking the people that don't do the same is kinda' weaksauce. It's the textbook definition of scrub behavior.

[Cy Mitchell]

I actually think that double enhanced coolshots is more broken than the strikes. Heat is supposed to be a limiting factor in all MW games and the BattleTech universe. Coolshots allow you to circumvent this limitations and take overly hot builds that should not be viable. I do not blame people for using them. They are there. I just do not think they should be in the game in their current state. Either you should only be allowed one or they should only give about half the benefit that they presently do.

[SMDMadCow]

Rampage, on 14 July 2017 - 09:50 AM, said:

I actually think that double enhanced coolshots is more broken than the strikes. Heat is supposed to be a limiting factor in all MW games and the BattleTech universe. Coolshots allow you to circumvent this limitations and take overly hot builds that should not be viable. I do not blame people for using them. They are there. I just do not think they should be in the game in their current state. Either you should only be allowed one or they should only give about half the benefit that they presently do.

They need to be replaced with coolant pods.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Coolant_Pod

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Integrity.

This answer ranks right up there with the old whales who used to get mad that people would leg them to death.

If the game gives you the option to saturation bomb your opponent to death, it's not an immoral option to do so, nor is your opponent being anything but intelligent as he redsmokes you into robot jerky.

If there's any thoughts on lack of integrity, they should be directed at the guys who made the game able to do so at the small, small cost of some virtual spacebucks. It's not a bug or exploit, after all. Functioning as intended.

[Pur]

Escef, on 14 July 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

Not using strikes is handicapping yourself because of ego. And then s**t talking the people that don't do the same is kinda' weaksauce. It's the textbook definition of scrub behavior.

You are not someone who is qualified to state what a scrub is, frankly speaking. I never talked ****.

King Harkinian, on 13 July 2017 - 09:37 PM, said:

I don't disagree.

Intent of design is usually what allows us to differentiate between an inherent balance issue, or whether or not a mechanic is being exploited or circumvented.

In the case of consumes, intent of design is quite obvious, just the balance is a bit off.

So therefore I don't hold the use of them against the community or place a lot of expectation on them to abstain from using them. They're in the game, the intent of design is clear - fair game for the community to go wild with in my opinion.

But it is a crutch at the end of the day, regardless.

The irony is, YOU did talk ****:

Escef, on 14 July 2017 - 09:25 AM, said:

No, that's basically the definition of being a scrub.

You're the one using words like scrub in response to my ONE WORD POST:

King Harkinian, on 13 July 2017 - 07:33 PM, said:

Integrity.

Seriously, take a good long look in the mirror, Escef. For your sake, not mine.

Moving on...

Brain Cancer, on 14 July 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

This answer ranks right up there with the old whales who used to get mad that people would leg them to death.

If the game gives you the option to saturation bomb your opponent to death, it's not an immoral option to do so, nor is your opponent being anything but intelligent as he redsmokes you into robot jerky.

If there's any thoughts on lack of integrity, they should be directed at the guys who made the game able to do so at the small, small cost of some virtual spacebucks. It's not a bug or exploit, after all. Functioning as intended.

Ethics are not morals. Don't distort my words based on your semantic misinterpretation.

[Y E O N N E]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

Seriously, take a good long look in the mirror, Escef. For your sake, not mine.

You are speaking with an individual who put me on a block-list in 2014 for telling him that running an XL engine in a triple AC/2 Battlemaster was a dangerous and sub-par move (and at the time it was, and even today it still is), all because he didn't like that it was coming from somebody relatively new to the game.

Know with whom you are dealing.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 14 July 2017 - 12:52 PM.

[Escef]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

You are not someone who is qualified to state what a scrub is, frankly speaking. I never talked ****.



The irony is, YOU did talk ****:



You're the one using words like scrub in response to my ONE WORD POST:



Seriously, take a good long look in the mirror, Escef. For your sake, not mine.

Moving on...



Ethics are not morals. Don't distort my words based on your semantic misinterpretation.

Y'know, I had hoped we could be friendly about this. You obviously don't want that.

And you're right, I don't get to make the definition.

"A Scrub is a player of a competitive video game who adamantly believes that his or her "house rules" should apply to everyone to promote his or her view of "fair play". If a scrub sees a move or strategy he doesn't like (or can't beat), he bans it (if only in his own mind), and complains that anyone who uses it is cheap." - http://tvtropes.org/....php/Main/Scrub

"You will not see a classic scrub throw his opponent five times in a row. But why not? What if doing so is strategically the sequence of moves that optimizes his chances of winning? Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules." - http://www.sirlin.ne...ducingthe-scrub

Sound familiar? Because that sounds like the attitude you have in this thread. If that offends you, too bad. It's the ugly truth. And you can either fix it if you think it is the wrong way to be, or embrace it. But don't deny.

Yeonne Greene, on 14 July 2017 - 12:52 PM, said:

You are speaking with an individual who put me on a block-list in 2014 for telling him that running an XL engine in a triple AC/2 Battlemaster was a dangerous and sub-par move (and at the time it was, and even today it still is), all because he didn't like that it was coming from somebody relatively new to the game.

Know with whom you are dealing.

Provide a link for that? Because it is far more likely you simply had a massive attitude problem. Which you have repeatedly hauled out on other posters over the years.

As for KH, I've hosted his livestream when he was doing a charity event before, I had no animosity towards him. He has changed that.

[Pur]

How am I being unfriendly about this when you literally tried to call me a scrub for having a personal sense of ethics about how I play the game?!

WTF.

[Escef]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

How am I being unfriendly about this when you literally tried to call me a scrub for having a personal sense of ethics about how I play the game?!

WTF.

Dude, there is literally NOTHING ethical about using strikes or not. And the obvious implication is that those that do are UNETHICAL. That is pretty much the definition of being a scrub. I wasn't saying that to be insulting, but, boy, did it get you heated. Get over yourself. If you refuse to use legal, viable tools that the game gives you, don't claim ethical high ground, because where you really are standing is in Scrubsville.

And if you choose to not use them because you don't like them, good for you. But to claim it to somehow be an ethical issue? Pfft, please.

Edited by Escef, 14 July 2017 - 01:16 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Ethics are not morals. Don't distort my words based on your semantic misinterpretation.

in·teg·ri·ty

inˈteɡrədē/

noun
noun: integrity

• 
  
  
  1. the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
  "he is known to be a man of integrity"
  synonyms: honesty, probity, rectitude, honor, good character, principle(s), ethics, morals, righteousness, morality, virtue, decency, fairness, scrupulousness, sincerity, truthfulness, trustworthiness
  
  
  "I never doubted his integrity"

Looks like you were talking about morality(and hey synonymous with ethics!), to me, but hey. That's just the definition of integrity.

Edited by Brain Cancer, 14 July 2017 - 01:17 PM.

[Pur]

I'll just leave this here:

[redacted]

PS - Brain Cancer, I'm not about to talk semantics with you. Gaming ethics are not about real life morals, period. Get a grip.

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 19 August 2017 - 01:52 PM.
[redacted]

[Escef]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

I'll just leave this here:

http://i.imgur.com/PnGBuNP.png

Yeah, ok, and? Oh, no, I'm not great at a video game, boo-hoo-hoo.

Not all of us can spend 7+ hour a day streaming, we have jobs.

I mean, If you want a "whip 'em out and measure 'em" contest, perhaps we can contrast your 45 followers on Twitch to my 968? Would that prove anything? Of course not.

So, are we done here? Or are you going to lecture me on your "ethical" superiority some more?

Edited by Escef, 14 July 2017 - 01:23 PM.

[Pur]

Same, but some of us devote our time and effort to video games. Now if you want to talk about ethics, and think you're better than me because of your real life stuff, you've lost the argument and are out of your element.

[Escef]

King Harkinian, on 14 July 2017 - 01:21 PM, said:

Same, but some of us devote our time and effort to video games. Now if you want to talk about ethics, and think you're better than me because of your real life stuff, you've lost the argument and are out of your element.

You lost the argument when you started it, and don't even realize it, son. Have a life.

[Pur]

Lol.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Brain Cancer, I'm not about to talk semantics with you. Gaming ethics are not about real life morals, period. Get a grip.

Hey, the word means what it means, not what you want it to mean. Use a different word if it doesn't fit.

It's not using an exploit or a bug to gain an unfair advantage. It's an option in the game to turn C-bills into damage.

We used to crack jokes about PGI adding gold ammo, and now they've plugged in a grind disadvantage for a direct in-game advantage, deliberately and to a far greater extent than pre skill tree. As it's deliberate, failing to use it is like failing to use Clan 'Mechs because they didn't exist in a prior incarnation of the game.

You just hate the changes. This is not integrity, it is simply a failure to adapt to the new rules of the game.

[Pur]

Gaming ethics are not about real life morals. I cannot overstate that enough, apparently.

It has nothing to do with adapting whatsoever. It has to do with refusing to incorporate something that I personally consider to be skilless.

Again, as I said earlier in the thread, I don't judge others for using them. But in their current form, in particular, they are a crutch. It is what it is.

Please read my comments instead of trying to spin them in your mind into something that I never said. That is... unethical.

[Escef]

BC, just give up, man. He's a lost cause.

[LordNothing]

Gwahlur, on 14 July 2017 - 07:39 AM, said:

Two strike limit pr person. 24 strike limit pr match.

48 if you count your own teams strike failures, like dropping an arty on your team while you are waiting for your assaults to catch up.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Again, as I said earlier in the thread, I don't judge others for using them. But in their current form, in particular, they are a crutch. It is what it is.

A penalty to your damage potential because you won't push a button, actually.

This ranks right up there with the guys who won't push R because they hate "noskill LRMs" and wouldn't want someone to potentially shoot at their lock. You're deliberately diminishing your capacity to win.

The game gives you X amount of damage for zero tonnage/crits, with the option of investing nodes for further damage capacity. This is intended as part of the game. Frankly, it's a crappy mechanic intended to steepen the grind hill.

But it exists. And is intended to exist as such. It is only a crutch insofar as you are impaired without it compared to with it.