205 replies to this topic

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 17 November 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

Example: (numbers are representative, not exact)

1: LRM works 10% (Crimson Strait)
2: LRM works 15%
3: LRM works 20%
4: LRM works 25%
5: LRM works 30%
6: LRM works 35%
7: LRM works 40%
8: LRM works 45%
9: LRM works 50%
10: LRM works 55%
11: LRM works 65%
12: LRM works 60%
13: LRM works 75%
14: LRM works 80%
15: LRM works 95% (Polar Highlands)

If you can use lrms in crimson only 10% you still dont know anything about lrms.
If you think lrms work to 95% in polar, you need to learn a lot about lrm-countering,
no wonder that you want to nerf lrms and maps with low cover.

Play a little more with lrms if you want to talk about them without looking stupid or like a crybaby.
Didnt you remember our discussion about your "lrm-balancing"?

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 01:53 AM.

[Anjian]

I am pretty okay with Polar Highlands. And no I am not a LRMer, I drive a Clan heavy that is heavy on either PPCs, ER Lasers or Ballistics. Well, sometimes an assault too. Many of my best games and scores are in this map.

It does favor mobile long to mid range builds that run hot which tends to align with many Clan builds.

I tend to vote for it every time it pops up, unless of course, there is Frozen Village.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 01:53 AM, said:

If you can use lrms in crimson only 10% you still dont know anything about lrms.
If you think lrms work to 95% in polar, you need to learn a lot about lrm-countering,
no wonder that you want to nerf lrms and maps with low cover.

Play a little more with lrms if you want to talk about them without looking stupid or like a crybaby.
Didnt you remember our discussion about your "lrm-balancing"?

The6thMessenger, on 17 November 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

Example: (numbers are representative, not exact)

Yeah, it's repeating what happened before; you acting high and mighty, despite getting things wrong. Especially when you're misinterpreting again, and missing the god-damn point. Like how could you miss a god-damn disclaimer, simply framing the argument for representation, not providing exact values of "effectiveness", it's the very first line of your quoted post.

Think before you post, read before you post.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 02:41 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 02:34 AM, said:

Yeah, I it's repeating what happened before; you acting high and mighty, despite getting things wrong. Especially when you're misinterpreting again, and missing the god-damn point. Like how could you miss a god-damn disclaimer, simply framing the argument for representation, not providing exact values of "effectiveness", it's the very first line of your quoted post.

Think before you post, read before you post.

5% or 10% or 15% and even 20% on crimson still shows that you know nothing about lrms and positioning.
Do your disclaimer is still matching if its double or triple or four times the number you showed as example?

Just use real numbers and not exxagerated numbers from thin air!

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 02:53 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 02:43 AM, said:

5% or 10% or 15% and even 20% on crimson still shows that you know nothing about lrms.

Again, example. God. Damn. Example.

It's bad enough that you're using Ad Hominem, cause it's a pathetic argument.

Of course Crimson Strait isn't just 10% -- i honestly don't even know how to quantify effectiveness, I don't have the global stats.

It was framing my point of view, you ninny. I was merely saying that as opposed of looking a ratio of maps from "no cover" to "with cover" in a 15:1 ratio, we look at how weapons are working on certain maps instead. After all, that's much of the issue with PH, that is the point of contention, likewise him saying that PH has "no-cover" is wrong that's why it's much better to look at it from how LRMs work instead.

If you're going to butt in someone else's conversation, the least you could do is read up. I don't expect you to agree with me, just don't misunderstand my position.

Think before you post, read before you post. Especially in the god damn context.

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 02:43 AM, said:

Do you disclaimer is still matching if its double or triple or four times the number you showed as example?

Okay, assuming that It has something about effectiveness. No, i could not quanitfy how well LRMs work, i do not have the global stats to make an inference.

Qualitatively however -- in a subjective sense based on opinion, they work well on PH COMPARED to other maps.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 03:03 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 02:51 AM, said:

Of course Crimson Strait isn't just 10% -- i honestly don't even know how to quantify effectiveness, I don't have the global stats.

So you claiming something and the next post you say you dont know it and just use exxagerated numbers from thin air?
Looks like an orange clown for me ...

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 02:51 AM, said:

Qualitatively however -- in a subjective sense, they work well on PH COMPARED to other maps.

Lrms work also on other maps well, if you know how to use them.
Some are easiert, like polar, alpine, turmalin and caustic, some are ok like crimson, mining or bog, some are worse like hpg and the new one.

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 03:10 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 02:59 AM, said:

So you claiming something and the next post you say you dont know it and just use exxagerated numbers from thin air?

Cause it's an example. It's not supposed to be a cold-hard fact, it's supposed to frame the point of view as a tool for argumentation.

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 02:59 AM, said:

Lrms work also on other maps well, if you know how to use them.
Some are easiert, like polar, alpine, turmalin, caustic and bog, some are ok like crimson, mining or bog, some are worse like hpg and the new one.

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 02:51 AM, said:

Qualitatively however -- in a subjective sense based on opinion, they work well on PH COMPARED to other maps.

Compared. Do you know how it works? That means, in relation to other maps. So if you could make LRMs work well on other maps too, you could make make LRMs even better on Polar Highlands, or make them work as well on other maps with less skill -- whichever. After all, the little hard-cover makes LRMs easier to land -- and receive.

I wasn't saying that they don't work well on other map.

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 02:59 AM, said:

Looks like an orange clown for me ...

Makes sense, now get out.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 03:10 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 03:08 AM, said:

Compared. Do you know how it works? That means, in relation to other maps. So if you could make LRMs work well on other maps too, you could make make LRMs even better on Polar Highlands, or make them work as well on other maps with less skill -- whichever. After all, the little hard-cover makes LRMs easier to land -- and receive.

Alpine is easier then polar, only a few hills to break locks in most engagements,
but polar has trenches to break locks everywhere.

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 03:19 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 03:13 AM, said:

Alpine is easier then polar, only a few hills to break locks in most engagements,
but polar has trenches to breack locks everywhere.

Yeah, but hard-cover means your LRMs wouldn't necessarily land with reliable locks -- people sure like to embrace hills. Sure that reduces to peekaboo, a sniper with ERLL or Gauss could unload before the LRM lands.

But if you have the same reliable locks on Polar Highlands -- locks that couldn't be broken, say a UAV they didn't notice, a dedicated spotter, guy in a brawl, or god-forbid a NARC -- it's feeding time.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 03:20 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 03:19 AM, said:

Yeah, but hard-cover means your LRMs wouldn't necessarily land with reliable locks -- people sure like to embrace hills. Sure that reduces to peekaboo.

But if you have the same reliable locks on Polar Highlands -- locks that couldn't be broken, say a UAV they didn't notice, a dedicated spotter, guy in a brawl, or god-forbid a NARC -- it's feeding time.

I won a game with my narc raven on caustic, less then 4 minutes, but i had 3 good lrm boats with me.
If you get narced on alpine you are done too,
if you get a sure lock its gameover on most maps, if the missile user not just stands back,
you know that moment where you have to decide to get lrmed to death behind your cover or getting in the fireline and getting melted by all other weapons in a second.

You may be right if we talk about the 900m all the missiles guy,
but if you would use them at 200-400 meters and move its another game,
thats why i ask you to play a little more with lrms if you want to talk about them.

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 03:29 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 03:24 AM, said:

I won a game with my narc raven on caustic, less then 4 minutes, but i had 3 good lrm boats with me.
If you get narced on alpine you are done too,

Again, i'm not saying that they wouldn't work, nor NARC exclusively works on PH. I'm just saying that LRM works better on PH, because there's little hard cover to deter LRMs + Reliable Locks, versus other maps that caters easily accessible hard cover.

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 03:24 AM, said:

You may be right if we talk about the 900m all the missiles guy,
but if you would use them at 200-400 meters its another game,
thats why i ask you to play a little more with lrms if you want to talk about them.

Yes, because you're the almighty Kroete, ultimate judge of those who play. *scarcasm

Stop with the Ad Hominem, it's not helping your case, it's only making you look bad and an ********.

Assuming that you meant on Alpine, because obviously NARC and locks are still useful at those ranges in PH. 200m to 400m combat might happen sure, no problem there if you can maintain it, I'm not even saying that LRMs are no good 200m to 400m. But Alpine Peaks kind of forces long-range combat, due to the immense spaces between mountains.

For reference, use this: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...peaks&m=assault

It's more likely that people huddle behind some massive rocks -- like L8 and K9, people sniping from i9, people trading from i6 i7 to h7 and h8. Because they would want to minimize return fire. On some cirumstances, F6 and F8 would cater to snipers good view of i6 and i7 for F6, and good view at H7 H8 G7 G8.

Close quarter usually happen on k10 too. etc. etc. Also when pushing L9 to K9, or L9 to L8.

On conquest, when people try to take theta at J7, and there are people on I6 mountain, that's pretty far too. To be fair, distances are also kind of close on Sigma on J5 when from the J6 hill, so yeah 200m - 400m rule-of-thumb works ok there.

And then on the numbers side: ERLL is hit-scan, Gauss has 2000 m/s speed, that means, the gauss can clear 400m at 0.20s, the LRM having 160m/s clears it for 2.5s.

I'm not saying that LRMs couldn't work on alpine, nor 200m to 400m combat doesn't happen, but all things considering, we can objectively say that LRMs would work better on PH than they would on Alpine cause alpine would hosts combat that generally exceeds 400m where LRMs work best.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 04:21 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 03:45 AM, said:

Yes, because you're the almighty Kroete, ultimate of those who play. *scarcasm

Nah, just an old, mostly drugged and disabled man.
Maybe ask some other lrms users?

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 03:45 AM, said:

And then on the numbers side: ERLL is hit-scan, Gauss has 2000 m/s speed, that means, the gauss can clear 500m at 0.20s, the LRM having 160m/s clears it for 2.5s.

Thats why you use lrms over 400m only if you have a sure lock and no cover near or for supression not expecting any damage.

You showed in your "balancing" thread and in this thread that you dont know much about lrms.

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 04:04 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 03:59 AM, said:

Nah, just an old, mostly drugged and disabled man.
Maybe ask some other lrms users?


Thats why you use lrms over 400m only if you have a sure lock and no cover near or for supression not expectiong any damage.

You showed in your "balancing" thread and in this thread that you don't know much about lrms.

No, you "think" that I don't know much about it with your own bias.

By comparison, sure i don't know ALL about it, I don't play LRMs as much as Vellron2005 or you (https://leaderboard....The6thMessenger), but with 5000 games under my belt, on the 96th percentile, I do have an insight of how mechanics would fit the game -- it's called Experience. It's like a 103 year-old versus a 30 year-old in terms of experience with the game -- essentially a lot wiser. (Assuming that it's your only account)

Kudos on the higher W/L though, no really, that's not even sarcastic.

So, you're not even going to respond about the scenarios that is described on Alpine Peaks? Just some implied Ad Hominem? Good, we're done here.

EDIT:

Kroete, on 18 November 2017 - 03:59 AM, said:

Thats why you use lrms over 400m only if you have a sure lock and no cover near or for supression not expecting any damage.

Yes, AMEN to that. Also I meant 400m, not 500m.

But again, on Alpine Peaks, you are most likely engaging people above 400m that makes it moot, as per the scenarios we've discussed.

Okay, now we're done.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 November 2017 - 04:28 AM.

[Beaching Betty]

I loikeeee

[Galenit]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 04:14 AM, said:

No, you "think" that I don't know much about it. By comparison, sure i don't know ALL about it, I don't play LRMs as much as Vellron2005 or you (https://leaderboard....The6thMessenger), but with 5000 games under my belt, on the 96th percentile, I do have an insight of how mechanics would fit the game -- it's called Experience. It's like a 103 year-old versus a 30 year-old in terms of experience with the game. (Assuming that it's your only account)

Kudos on the higher W/L though, no really, that's not even sarcastic.

I dont even know where i can see my played matches,
but i started at the beta with my is-account,
my narc raven has over 1000 matches and some other mechs too.

The last seasons i played only a few matches (in both accountd), seems my tennis elbow is chronic.
Easy 500mc wasnt worth the pain and trying a 90° mouse didnt worked for me.


Ok, you admit that you only know the basic skills for lrms,
thats why i say play more with them if you want to talk about them.

PS: This is kroetes is-account.

Edited by Galenit, 18 November 2017 - 04:36 AM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 18 November 2017 - 04:14 AM, said:

... it's called Experience. It's like a 103 year-old versus a 30 year-old in terms of experience with the game -- essentially a lot wiser. (Assuming that it's your only account)

Do you realy want to play the number game?

I dont like it, but if you want we can compare our played matches to see who has more "experience":
2406+1972+1846+1697 = 50% more then your played matches.

Edit:
I missed the archived stats of my is account:
Thats another 3339 wins and 3638 lose.
Together around 3 times the matches you have played ...

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 05:07 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Since LRMs are underpowered compared to direct fire even on Polar Highlands, it would make more sense to make other maps more open.

[PFC Carsten]

To brag about statistics and how one ranks better than someone else on some leaderboard does not help moving the topic forward, btw.

On topic:
At first, when PH was a new map, i detested it because of seemingly no cover, brought Long-Rage ballistics and Lasers whenever i could. Then I learned a thing or two about positioning, playing one's strengths and covering up weaknesses. Now, I'm doing ok enough with even medium lasers on Polar.

Yes, sometimes you make a mistake and are punished for it. So what? Learn from it, move on, do better next match.

Edited by PFC Carsten, 18 November 2017 - 05:11 AM.

[Kroete]

PFC Carsten, on 18 November 2017 - 05:11 AM, said:

At first, when PH was a new map, i detested it because of seemingly no cover, brought Long-Rage ballistics and Lasers whenever i could. Then I learned a thing or two about positioning, playing one's strengths and covering up weaknesses. Now, I'm doing ok enough with even medium lasers on Polar.

Yes, sometimes you make a mistake and are punished for it. So what? Learn from it, move on, do better next match.

If you dont have much cover, positionig is more importand and you get punished more for mistakes.
Polar helps a lot to make you better in positioning and less dependet on cover.

About statistics:
They make the discussions and forum more toxic, thats why i only enable my tier-showing if someone comes with that. And braging i do only if someone trys to validate their opinion with stats who say nothing about the topic.

Edited by Kroete, 18 November 2017 - 05:27 AM.

[Nightmare1]

My idea to "fix" PH would be to remove it entirely.

Obviously, that's not going to happen though.