219 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

Wolfways, on 16 December 2017 - 11:58 AM, said:

Customization: Building whatever you like on a mech (within limits).
Quick Play: A quick knockabout match for around 10 minutes.
Pugs: Random players in random mechs.

Why do you expect people to play the way you want?

I realize I've only said this in almost every post but let me repeat it -

It's a game, play how you want and have fun.

However if you're saying "I'm amazing/this loadout is amazing/x behavior (like sharing armor) is a myth" you're going to get called out.

[OmniFail]

MischiefSC, on 16 December 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

The leaderboard for Jarlslist is amazing but it's score based to try and work around the w/l skewing that group queue has. It also adjusts your values based on weight class.However I've never said I was a great player. A bit over mediocre. The 0.8 average is badly skewed by the thousands of terribads and terribad alts who played 10+ games at a 0.5 or so and quit.

You're carrying. 1.5 is ideal - that's statistically offsetting all the 0.8s. 1.25 is still solid - it means on average you're 5% over break even. Especially for LRMs that's good enough, you're helping drive wins. That's not leeching, that's carrying. I've seen you olay, you were in, I think, TBR with LRMs and lasers? You were up front, playing and carrying. Was Grim and we won, you went down about 1/2 way through, we were rotating right and you were caught out.

You're not the guy who rarely hits 1.0 but posts some one off screenshots and says you're amzing.

Thanks for writing me another essay explaining to me why I'm bad. Here's a "off" screen shoot from my collection of more than a thousand. For you to ridicule and ponder how bad I am for your next essay.

[Khobai]

Quote

If half of LRM damage wasn't trash you would be crying about how OP it was. Think about the 1000+ damage games being all CT damage. Also SRM's, MRM's, SSRM's, and LBX all suffer from what you call trash damage. Prove me wrong show me pictures do the math.

Like I said doing trash damage shouldnt be rewarded as much as doing lethal damage.

That includes all weapons that do trash damage not just LRMs.

I just had a 1500 damage game in my annihilator with 4 LB10Xs. Unlike you, you dont see me bragging about it. Because I know a good portion of LBX damage is trash damage. And trash damage should be worth less.

Im just saying the rewards for trash damage shouldnt be the same. Thats all.

MWO should reward good shot placement that contributes to kills. Not spraying missiles into locations that dont matter.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 12:35 PM.

[OmniFail]

MischiefSC, on 16 December 2017 - 12:28 PM, said:

I realize I've only said this in almost every post but let me repeat it -

It's a game, play how you want and have fun.

However if you're saying "I'm amazing/this loadout is amazing/x behavior (like sharing armor) is a myth" you're going to get called out.

P.S. Armor sharing is a myth. Prove me wrong. Show me pictures, math, and charts. Or we could just post links to the MWOWC and see how the pros share armor.

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

Like I said doing trash damage should not be rewarded as much as doing lethal damage.

That includes all weapons that do trash damage not just LRMs.



I just had a 1500 damage game in my annihilator with 4 LB10Xs. Unlike you, you dont see me bragging about it. Because I know a good portion of LBX damage is trash damage. And trash damage should be worth less.

And yet you see only post singling out LRM's but hardly ever the others. Is it the indirect fire is that what throws you guys into bi-polar PTSD fits?

[Brain Cancer]

MischiefSC, on 16 December 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

The leaderboard for Jarlslist is amazing but it's score based to try and work around the w/l skewing that group queue has. It also adjusts your values based on weight class.However I've never said I was a great player. A bit over mediocre. The 0.8 average is badly skewed by the thousands of terribads and terribad alts who played 10+ games at a 0.5 or so and quit.

Nah. I pulled that straight from the MWO leaderboards myself. This season's stats, remember?

You are well into the top 10% of the playerbase at about 2.0 W/L. Factoring in all the people who play 10 on an account and stop, you're probably in the top 5% for wins vs. losses because there's more of those in the top 5% than below it. If you only play QP, odds are you're even higher.

Have I mentioned lately that not separating QP into solo and group stats is a bad thing?

Quote

You're carrying. 1.5 is ideal - that's statistically offsetting all the 0.8s. 1.25 is still solid - it means on average you're 5% over break even. Especially for LRMs that's good enough, you're helping drive wins. That's not leeching, that's carrying. I've seen you olay, you were in, I think, TBR with LRMs and lasers? You were up front, playing and carrying. Was Grim and we won, you went down about 1/2 way through, we were rotating right and you were caught out.

Supernova-A the past few months. Orion IIC before that. And yep, I try to avoid the typical lurmtossing potato tactics whenever possible.

Quote

You're not the guy who rarely hits 1.0 but posts some one off screenshots and says you're amzing.

True. I try to be on the high end of skill for my missile-bombing of choice, whether it's ATM or LRM or a bit of both. What I get is about the edge of what missile boats can generally do, simply because every bit of spread means automatically that much less potential lethal damage to a target. I noticed the second the Artemis/ATM spread nerf kicked in, as kills turned into KMDDs because a few more missiles were either missing or hitting off-target, turning that dead robot into someone else's secured kill. Honestly, we can't really do MORE damage, simply because there's only so much ammo you can toss in before you're sacrificing hitting power or ROF or something really stupid, like not having secondary guns or armor.

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 12:22 PM, said:

If half of LRM damage wasn't trash you would be crying about how OP it was. Think about the 1000+ damage games being all CT damage. Also SRM's, MRM's, SSRM's, and LBX all suffer from what you call trash damage. Prove me wrong show me pictures do the math.

Most of those suffer from considerably less trash damage than LRMs do, seeing as most LB-X shots will realistically put their full damage into the torso at all but extreme range if you're centerpunching. SRMs are much the same. MRMs do have LRM-like spread, of course...but even they can hug a target and minimize it.

Only guided missiles have zero "choke" capacity via positioning.

[Khobai]

Quote

Armor sharing is a myth.

lolol

that statement refutes itself

Quote

And yet you see only post singling out LRM's but hardly ever the others. Is it the indirect fire is that what throws you guys into bi-polar PTSD fits?

huh? the damage weighting system I proposed doesnt single out LRMs.

it punishes all trash damage regardless of the source.

all trash damage would be worth less than lethal damage.

if you fire an LB20X into a mech and half the pellets hit arms and legs, and the mech dies to CT damage, those pellets that hit the arms and legs are trash damage. Only the pellets that hit the CT would get the lethal damage multiplier.

having a system like that would just expose how much of LRM damage is in fact trash damage...

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 12:41 PM.

[OmniFail]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:37 PM, said:

lolol

that statement refutes itself



huh? the damage weighting system I proposed doesnt single out LRMs.

it punishes all trash damage regardless of the source.

all trash damage would be worth less than lethal damage.

if you fire an LB20X into a mech and half the pellets hit arms and legs, and the mech dies to CT damage, those pellets that hit the arms and legs are trash damage. Only the pellets that hit the CT would get the lethal damage multiplier.

Armor sharing is a myth and the only lethal damage is the killing blow. These are self evident truths. Show me the "Give armor to ally" button. Show me the this damage is lethal but dose not kill.

Show me

Edited by OmniFail, 16 December 2017 - 12:44 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Armor sharing is a myth

I suppose torso twisting to distribute damage across multiple locations is a myth too

because damage sharing is the exact same concept, just applied across multiple mechs.

Quote

the only lethal damage is the killing blow

no. any damage that helped kill the mech is lethal damage.

any damage that didnt help kill the mech is trash damage.

it has nothing to do with who got the killing blow. it has to do with how the mech died and who contributed to killing the mech in that way.

if a mech dies to CT damage, anyone who did CT damage did lethal damage to the mech because they helped kill that mech.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 12:49 PM.

[OmniFail]

Brain Cancer, on 16 December 2017 - 12:37 PM, said:

Supernova-A the past few months. Orion IIC before that. And yep, I try to avoid the typical lurmtossing potato tactics whenever possible.

I earned the time in my Supernova-A doing lurmtossing potato tactics by getting my Peoples Hero using lurm Huntsman builds. It's what make good.

[OmniFail]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

I suppose torso twisting to distribute damage across multiple locations is a myth too

because damage sharing is the exact same concept, just applied across multiple mechs.



no. any damage that helped kill the mech is lethal damage.

any damage that didnt help kill the mech is trash damage.

it has nothing to do with who got the killing blow. it has to do with how the mech died and who contributed to killing the mech in that way.

if a mech dies to CT damage, anyone who did CT damage did lethal damage to the mech because they helped kill that mech.

Don't put words in my mouth. I did not say anything about torso twisting. And the truth is a enemy murderball is gonna call a magic mech letter (example: Alpha) and burn it down. They are not gonna distribute their damage if they can help it. They are gonna focus fire.

For your second point. I don't understand are you saying that weapons that spread damage do not contribute to the kill? Does this mean that you think weapons with spread damage cannot kill you?

[Khobai]

Quote

They are not gonna distribute their damage if they can help it. They are gonna focus fire.

yes now youre getting it.

damage sharing means taking steps to prevent the enemy from focus firing.

the damaged mechs rotate to the back where theyre harder to focus fire. and fresh mechs rotate to the front where they become a higher perceived threat. youre able to keep your team's overall damage up by keeping the damaged mechs alive longer. Or say you have multiple mechs attack at once, and they all have the same perceived threat level, the enemy is limited in how many mechs they can attack at a time. So you can share armor that way too.

and like I said, its not entirely different from the concept of torso twisting to distribute damage across multiple locations. youre just applying that concept across the entire team.

Quote

For your second point. I don't understand are you saying that weapons that spread damage do not contribute to the kill? Does this mean that you think weapons with spread damage cannot kill you?

no it means some of the damage is trash damage and some of it is lethal damage.

if you shoot an LBX into a mech with a red CT and kill it, all your LBX pellets that hit the CT are lethal damage, but the ones that hit the arms or legs or other non-CT locations are trash damage.

LRMs are the same way. Some of the LRMs hit locations that help kill mechs. But a lot of them dont and are effectively wasted damage. That wasted damage should not be rewarded as much.

Damage weighting would make trash damage worth less than lethal damage. Which is how it should be.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 01:44 PM.

[Wolfways]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

no. any damage that helped kill the mech is lethal damage.

any damage that didnt help kill the mech is trash damage.

it has nothing to do with who got the killing blow. it has to do with how the mech died and who contributed to killing the mech in that way.

if a mech dies to CT damage, anyone who did CT damage did lethal damage to the mech because they helped kill that mech.

While I understand what you're saying I don't like calling it trash damage. It's not like taking the AC arm off a Centurion is wasted damage (assuming you don't have high enough Alpha to just drill through the ct).

[Khobai]

Quote

While I understand what you're saying I don't like calling it trash damage. It's not like taking the AC arm off a Centurion is wasted damage (assuming you don't have high enough Alpha to just drill through the ct).

well im not saying trash damage shouldnt be worth anything. it should still be worth something.

but lethal damage should get a multiplier to be worth more than trash damage.

all im saying is they shouldnt be treated the same.

doing 48 damage and destroying a centurion's arm shouldnt be worth the same as doing 48 damage to a centurions rear CT and killing it outright.

the latter should be worth more because its lethal damage.

Edited by Khobai, 16 December 2017 - 01:08 PM.

[OmniFail]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 12:57 PM, said:

yes now youre getting it.

damage sharing means taking steps to prevent the enemy from focus firing.

the damaged mechs rotate to the back where theyre harder to focus fire. and fresh mechs rotate to the front where they become a higher perceived threat.

and like I said, its not entirely different from the concept of torso twisting to distribute damage across multiple locations. youre just applying that concept across the entire team.



no it means some of the damage is trash damage and some of it is lethal damage.

if you shoot an LBX into a mech with a red CT and kill it, all your LBX pellets that hit the CT are lethal damage, but the ones that hit the arms or legs or other locations are trash damage.

LRMs are the same way. Some of the LRMs hit locations that help kill mechs. But a lot of them dont and are effectively wasted damage. That wasted damage should not be worth as much.

Armor Sharing: You know were living in the age of the 78 point alpha strike and er-large laser spam. The other team is not gonna give a chance to rotate. Two of them are gonna rip you to shreds no matter what weapons they are using.

Trash Damage: I see in death a member of project mayhem does have a name. Your argument seems to be degrading to the point where you appear to be a crazy person.

Anyway I have important things to do today. I want to get a jump on my studies for next quarter and spark a J with the homeless clowns in the park. Write your essays and I'll come back to laugh at them after I'm done with my rounds.

[Wolfways]

Khobai, on 16 December 2017 - 01:05 PM, said:

well im not saying trash damage shouldnt be worth anything. it should still be worth something.

but lethal damage should get a multiplier to be worth more than trash damage.

all im saying is they shouldnt be treated the same.

doing 48 damage and destroying a centurion's arm shouldnt be worth the same as doing 48 damage to a centurions rear CT and killing it outright.

the latter should be worth more because its lethal damage.

No I mean you're calling it "trash damage". Why not non-lethal damage, or just damage?

[MischiefSC]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 12:35 PM, said:

P.S. Armor sharing is a myth. Prove me wrong. Show me pictures, math, and charts. Or we could just post links to the MWOWC and see how the pros share armor.



And yet you see only post singling out LRM's but hardly ever the others. Is it the indirect fire is that what throws you guys into bi-polar PTSD fits?

Okay. Here's some some math. You can see this in MWOWC as well -

8 people on each side. All 8 are using direct fire. Each presents themselves as a target when they come up to shoot, covering a lane and presenting in a lane. They project a threat down that lane doing damage immediately to one target in their lane every weapon cycle. In turn they draw fire or at least attention to themselves as a target to shoot every time they shoot.

Both sides are shooting at every target they can every chance they get. It's assumed you're going to get hit a bit - the goal is to do more damage than you take. That's called trading. Since everyone is shooting as often as they can you want to present in a staggered line to spread damagr.

So suppose one side has an LRM boat shooting from cover. His team is only presenting 7 targets - the other team has 1 less person shooting at them and 1 less lane covered because LRM guy isn't watching a lane, he's leeching on someone elses. The 8 guys now have 1 guy every cycle who isn't being threatened and can pick his shots at leisure. The 7 guys are spreading the shots being made at them by 1 less mech so they each take more damage. The result is that they start getting killed off first, creating a roll. The LRM guy, having used his team as armor, is still alive and undamaged but is now going to get focused by 8 people and killed quickly.

Hiding LRM boat is not projecting an independent threat or managing a lane. He's just raining on people that his teammates are already attacking. This means 1 enemy is not being suppressed - as such can shoot at leisure, which quickly snowball's damage.

Google MWO Tactics 101. On my phone so I can't easily find it for you but it's even got pictures for you. This is a basic premise that pretty much everyone who wants to get good at the game has already become familiar with.

[MischiefSC]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 01:08 PM, said:

Armor Sharing: You know were living in the age of the 78 point alpha strike and er-large laser spam. The other team is not gonna give a chance to rotate. Two of them are gonna rip you to shreds no matter what weapons they are using.

Trash Damage: I see in death a member of project mayhem does have a name. Your argument seems to be degrading to the point where you appear to be a crazy person.

Anyway I have important things to do today. I want to get a jump on my studies for next quarter and spark a J with the homeless clowns in the park. Write your essays and I'll come back to laugh at them after I'm done with my rounds.

So to be simple and clear -

If your assumptions were correct they would be presented in the data. They are not. Your w/l I'd way, way lower than other players dpi g the same level of damage or even close. Your assumptions are losing matches that other people are consistently winning. Your opinion, feelings and such are irrelevant. In actual practice your approach is a losing one.

Which is okay - play how you want. However you're attempting to present your losing system as a winning one. It's is not, as the data proves.

[Xetelian]

If you don't understand armor sharing then you've never payed attention to a good team in group queue.


Put heavily armored guys out front and push into the enemy lines with them.
As they get damaged, have them fall back and have the next heaviest guys go forward.
The first guys become second line and the second line guys become first line guys.
Timing is essential but it works.


Simply leading a charge that breaks an enemy line, even if you die in the process, can lead to a victory for your team. All that damage you took raised the heat of the laser vomit guys and took out ammo on the rest.



This works even better in faction war siege, the attacking team gets all fast heavies and pushes directly into the enemy defense and takes out as many turrets and does as much damage to generators as they can, usually focusing on one at a time.


I've played much more than 100 faction war matches and have rolled with organized teams, that is how to win against another unit half the time.




If armor sharing is a myth do you believe in the myth of total shared armor? I see a lot of LRM apologists saying that their spread damage lowers the overall shared armor of the entire team.

[Khobai]

this guy has to claim armor sharing is a myth

because if he doesnt, he has to admit that by not armor sharing hes hurting his team

[Xiphias]

OmniFail, on 16 December 2017 - 12:44 PM, said:

Armor sharing is a myth and the only lethal damage is the killing blow. These are self evident truths. Show me the "Give armor to ally" button.

You're stuck on the literal interpretation of "armor sharing". Obviously you can't give armor to another player. That doesn't mean that a team can't share armor by rotating mechs so that each player is taking some damage and it's not all focused on a few players.

It's the same as "sharing your strength" with someone. You can't literally give your physical strength to someone, but you can take some of the weight that they are carrying to make it easier for them. Don't deliberately misrepresent what's meant by armor sharing.

You mentioned the MWOWC, you can see examples here, here and here. Look at how in the first two EON has spread the damage out between all the players on their team. You don't see someone with 100% while their teammates are heavily damaged. In the last one you can see how both EMP and EON are distributing damage between players.

Armor sharing is about presenting multiple targets to make focus fire harder and about each person on a team taking some damage instead of a few players taking a lot of damage.

Quote

Show me the this damage is lethal but dose not kill.

Show me

Simple, leg a target out of bounds. The damage is lethal, but doesn't directly kill the target directly.

Similarly, if you aren't stuck on a perfectly literal "killing shot is the only lethal damage" mindset, things like legging a light can be considered "lethal" damage more so that the actual killing shot.

If you actually look at the definition of lethal you'll see that in addition to meaning "causing death" it can also mean "gravely damaging or destructive" or "very potent or effective". Therefore, by definition you can have "lethal damage" that doesn't kill a target.

I think the idea of weighing damage is flawed though simply because it's impossible to tell what damage actually contributed to the kill without some sort of human judging. For example, if a light gets legged, but then dies through CT is that leg damage worthless damage? Another example is damage that makes a target look one way while another mech shoots the target in the back. The back damage was the lethal damag, but it wouldn't have been possible without the front "worthless damage". It's not nearly simple enough to use some sort of automatic system.