366 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Mech The Dane, on 12 February 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

We probably don't need to all pile on Koniving. Where ever his skill my rest at, he's been a very good early resource and friendly guide for many new players to the game.


Also, look, the Jarl's List is down. The Lighthouse got his way!

Apparently, it wasn't sabotage. Drat!

[pattonesque]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

My trusty MRM St. Ives Blue typically raises my average match score.

In the 12 games I ran the Spider-5D to skill out the better ones I had a 5.75 KDR. That's with 3 MPL

[Horseman]

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 08:41 AM, said:

I didn't actually use the ECM nodes so I worked with an assumption and it was either off or flat out wrong and when someone pointed it out, that's when a correction is done. I don't rely on ECM to play and the skill tree was reasonably new. **** happens.

And that's part of what I'm talking about regarding "trustworthiness".
All you needed to do in the first place was check the patch notes or the in-game description of the skill node. However, you were more inclined to make assumptions instead of checking - and worse, to give out advice to others based on those unverified assumptions.

No, the skill tree wasn't "reasonably new" at that point - it was at the very end of December, when the Skill Tree was over half a year old.
And no, "**** happens" is only acceptable within the context of your own gameplay. Never when advising new players.

Quote

But this does make me wonder... How did I get that wrong again? All it affects is range; pretty sure that would be what I assumed...

ECM reduces the range at which enemy mechs can detect you (and allies within your ECM bubble) by a percentage.
You made the assumption the skill nodes change the size of your ECM bubble while the enemy's detection range reduction is fixed, which is the exact opposite of their in-game effect.

[ZippySpeedMonkey]

The Leaderboards are irrelivent.

You play this game long enough and you’ll get a feel for who the good players are.

[El Bandito]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

My trusty MRM St. Ives Blue typically raises my average match score.

I'm sure MRM IV-4 will raise your score even higher, cause it is far more meta.

Edited by El Bandito, 12 February 2018 - 11:42 AM.

[Vxheous]

ZippySpeedMonkey, on 12 February 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

The Leaderboards are irrelivent.

You play this game long enough and you’ll get a feel for who the good players are.

You'd think this would be the case, but sadly it's not. So many times I drop into group queue with 1-2 other EmP members, and you'd be surprised how often some no-name guy would try and give us orders on how to play/position. I remember like a week prior to mech con, I dropped into group queue with Proton, and some idiot tried to tell him how to play an annihilator, then proceeded to TK Proton cause Proton was "blocking him"

Edited by Vxheous, 12 February 2018 - 11:56 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

El Bandito, on 12 February 2018 - 11:41 AM, said:

I'm sure MRM IV-4 will raise your score even higher, cause it is far more meta.

Hmm I should give that a try. Might even be better than my MRM Thanatos.

[justcallme A S H]

Vxheous, on 12 February 2018 - 10:36 AM, said:

Koniving, you should form a team with like-minded individuals and sign up for MRBC in about 1-2 weeks. For all your theorycrafting about beating "meta" mechs, it's all it is, theorycrafting. Form a team, prove it in competitive play, and people will stop questioning your advice. Keep posting outdated videos and anecdotal evidence, and you'll keep getting the same responses.

Since you already know how to crush all meta mechs, and you say Tier 1 is full of new crappy players compared to Tier 4 "veterans" your team should be placed in somewhere between NA/EU Div A and Div C where pretty much all players are Tier 1. Should be no problems for you beating them right?

Questioning?

We already proved last week a bunch of the 'advice' given in the new players forum, was totally incorrect/wrong. It's so sad that new players are being fed such totally incorrect information. Actually it's more than sad, it's disgraceful as it doesn't help them improve at all by doing so.

[Scyther]

In a recent thread of mine, a forumite posted my leaderboard link as a way of saying "He's a bad, so his opinion is worthless".

It didn't bother me a bit.

If that's the extent of his counter-argument then I don't even need to waste time rebutting. Ideas either stand or fall on their own merit, and in most cases it's the discussion that counts, not the name-calling.

Personally even though I don't use the leaderboard, I think it is handy to have something like that available for the times when you do need to gain some indication of a players overall performance. Obviously it doesn't actually tell you much but even a little useful info is better than none.

Tossing out that information tool because sometimes one fool uses it in place of reasoned debate, and some other fools pay attention to it, is overreaction.

(not saying that all uses of it are by fools, just that seems the kind the OP is bothered by)

[justcallme A S H]

Mech The Dane, on 12 February 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

We probably don't need to all pile on Koniving. Where ever his skill my rest at, he's been a very good early resource and friendly guide for many new players to the game.

Sorry not gonna buy into that when the advice is constantly incorrect.

[Mystere]

MadBadger, on 12 February 2018 - 01:42 PM, said:

In a recent thread of mine, a forumite posted my leaderboard link as a way of saying "He's a bad, so his opinion is worthless".

It didn't bother me a bit.

If that's the extent of his counter-argument then I don't even need to waste time rebutting. Ideas either stand or fall on their own merit, and in most cases it's the discussion that counts, not the name-calling.

Personally even though I don't use the leaderboard, I think it is handy to have something like that available for the times when you do need to gain some indication of a players overall performance. Obviously it doesn't actually tell you much but even a little useful info is better than none.

Tossing out that information tool because sometimes one fool uses it in place of reasoned debate, and some other fools pay attention to it, is overreaction.

(not saying that all uses of it are by fools, just that seems the kind the OP is bothered by)

It would actually help if PGI is consistent on the matter: personal stats are private, tier has a privacy toggle, but the leaderboard stats are fully public.

Just another item in a long list of little things that if collectively fixed will go a long way in dispelling the persistent perception that this game is nothing more than a minimally viable product. <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 12 February 2018 - 02:50 PM.

[Koniving]

Horseman, on 12 February 2018 - 11:29 AM, said:

And that's part of what I'm talking about regarding "trustworthiness".
All you needed to do in the first place was check the patch notes or the in-game description of the skill node. However, you were more inclined to make assumptions instead of checking - and worse, to give out advice to others based on those unverified assumptions.

No, the skill tree wasn't "reasonably new" at that point - it was at the very end of December, when the Skill Tree was over half a year old.
And no, "**** happens" is only acceptable within the context of your own gameplay. Never when advising new players.
ECM reduces the range at which enemy mechs can detect you (and allies within your ECM bubble) by a percentage.
You made the assumption the skill nodes change the size of your ECM bubble while the enemy's detection range reduction is fixed, which is the exact opposite of their in-game effect.

Under the old advanced sensor system, the enemy determined the sensor range at which they could detect mechs. However, when the ECM was reduced from 180 to 90, so to was the detection range changed. This made an automatic correlation that ECM bubble range changes would cause detection range changes.

There is no patch notes (you're welcome to share them if you can find them) that say otherwise, so there was no way to know. The only way to have known is to directly look at the skill node for ECM, which simply says it increases the bubble range. If detection range is affected by bubble range, it is logical to believe it would change both. There are no patch notes stating otherwise.

Okay so from December 2017, you say it was out for half a year. In May they are released. In June, July, September, October and December changes were made to the skill tree.

November I'm quite certain had some too but PGI doesn't even list a patchnotes for it... (Wonder how come?)
In the May patch notes, they introduce us to how ECM works.

Decreases the maximum range at which a friendly 'Mech being protected by your ECM can be targeted.

So.. Decreases the range at which you can be targeted aka detected.

Quote

ECM reduces the range at which enemy mechs can detect you (and allies within your ECM bubble) by a percentage.
You made the assumption the skill nodes change the size of your ECM bubble while the enemy's detection range reduction is fixed, which is the exact opposite of their in-game effect.

People say you can restore your ECM bubble up to 75% of what it was originally with the nodes. That makes sense.
The pre-nerf ECM is 180 meters. Post nerf is 90 meters. 22.5% times 2 = 50%, 90+50% = 135.
70% of 180 is 135.

I have never made the assumption that your bubble is fixed with the skill nodes. I have always known that the bubble is tied to detection range. Even explained as much beforehand. The two are directly correlated and as far as I know were never separated, and so far they seem to be still connected.

Are you certain your accusation is correct? If I have said the bubble is fixed there is likely a misunderstanding.
Neither item is fixed.

[Dr Cara Carcass]

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 February 2018 - 09:15 PM, said:

What really needs to happen is that arguments that boil down to "I'm right because my stats are better than yours" should be against forum rules.

Special snowflake talk.....

[Dr Cara Carcass]

Scurro, on 10 February 2018 - 10:48 AM, said:

Creator of The Jarl's List here,
I mainly created The Jarl's List because I work in IT and wanted to learn more about php and sql. SQL is very common in network services like WSUS and uniFLOW and I actually learned immensely from this project.

Secondly, I wanted to make a leaderboard as almost every competitive multiplayer game has one and PGI leaderboards were only monthly. I figured that a leaderboard would be a great opportunity to learn.

I have had a few people thanked me for the leaderboard because it gives them a goal to work towards while still playing.

I might not be amongst the top 100 players, but the game is not as exciteing as it was years ago. What keeps me playing is a wish to improve. That board is one of the incentives to play atm.

[Deathlike]

justcallme A S H, on 12 February 2018 - 01:43 PM, said:

Sorry not gonna buy into that when the advice is constantly incorrect.

I keep seeing LBX being referenced into the convo.

By its own merits, LBX is more effective when you literally facehug the target. It's probably the only real way of making LBX effective.

Then again, it's not something commonly used in comp play, particularly when there's trading and not brawling going on. I am always reminded by my teammates (in comp) to not facehug the target, in order to better allow focus fire to do the work more effectively than a straight facehug.

Would be nice someday that LBX was actually more effective than they are now... but that's just a pipe dream.

[Horseman]

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 03:07 PM, said:

when the ECM was reduced from 180 to 90, so to was the detection range changed.

It wasn't: http://mwomercs.com/...-1438-01dec2015

Quote

This made an automatic correlation that ECM bubble range changes would cause detection range changes.

That was your own assumption, and not only is based on a non-event, it does not withstand further scrutiny either.

Quote

There is no patch notes (you're welcome to share them if you can find them) that say otherwise, so there was no way to know.

https://mwomercs.com...15-16-may-2017/

Spoiler

Quote

ECM
• Base Range of Detection Scrambling reduced to 30% (from 75%).
• The remaining 45% is now unlocked through the Skill Tree (22.5% per Node).

Quote

The only way to have known is to directly look at the skill node for ECM, which simply says it increases the bubble range.

Wrong, it neither mentions not affects the bubble range. Look at ECM in your mechbay.

Spoiler

The unit has two parameters: Range (which per description is the size of the ECM bubble) and a percentile "Target Range Reduction". This is on a fully ECM-skilled mech, and only TRR displays receiving a buff from the Skill Tree and the Skill Tree nodes only refer to Target Range Reduction

Spoiler

Quote

I have always known that the bubble is tied to detection range.

Quote

If detection range is affected by bubble range, it is logical to believe it would change both.

You're making an assumption that target range reduction exists only as a function of ECM range. As you can see above, that is not the case.

Quote

People say you can restore your ECM bubble up to 75% of what it was originally with the nodes. That makes sense.
The pre-nerf ECM is 180 meters. Post nerf is 90 meters. 22.5% times 2 = 50%, 90+50% = 135.
70% of 180 is 135.

When the Skill Tree was released, the Target Range Reduction value was reduced from 75% to 30%. This is the only nerf the ECM nodes reverse.
Trying to connect it to December 2015 change (ECM range 180m -> 90m) was your own assumption.

Quote

Are you certain your accusation is correct? If I have said the bubble is fixed there is likely a misunderstanding.
Neither item is fixed.

You claimed that the ECM range (bubble size) is increased by to the ECM nodes in the skill tree and now that the Target Range Reduction is a function of that:

Spoiler

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5988529

Koniving, on 31 December 2017 - 12:29 AM, said:

Enhanced ECM as stated is only compatible ECM mechs, and the percentage is tacked onto the 90 meter ECM range. With the two nodes you can increase the range to 130.5 meters.

As shown above, neither of your claims is true.

Edited by Horseman, 12 February 2018 - 05:08 PM.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 12 February 2018 - 04:20 PM, said:

I keep seeing LBX being referenced into the convo.

By its own merits, LBX is more effective when you literally facehug the target. It's probably the only real way of making LBX effective.

Then again, it's not something commonly used in comp play, particularly when there's trading and not brawling going on. I am always reminded by my teammates (in comp) to not facehug the target, in order to better allow focus fire to do the work more effectively than a straight facehug.

Would be nice someday that LBX was actually more effective than they are now... but that's just a pipe dream.

They're more effective boated... 6-8 LB2s will make most things go away in short order.

[Lovas]

Mech The Dane, on 12 February 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

We probably don't need to all pile on Koniving. Where ever his skill may rest at, he's been a very good early resource and friendly guide for many new players to the game.


Also, look, the Jarl's List is down. The Lighthouse got his way!

Poppycock! This thread is all about Stat posting man!
https://leaderboard....0Amech+the+dane

Stop changing the subject people!

Dane...you go back to making Hat Videos! we need moar!

[PocketYoda]

I've played many many multiplayer games over the years, the condescending and bigotry in this community is just as bad as the balance issues all these people do is help kill the games...

Its a game people good pings and good hand eye coordination does not make you better than anyone else...

[Angus McFife VI]

Samial, on 12 February 2018 - 05:57 PM, said:

I've played many many multiplayer games over the years, the condescending and bigotry in this community is just as bad as the balance issues all these people do is help kill the games...

Its a game people good pings and good hand eye coordination does not make you better than anyone else...

No, but it qualifies us to make educated and informed opinions on balance that may dictate the future of the game. And if you think the only things that determine skill is good ping and good hand eye coordination than you're probably a bad who doesn't understand the many variables and concepts of being an effective player.