SaltiestRaccoon, on 11 July 2018 - 12:00 PM, said:
A strawman would be you creating an argument you think I'm making or would like me to be making then attacking that instead of my actual argument, which you've done. You've said I only like big plays, you've said I want to make the game a twitch shooter and you've said I expect two people to somehow do less damage than one.
None of that is true. Let me take a moment to explain how lower TTK more strongly favors a skilled player in an asymmetric engagement, because it's clear you don't get that part of the argument: It makes it easier for that good player to turn the situation into a one on one by killing one of the enemy mechs.
Yeah, if you're not that much better, if you don't have positional advantage, you WILL die even faster in a two on one situation. However, with lower TTK your positional advantage, faster aiming and better twisting will mean you can take half of the damage out of the fight before you've been banged up. Right now virtually any engagement will be a damage trade that only marginally favors the better player. Lower TTK gives more decisive fights, which means the better player, or the player with better positioning will take less damage to get their kill, as a result, a player who is consistently making good decisions will be better rewarded for it, because they'll take less damage per kill they get, because they are able to more rapidly silence any return fire.
All of those things you mentioned? Target priority? Focus fire? All those still matter with a lower TTK. I don't want to remove those from the game. It's a team game and those are important aspects, what I do want is for them not to totally overshine shot placement or positional advantage. You are grossly exaggerating literally everything I've said (almost like you're inventing a position and attributing it to me, or creating a straw man.)
Again, you call it a 'walking tank simulator' but in any sort of tank simulator, then position should matter more and combat should be more lethal.
As for 'entertainment.' You're not saying you would prefer to watch a slow 0-3 game in football. You're being extremely intellectually dishonest on this point. But if you prefer, I can say, "In my experience, the overwhelming majority of people find that big plays in games are much more fun to watch and participate in, and that the potential for an unexpected outcome makes more people find a situation exciting." I suppose I'm sure there's someone who would like every situation in a game to be more predictable, and yet the vast majority of games using cards or dice, and the vast majority of sports not having rules against big plays would indicate that those people are in the minority. Many sports, in fact, introduce rules to encourage high-risk, high-reward plays that show off individual skill. That is literally the reason the 3-point line was introduced to basketball.
But anyway, I'm kind of done with replying to you. I'm trying to have a discussion/debate. Hey, you disagree, that's cool. Let's talk about why. How about trying to explain how lower TTK (I would say 30-50% less) would not do what I expect it to do, or how it would be detrimental to the game. Being insulting just because I disagree with you and not trying to be civil doesn't make you right. It makes you an *******, and I'm surprised I have to explain this to a grown adult.
No, a strawman would be more along the lines of this; "I think the Last Jedi is a terrible movie"
"Yeah well, so were the prequels. What was George Lucas's excuse?"
I addressed your idea of entertainment being opinion based and not as a absolute fact that applies to everyone globally. That isn't a strawman, which is why I suggested you look up the term.
If that's how you were trying to explain the TTK for a 1v2 situation quickly turning into a 1v1, then you worded your point poorly, or you didn't make the point at all. I can point you to your original post where you think two potatoes that are shooting you should basically mean that you come out of it the unscathed rather than being banged up if you'd like.
If you think lowering the TTK is the answer to this, you'd be dead wrong. if my aiming is that much better than the two people I'm fighting against, how or why would you think the outcome would be any different than it is now? I very likely could kill the both of them with no problem in one or two alphas and move on with my day. Likewise, if two potatoes are punishing you for being out position, you're more likely to die, which is counter intuitive to your original point in your post. Big deal if they're face tanking you, that's still two people over 1 shooting you, you're not going to kill them instantaneously, but they'll kill you that much faster, despite torso twisting (cause you know...two different angles). So whats your point?
Quote
All this developer talk about lowering alpha damage and raising TTK just reeks of a style of game where the epitome of skill is simply assembling a 12 man team such that you can maximize fire, then calling out a good target priority. That is neither fun, nor is it Mechwarrior, and it never has been and never will be what Mechwarrior should be.
Why in the world would you type this, make it appear that calling priority targets, bringing all guns to bear with a coordinated 12 man, out to be a bad thing? If your intention is to lower the TTK, and then say that the above should be frowned upon, then you're just contradicting yourself to make your argument valid. (not a strawman, look up the term). Your words, not mine.
Of course position matters. Why do you think teams on Canyon Network that stay in the ravine lose more frequently? It's almost as if there's a height advantage and multiple firing lanes to shoot down on...Hmmmmm.....
If you think you're being insulted, then you lived in a bubble, or someones been stroking your ego a bit too much for too long. This is part of debating, deconstructing your argument point by point, which is why I addressed each and every issue (without using a strawman that you so claim).
Here's an insult though: In order for a intelligent debate to happen, you should have an intelligent argument to make...And you didn't.
We can have disagreements on opinions, but your opinion doesn't mean it's right. In fact, it sucks. Opinions can suck, and yours does.
3
