120 replies to this topic

[The pessimistic optimist]

Wow this post is pure dumbassery please continue it's mildly entertaining.

[Vellron2005]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 01:09 PM, said:

I'm amused, all I said in the OP is that if you don't want your target to be LRMed (plenty of valid scenarios you'd want this), then you should disable auto-lock.

Funny all the LRM proponents jumped in.

As if they are entitled to free locks.

It seems to me that your proposition of messing with the user.cfg file is a "hack", and is a violation of the COC.

Especially in a team-oriented game, you want to make it impossible for your mech to target mechs for lurmers.. so you would go so far as to hack your game to not give friendly locks..

That is really un-sportsmanlike behavior and you good sir should be ashamed of yourself.

And support should look at you more closely.

[The6thMessenger]

Vellron2005, on 01 July 2019 - 02:16 AM, said:

It seems to me that your proposition of messing with the user.cfg file is a "hack", and is a violation of the COC.

Hack? You mean i put that in my cfg, I would access your account?

Or wait, you mean "make things easier" like life-hack? Dude, the automatic-targeting is disabled, how is that an advantage? or how does that make things easier?

And as far as I'm concerned, it's legal to modify the user.cfg, as per COC.

Spoiler

Quote

MODIFYING THE USER.CFG FILE

By modifying the user.cfg file players may be able to tweak settings not directly available to the player using the options provided in the game client. The purpose of this user.cfg file is to allow players some degree of freedom toward further maximizing or fine-tuning the performance of their game client. However, we do not provide technical support for user.cfg changes, nor can we provide technical support for issues with the game client when a modified user.cfg file is being used. This is due to the amount of potential variables a heavily modified user.cfg can introduce, making it extremely difficult to narrow down the cause of an issue.

Beyond its intended purpose, it is also possible that changes to the user.cfg may sometimes be able provide an unfair or otherwise prohibited advantage to a player outside the spirit or scope of what the user.cfg file is intended to be used for.

We reserve the right to remove any functionality from the user.cfg as we see fit.

Generally, if it has been determined that a player has modified their user.cfg in such a way to gain an unfair or otherwise prohibited advantage outside the spirit or scope of what the user.cfg file is intended to be used for, they will not be subject to serious moderation actions for such behavior. Instead, we will work to close that particular loophole in the user.cfg and simply warn the player about such modifications.

If we determine that a player is consistently using such user.cfg exploits we reserve the right to enforce escalated moderation actions.

If anything, (disabling) the auto-targetting is not an advantage but rather a disadvantage, so yeah it's far from cheating. As for being an exploit -- by definition it should be unintended loophole but advantageous, but it's not, engineers specifically put that precise parameter, you are basically complaning about a hidden menu in McDonalds. And even if it is, the most likely course of action is for PGI to close the loophole than to moderate Nightbird.

Don't get me wrong, I don't condone the hateboner, but you desperately looking for anything incriminating is just rather pathetic.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 02 July 2019 - 01:38 AM.

[Prototelis]

Vellron2005, on 01 July 2019 - 02:16 AM, said:

That is really un-sportsmanlike behavior and you good sir should be ashamed of yourself.

But sitting 600 meters from the fight and never moving up even when asked to is sportsmanlike? lol.

[Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie]

Prototelis, on 01 July 2019 - 02:58 AM, said:

But sitting 600 meters from the fight and never moving up even when asked to is sportsmanlike? lol.

dude, you've put the 9 upside-down..

[Vellron2005]

Hahahaha... haters stick together.. as expected..

Here's why it's a hack and/or wrong..


1)

The6thMessenger, on 01 July 2019 - 02:30 AM, said:

If anything, the auto-targetting is not an advantage but rather a disadvantage.

You said it yourself - And according to this, if you disable it, you're disabling a disadvantage.. it's just like when you go into super-low visual settings, so you don't get grass, smoke and fog that obscure your vision.. It's gaining an unfair advantage, and therefore not ok.

2) It's counter productive to your team, since it's not the point of the game to get solo kills and personal glory, but to win and kill all the enemies, and since you are willingly not sharing automated locks, you are effectively aiding the enemy, which is a reportable offense and a COC violation. So when you do this, you are no better than a lurmer standing 900m back and not doing anything, that you hate so much..

3) On the count of "some lurmer stealing your kill", the tables can be easily reversed. Lurmers normally get tons of KMDDs, but few solo kills, because "some light" or "some facehugger" steals their kill... and yet, you don't hear many lurmers being all pissy about this.. In fact, most good lurmers are happy to make your target softer so you can take the kill and bring the target down quicker. So OP being all bend out of shape for a lurmer taking the kill is just pure greed and selfishness - no team play at all.

You can say what you will, but the above is simple fact..

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 01 July 2019 - 10:36 AM.
unconstructive, replies removed

[Prototelis]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 01 July 2019 - 10:39 AM.
unconstructive

[McGoat]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 01 July 2019 - 10:39 AM.
unconstructive

[Phoolan Devi]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

Just added this line to your user.cfg file:

gp_mech_disable_autotarget = 1

Why in hell would I want to do that?

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:

I don't have any trouble with LRMs, did you misread my very short post?

What is to be misread about "Say NO to LURMS" or "I'm not saying I'm not bashing"?

[Redacted]

thievingmagpi, on 27 June 2019 - 08:58 AM, said:

also makes it so no one can steal your kills I like it

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

someone gets it :thumb:

prevents useless LRMs from giving away that you have a target lined up, and perhaps even stealing your kill

Who in hell cares for kill steals? Is it even a thing and why does it matter?

Edited by draiocht, 01 July 2019 - 10:48 AM.
unconstructive

[Phoolan Devi]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 11:29 PM, said:

The only advantage of LRMers is that they tend to be slow so it's easy to leave them behind in a nascar movement

LOL...as if you'de be one on the front line....how absurd!

[Phoolan Devi]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 01 July 2019 - 10:54 AM.
unconstructive

[Phoolan Devi]

C H E E K I E Z, on 29 June 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

What about us drunkards just passing through because we hear shouting and immediately just start shouting because we don't want to be out-done.

......and are on the lookout for the next beer ; )

[Phoolan Devi]

Prototelis, on 01 July 2019 - 02:58 AM, said:

But sitting 600 meters from the fight and never moving up even when asked to is sportsmanlike? lol.

You mean thos PPC, AC2 and Gauss users?

Edited by Phoolan Devi, 01 July 2019 - 06:33 AM.

[Nightbird]

Phoolan Devi, on 01 July 2019 - 06:06 AM, said:

LOL...as if you'de be one on the front line....how absurd!

You can't get 3 WLR in a light by sitting in the back with long range weapons

[Phoolan Devi]

Nightbird, on 01 July 2019 - 07:56 AM, said:

You can't get 3 WLR in a light by sitting in the back with long range weapons

Well, 1st, it's rather a 2.3 WLR, but yes you can!

[Nightbird]

Phoolan Devi, on 01 July 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

Well, 1st, it's rather a 2.3 WLR, but yes you can!

Nope, anyone that tries will get less than 1 WLR, and is being a nuisance non-contributor to their team. Like LRM boats

[Tesunie]

Vellron2005, on 01 July 2019 - 02:16 AM, said:

It seems to me that your proposition of messing with the user.cfg file is a "hack", and is a violation of the COC.

Especially in a team-oriented game, you want to make it impossible for your mech to target mechs for lurmers.. so you would go so far as to hack your game to not give friendly locks..

That is really un-sportsmanlike behavior and you good sir should be ashamed of yourself.

And support should look at you more closely.

Modifying the user.cfg (cfg for short) file is not a "hack" nor is it a violation of the CoC, as someone else mentioned already. It's perfectly valid, as the cfg is basically a hidden options setting feature (which some of it should be in game as full features to be honest).

The file config line here is only suppose to turn off the auto-lock from placing your crosshairs over a target (when you don't have another mech targeted). Of that on it's own, there is no problem.

My issue is not with the change to the cfg, but more so the "say no to LRMs" and the insinuated message of "don't get locks, don't help LRM teammates". If this was only about disabling the auto-lock for the purposes of keeping an ambush an ambush (an actual time where you don't want the enemy to know you're behind them by having LRMs take advantage of a lock), than on its own this config is valid. Once the message started to fall into "hinder teammates by not getting locks so LRM mechs can't leach off you and steal your kills" is where I believe things started to head into a dark place.

But, when you have accusations from one crowd about LRM users shooting only indirectly at crazy ranges (even when it's sadly true for too many LRM users), and the other side calling them out for their behavior (harassing people who use LRMs or mentions that they like LRMs), it's just being a mud throwing feast.
"Well, you LRM scum hide 800+m and fire only indirectly, never sharing armor and shooting only from safety with no skills, you aim bot hacks."
"Well, you hide behind teammates to buff your own score and stats, sacrificing your team for your own personal glory, you elitest scum."
"Well, at least I expose myself to deal my damage and I have to aim, so I have skillz."
and on and on and on and on it goes. And heaven forbid if anyone makes the claim of shooting their LRMs within 600m or even closer with a combination of direct fire weapons, or claiming to stick with the team and sharing armor with their LRM builds... because that gets called out as you being a liar, not possible, and that no LRM user would consider shooting anything but (the worst way to use them) indirectly and at extreme ranges.

This thread had a small point about auto-lock, but has always been tinged with "LRM hate" for no reason than to just hate on LRMs. There is a tiny piece of validation on the part of the premise of the thread, as mentioned on the first page, where the auto-lock can ruin a back stab ambush from a light because they auto-lock the target they are looking at and some LRM mech on their own team uses the lock, giving away their position and spooking their target. It's a rather rare occurrence, with in game limitations to the auto-locking meaning it is possible to not let it happen (lock someone else, then unless they die you won't auto-lock anyone else for looking at them), but I can see the potential reason to turn off the auto-lock in some limited cases. (Also, more experienced players should be in the habit of locking targets anyway, making this feature an unneeded one. So it should have an on/off toggle in the menu options.)

Merely turning off the auto-lock has no discernible impact on the game nor on team function. Suggesting to not get locks at all (as has been implied in this thread several times now) just to spite LRM users on your own team is far more so the underlining issue. It's griefing, plain and simple. PGI can't do anything about this form of griefing though unless they can find proof for the intent behind withholding locks. ("Oops, I just forgot to press R. Sorry PGI. Really.") (This is determined by the definition of griefing as any intentional action (rather provable of intent or not) that has a purpose to hinder a teammates ability to play. Not getting locks with the intent to specifically hinder LRM play for no other purpose than to hinder LRM users, is just as bad and as much griefing as intentionally standing in front of an ally to prevent them from shooting their direct fire weapons, or as bad as intentionally standing behind/around an ally to prevent their ability to move. Key word here for all of this is intention, not just the act.)

[Nightbird]

Tesunie, on 01 July 2019 - 09:10 AM, said:

snip

If I had put that in the OP, the amusement value of this thread would have been adversely impacted.

[Tesunie]

Nightbird, on 01 July 2019 - 08:45 AM, said:

Nope, anyone that tries will get less than 1 WLR, and is being a nuisance non-contributor to their team. Like LRM boats

Though it may not be as valid as it once was, but I might make mention that at one point the meta build for a Raven (a light mech, FYI) was dual ERLL and to snipe at long range with ECM. This became a meta for a while because it was effective, and it could win games. So, it is/was possible in this game to utilize a long range light mech to achieve a reasonable W/L rate. (Now I believe this build has moved over to triple LL, which I've been seeing here or there.)

This has no indication on rather you have done (or do) this actively or in the past.


Also, as far as W/L rate is concerned, some of this can be reliant on what game mode you play in, whom your teammates are, etc. I'm also going to go out on a limb here and say that you mean it's difficult to get a W/L greater than 1 in a long range light mech, when looking at said specific light mech's stats. Going by overall player stats would have to assume that said player only used X mech/build, which is typically false.

(Also, wasn't it at one point mentioned on these vast forums that it was okay for a light mech to fill the role of sniping, because you've at least pulled the least amount of tonnage/armor out of the armor sharing pool, compared to other class mechs being a sniper? It was a valid strategy at one point. I believe it still is, though better strategies for lights (along with different options) are now available than previously.)

[Armored Yokai]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

Just added this line to your user.cfg file:

gp_mech_disable_autotarget = 1

Why make it harder for your allies? Assuming you want to deny this for your team, It will be harder to win when you are 1v2 and for some reason the lrms can't be lobbed at your target to save you in that 1v2?