448 replies to this topic

[Bombast]

FRAGTAST1C, on 08 August 2019 - 07:18 PM, said:

Are you also the kind of person that says, "Prove to me Scientifically that Love exists"?

Great, I'm going to have nightmare flashbacks of Interstellar tonight. Thanks.

[The6thMessenger]

Please stop justifying your cowardice to show yourself in front of the enemy, and be a detriment to your team.

Imagine if we all lurm from behind, I doubt we have much of a game to actually enjoy.

[Armored Yokai]

Yes and No!

[OmniFail]

Shanrak, on 08 August 2019 - 11:34 AM, said:

You win the game by winning trades, you win trades by rotating in fresh armor mechs when exposing so the open component ones can still live and shoot back. There's proper armor sharing and then there's people who think armor sharing is staring down a firing line by themselves.

Yes you win by getting good trades because this facilitates the destroy enemy mechs win condition. Sharing armor is not a win condition and doing it dose not drive wins. Only fulfilling win conditions drives wins.

[Prototelis]

^ lol

Lrmer detected.

[OmniFail]

Bombast, on 08 August 2019 - 12:00 PM, said:

A better way of putting it, probably, is that team-wide engagement wins matches, and part of that ends up being sharing armor. If you can get all 12 mechs on your team to be near-perpetually engaged in combat with the enemy, whether they be on a unified firing line, or in a flanking maneuver, or in a solitary sniping position, you'll be in a good spot.

To put it another way, you want to share your enemy's attention, not necessarily your armor. Because any enemy rotating to respond to flanking harassers isn't doing much damage. Assault mechs spinning in circles trying to find whoever's blowing holes in them from a sneaky position isn't doing his team any good.

There is no other way to put it. The team does need to be fully engaged in fulfilling the matches win conditions weather in a firing line, flanking maneuver, or sniping position. These are attack moves are meant to facilitate the destroy mech win condition.

Sharing armor is not a win condition and doing it does not drive wins. Only fulfilling win conditions drives wins.

On a side note:

“Assault mechs spinning in circles trying to find whoever's blowing holes in them from a sneaky position isn't doing his team any good.” ~ Bombast

This person is attempting to focus fire on an enemy mech and is trying to facilitate the destroy enemy mechs win condition and also keeping the enemy mech from using its fire power for destroying friendly mechs.

You may argue your points with the master.

“If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected. ~ Sun Tzu

Edited by OmniFail, 08 August 2019 - 10:37 PM.

[OmniFail]

Kodan Black, on 08 August 2019 - 12:03 PM, said:

Sure, at a theoretical level you don't need to share armor, just like you should never miss a shot as that is wasted DPS. But the reality of a snowball game is that the more mechs you have alive the better your chances of winning. If I can have a mech at 38% armor but with all their weapons by trading some of the armor off of a mech with 97% armor that is a good trade because otherwise that damage likely causes some or all of that mech's weapons to be no longer available.

Deal with reality instead of perfect world scenarios that never happen.

Losing armor no matter how effectively you do it will not trigger a win condition and therefore will not drive wins.

Think of armor as a resource the enemy is capturing. You can take turns being shot all day it will not win the match for you. To win you will have to destroy mechs, collect resource, and cap or destroy bases. Doing these things are what win games and what drives wins.

Is this real enough for you?

Edited by OmniFail, 08 August 2019 - 10:44 PM.

[Prototelis]

Guess what becomes more and more difficult when there is less available health pool.

[Nicholas Hyde]

I am confused. Should I replace all armour on my mechs with weaponsystems now?

[OmniFail]

GuardDogg, on 08 August 2019 - 12:08 PM, said:

I try my best to share armor when have no weapons, ammo. The problem is getting in front of friendly fire, when doing so. Trying to get the apposing mech to focus on me, while a friendly is engaging it. It is a skill to look at for the team.

Good job shielding your team mates with your gunless boat!

Unfortunately, this does not drive wins because it does not facilitate a win condition. However if you had gone to cap or collect resources in the appropriate matches it would drive wins because you would be trying to fulfill a win condition.

[OmniFail]

QuakeRiley, on 08 August 2019 - 12:41 PM, said:

You can't always rely on quality trading or playing objectives to win matches, sometimes (especially in pugs) you need to push and be aggressive and in those situations rotating/sharing armour will easily win a fight since 8 mechs with red armour or open components can still easily beat 3 fresh mechs.

Your argument stands a lot better in the context of FP where quality trading is the name of the game.

You absolutely have to play to the objectives it is impossible to win otherwise. But, but you do get points in my book for being aggressive and pushing.

Remember kids move as a unit and focus fire.

Edited by OmniFail, 08 August 2019 - 10:53 PM.

[Prototelis]

Guess what becomes more and more difficult when there is less available health pool.

[OmniFail]

Feral Clown, on 08 August 2019 - 12:44 PM, said:

I don't know if you are trying to justify or defend hiding behind a rock or just trolling.

When people say games are won by sharing armor your ape brain should be telling you that presenting a target and drawing enemy attention or splitting focus is what they mean by that.

As well I am sure many of have seen an assault push in soaking up tons of damage allowing a team to not take damage while shooting all the guys shooting them. I am always appreciative of an Atlas leading the charge in the tunnel on Crimson for example.

If a guy is hiding whether it be lurming or sniping from Zimbabwe, people don't get the benefit of that other target, and a good deal of the time the team deprived of that will melt and the guy hiding will not be able to put out enough damage before they all die to be enough influence. This isn't always the case sure, which is I guess what all those dudes who do this are banking on, that one in a hundred game where they racked up tons of damage and won. This isn't percentage wise a smart thing to do and clearly there is more people who hate guys that hide, than there are people who actually think this is a good idea.

This isn't saying a lurm mech or snipy mech is a front line mech. Second line trading, peeking and poking, and skirmishing are in my opinion, and from what I have seen the best in the game doing, the proper approach.

I am not trying to justify or defend hiding. Go find the part of my first post that infers that I am. If by trolling you mean that I am trying to falsify that armor use drives wins, then yes sir I am.

An ape brain nor a lizard brain would tell me to sit there and take fire without doing something about it. That there is the thought of a lemming brain.

In your scenario the assaults’ teammates are focusing fire and trying to fulfill the destroy enemy mechs win condition. They are driving wins. The enemy mechs are focusing fire on the friendly assault. They are trying to fulfill the destroy enemy mech win condition. They too, are driving wins.

The assault is using his armor. He is not driving wins. He is dying, because the enemy is focusing him down. Your team has lost valuable firepower. Your team will not be as effective at destroying enemy mechs. Your teams’ chances of winning are diminished.

I am also critical of the pilot that is firing from a position that is not in the main force or with the light group. I am critical of them because I feel that their ability to focus fire with the team may be somehow diminished and because they lack supporting firepower that they could be overwhelmed by a superior force.

Trading shots, poking, peeking, and skirmishing all drive wins because they are proactively attempting to facilitate the focus of fire in an attempt to destroy enemy mechs.

yrrot, on 08 August 2019 - 05:14 PM, said:

Even guys hiding behind rocks in the right places can still draw fire and distract firepower from the front line. If they are winning trades with 2-3 mechs that they can out range and keep pinned, it's even better than sharing their armor on/near the front. But it isn't by hiding behind the rock, it's by using the rock to eat some of the return fire while cooling down and playing actively. Poking out from a rock and dropping 70-100+ damage on someone, for example, draws a lot of attention.

Sharing armor at the front is a way to keep a push going and keep more firepower on the board when things aren't steamrolling. However, it doesn't really matter how much armor gets shared, the attrition that decides matches is in how much firepower is removed from the board. Teams that secure kills and prevent the other team from sharing armor win matches.

Look at the big brain on yrrot. The ladies are gonna love you.

Prototelis, on 08 August 2019 - 05:17 PM, said:

Health pooling is incredibly important.

How big a pool of friendly blood will trigger a win condition?

Edited by OmniFail, 08 August 2019 - 11:42 PM.

[Prototelis]

That didn't even make sense. Try harder.

[OmniFail]

BlaizerP, on 08 August 2019 - 05:24 PM, said:

Fully agree. I often find golf much easier as well when I can get hole in ones every tee.

I also agree,

Even though, perfect games are incredibly difficult to achieve, we must all strive for perfection.

Mystere, on 08 August 2019 - 05:30 PM, said:

FTFY.
[left][/size]

So is the concentration of firepower.

And as such, see above.

Concentration of firepower wins games, losing armor dose not.

Mystere, on 08 August 2019 - 06:13 PM, said:

I gave away my steering wheel. As such, I do not know what the frack you are talking about.

Having said that, I'm planning to get a new and better one.

And maybe one of these:

Juju cannot LRM with this.

Prototelis, on 08 August 2019 - 06:36 PM, said:

Guess what becomes more and more difficult when there is less available health pool.

Winning

[OmniFail]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 13 August 2019 - 06:38 AM.
inappropriate reference

[OmniFail]

Y E O N N E, on 08 August 2019 - 07:19 PM, said:

You definitively stated that concentration of firepower is as important as the armor pool.

What you are hoping to achieve, here, is to see if you can sucker somebody into sinking a disproportionate amount of time to proof a scenario whose reliability has already been validated by demonstration for years. All so you can then get some smug satisfaction from flippantly dismissing this model in the end because the model has some error (no matter how trivial) and because you get a kick out of toying with people who are passionate about a game that you care so little for.

So I say again: you first.



She is exactly that sort of person.

Concentrated firepower destroys mechs and drives wins. Loss of armor only inches you toward defeat and is a resource that can not be regained nor in itself win a game.

[OmniFail]

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2019 - 08:39 PM, said:

Please stop justifying your cowardice to show yourself in front of the enemy, and be a detriment to your team.

Imagine if we all lurm from behind, I doubt we have much of a game to actually enjoy.

The man slanders the man because he cannot attack the argument. This is an example of a reptile response. You will garner no further response or respect until you use your ape brain.

Armored Yokai, on 08 August 2019 - 09:06 PM, said:

Yes and No!

Needs evidence, details, and reference points.

Prototelis, on 08 August 2019 - 10:35 PM, said:

^ lol

Lrmer detected.

Oh, look a big brain answer.

The man slanders the man because he cannot attack the argument. This is an example of a reptile response. You will garner no further response or respect until you use your ape brain.

Prototelis, on 08 August 2019 - 11:22 PM, said:

That didn't even make sense. Try harder.

Added the word "of" to make my statement make sense.

[Prototelis]

Nope, still doesn't make sense.

Your argument doesn't make sense.

This whole thread must stem from one of those last mech alive, fresh, and getting called a ******* incidents.

[OmniFail]

Prototelis, on 08 August 2019 - 11:51 PM, said:

Nope, still doesn't make sense.

Your argument doesn't make sense.

This whole thread must stem from one of those last mech alive, fresh, and getting called a ******* incidents.

This post makes claims but provides no evidence though empiricism, reason, or logic that assails any of the premises of the proposed argument.

Still in big brained, bi-polar rage, reptile response mode.

Edited by OmniFail, 09 August 2019 - 12:05 AM.