205 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

Massive inferiority complex. You're insecure about not using the meta, you're insecure about your personal performance, you're insecure about having your advice criticized. And your response? Verbally combative, trollish pushback. I haven't played regularly in a long time - heck, I don't think I even show UP on the Jarl's List right now. But Two of the guys who do, you've been arguing with for pages now.

You know that gamer stereotype where an opponent performs so well that some newb thinks they're cheating? Well, when Ash eyeballed your teammates and pegged their tier level with a pretty good degree of fidelity, that same phenomenon occurred - and you're the newb.

You're just arguing to protect your insecurities at this point; you've even started to recycle arguments that were already dealt with about five pages ago: it's not a good idea for you to recommend to (other) newbies that they use builds that will underperform later to advance in tier now, for example.

Just give it up; take the affected Southern accent, the combative bluster masking transparent insecurities, and shut up long enough to learn something. Or, you can keep on banging the drum of your own ignorance.

Will you seek wisdom, or are you a fool - only you can tell me.

[Rain Dark Sky]

calling 5 games in my butterbee, normal load out. and... GO! will post results.

[Void Angel]

But no one cares.

Not trying to be trollish - but you're not going to prove anything with a few random games against the collective decades of experience you're arguing with.

[Rain Dark Sky]

11:4 K:D (2.75:1 K/D)

3:2 W:L

587 DMG per Game

[Rain Dark Sky]

ETA 3mpl, S-SRM 2,4,4,6, Tag, I posted the build earlier.

Oh noes, it's dur low skills build!

:Laughs in Faceroll:

[Harambe McHarambeface Kerensky]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 12:26 PM, said:

11:4 K:D (2.75:1 K/D)

3:2 W:L

587 DMG per Game

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 12:30 PM, said:

ETA 3mpl, S-SRM 2,4,4,6, Tag, I posted the build earlier.

Oh noes, it's dur low skills build!

:Laughs in Faceroll:

Nobody's impressed with you farming damage with a streakboat, they're all laughing at how you think that's actually impressive. Come back when you can do 2K damage in quickplay. [CZBG] Harambe Mcharambeface Kerensky ggclose
*CZBG is the Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden

Edited by Harambe McHarambeface Kerensky, 07 December 2019 - 12:49 PM.

[Vxheous]

Harambe McHarambeface Kerensky, on 07 December 2019 - 12:43 PM, said:

Nobody's impressed with you farming damage with a streakboat, they're all laughing at how you think that's actually impressive. Come back when you can do 2K damage in quickplay. [CZBG] Harambe Mcharambeface Kerensky ggclose
*CZBG is the Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden

[Tesunie]

Someone has moved this thread very very far away from "how to deal more damage in a MAD-3R"... A Butterbee Catapult is NOT a Marauder... and neither is a Kitfox.

A MAD-3R can't take missiles, so discussions about SSRMs have no relevance here. Please. Stop posting information on mechs outside the scope of this thread.

[Gagis]

Tesunie, on 07 December 2019 - 03:05 PM, said:

Someone has moved this thread very very far away from "how to deal more damage in a MAD-3R"... A Butterbee Catapult is NOT a Marauder... and neither is a Kitfox.

A MAD-3R can't take missiles, so discussions about SSRMs have no relevance here. Please. Stop posting information on mechs outside the scope of this thread.

Everything meaningful got said 6 pages ago, which is typical to MWO Forums. Both the 3RAC and the 2LB10 builds are very good. I prefer the LB10 build with some MPL.

[Tesunie]

Gagis, on 07 December 2019 - 03:45 PM, said:

Everything meaningful got said 6 pages ago, which is typical to MWO Forums. Both the 3RAC and the 2LB10 builds are very good. I prefer the LB10 build with some MPL.

I've tried the dual LB10 build and didn't like it much, and I don't seem to do well with RACs at all (need to work with them more I guess). I seem to perform better with one of two other builds myself: either an UAC10, dual AC2 and quad (ER)MLs or AC10, two LLs and two ERMLs. However, I tend to be more of a mid ranged combatant myself.

Though the two builds you mentioned are good builds as well.

[Rain Dark Sky]

Void Angel, on 07 December 2019 - 11:53 AM, said:

But no one cares.

Not trying to be trollish - but you're not going to prove anything with a few random games against the collective decades of experience you're arguing with.

There is always a "But"...

A few random games?

Now you are "misrepresenting" what I just did. There is another word for that, but I won't use it in polite company.

They weren't "random" games, they were consecutive. I even called them out beforehand to prevent myself from just playing until I had a good streak (double-entendre) .

10 consecutive games (with two slightly different load outs) all with nice w/l k/d ratios.

Ash's "cop out" was... "you won because you were fighting teir 5, you lost because you were fighting tier 1". Well, it is quick play, duh. And yet my builds and I still (mostly) got respectable scores.

The mech stats from the mwomercs web site even backs up what I'm saying. My Butterbee rocks. I already posted them. Not the inaccurate "Jarl's List" but the official stats that are on my profile. Or are you accusing the official web site of lying?

Plus some very nice dmg and c-bills regardless.

Are we talking about the same "collective experience" that throws a temper tantrum every time their meta becomes non-meta. And instead of trying to change loads or tactics they try and force the developers to re-balance the entire game just so they can maintain their load out and not have to change tactics?



Just scroll through all the threads on streaks to see what I mean. Page after page of moaning and complaining.

I'm not saying I couldn't do better (or someone else couldn't do better) with a different build.

It can be quite frustrating to see someone's critted component and be forced to pick away at it with a small percentage of your dps, while hoping RNG nails that weak spot. And running into an ECM or two will certainly cause issues.

I'm saying there is something beside "the meta" that can work, and work well. Especially for people who are still learning to aim and lead targets. Something that is even (and Ash admitted this) a hard counter to certain other mechs/builds. Just like chess.

I'm not even working in a co-ordinated unit, where a build like that could be put to maximum effect. Just running potato play, all by me lonesome, and it STILL works.

I do think it is telling that so many people who consider themselves "the best" feel so threatened by the things I am pointing out, and proving with hard data.

[Vxheous]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 06:40 PM, said:

There is always a "But"...

A few random games?

Now you are "misrepresenting" what I just did. There is another word for that, but I won't use it in polite company.

They weren't "random" games, they were consecutive. I even called them out beforehand to prevent myself from just playing until I had a good streak (double-entendre) .

10 consecutive games (with two slightly different load outs) all with nice w/l k/d ratios.

Ash's "cop out" was... "you won because you were fighting teir 5, you lost because you were fighting tier 1". Well, it is quick play, duh. And yet my builds and I still (mostly) got respectable scores.

The mech stats from the mwomercs web site even backs up what I'm saying. My Butterbee rocks. I already posted them. Not the inaccurate "Jarl's List" but the official stats that are on my profile. Or are you accusing the official web site of lying?

Plus some very nice dmg and c-bills regardless.

Are we talking about the same "collective experience" that throws a temper tantrum every time their meta becomes non-meta. And instead of trying to change loads or tactics they try and force the developers to re-balance the entire game just so they can maintain their load out and not have to change tactics?



Just scroll through all the threads on streaks to see what I mean. Page after page of moaning and complaining.

I'm not saying I couldn't do better (or someone else couldn't do better) with a different build.

It can be quite frustrating to see someone's critted component and be forced to pick away at it with a small percentage of your dps, while hoping RNG nails that weak spot. And running into an ECM or two will certainly cause issues.

I'm saying there is something beside "the meta" that can work, and work well. Especially for people who are still learning to aim and lead targets. Something that is even (and Ash admitted this) a hard counter to certain other mechs/builds. Just like chess.

I'm not even working in a co-ordinated unit, where a build like that could be put to maximum effect. Just running potato play, all by me lonesome, and it STILL works.

I do think it is telling that so many people who consider themselves "the best" feel so threatened by the things I am pointing out, and proving with hard data.

Again, it's like you think you came across something we don't know already, and that we don't use streaks in competitive play (we do).

[Rain Dark Sky]

"Oh noes, our meta isn't working, the game balance must be broken"

Vxheous, on 07 December 2019 - 06:50 PM, said:

Again, it's like you think you came across something we don't know already, and that we don't use streaks in competitive play (we do).

Again it's like you think this thread is about competitive play (It isn't).

It's about helping a new player do more damage.

[Omniseed]

Always be shooting back

[Rain Dark Sky]

Tesunie, on 07 December 2019 - 03:05 PM, said:

Someone has moved this thread very very far away from "how to deal more damage in a MAD-3R"... A Butterbee Catapult is NOT a Marauder... and neither is a Kitfox.

A MAD-3R can't take missiles, so discussions about SSRMs have no relevance here. Please. Stop posting information on mechs outside the scope of this thread.

But it CAN take 3x RAC2's which are generally sneered at by the meta because of facetime and no burst dmg.

I will give "someone" credit though, for at least posting a great build for that mech, that used RACs. Although I would never run that specific mech due to the lack of jump jets.

OP would do well to head my advise and sell it for the version with 5mpl, 2 rac2s and some jump jets.

Being new they will find a lot of use for JJ in places where they get caught in a bad position (because they are new, after all, and besides, never know when an enemy lance my pull something odd, like in canyon network. Some JJ will easily make a massive difference in a lot of games.

And 5MPL are great for picking off weak components, something a new player should work on. Especially due to so many people running IS XL's, even on heavies and assaults. Yes, there are a lot of bad builds in QP.

[Vxheous]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 07:13 PM, said:

"Oh noes, our meta isn't working, the game balance must be broken"



Again it's like you think this thread is about competitive play (It isn't).

It's about helping a new player do more damage.

My point wasn't about comp play, its about how you think you've discovered something "off-meta" yet streaks have been part of the meta for years, as evidenced in use in comp play.

Edited by Vxheous, 07 December 2019 - 10:08 PM.

[Grumpy Old Man]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 07:30 PM, said:

But it CAN take 3x RAC2's which are generally sneered at by the meta because of facetime and no burst dmg.

I will give "someone" credit though, for at least posting a great build for that mech, that used RACs. Although I would never run that specific mech due to the lack of jump jets.

Well, I guess people should play what works for them. What works for others may not work for everybody. I myself played a 3xRac 2 Bushwacker for the longest time and in the T5-T4 games it absolutely wrecks face. It is MWO easymode. But when you move up in Tiers the performance becomes inconsistent.

I started getting really good games and really lousy games. There are just too many counters for facetime builds. I wasn't able to do anything about poptarts and I kept eating a lot of LRMs, since a lot of time I was one of a few people visible from my team. In higher Tiers, people suddenly and stupidly start rotating around a central structure for whatever reason, which means I started getting overrun by the enemy main force all the time.

To compensate, I do not play Assaults at all and Heavies only if I can't avoid it. I need the speed and agility to stay alive. I also switched Mechs to those that performed consistently for me, away from hit and miss Mechs. Wor me, the bare minimum I can work with is 75 kph speed. No facetime. Only Mechs that are exceedingly sturdy. If I go down, I want to at least have taken the maximum amount of heat and ammunition from the red team that I can. So for me, that means playing Urbies and Crabs for when I need to perform consistently. I would not play a Marauder myself (I do have one that I can't get to work for me - too slow), but if I did I would pick the 2 LBX 10 build. I know that when I am facing one, I am more worried about that than the 3 Rac 2s... But hey, that's just me...

You do you, man. Whatever works for you.

[Horseman]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 06:40 PM, said:

A few random games?
They weren't "random" games, they were consecutive. I even called them out beforehand to prevent myself from just playing until I had a good streak (double-entendre) .
10 consecutive games (with two slightly different load outs) all with nice w/l k/d ratios.

That's still not a statistically significant sample size. I'd go as far as to argue that until you've maxed out your tier rating experience bar, your stats just aren't going to be a realistic representation of your performance - as I've shown you already, using the stats from my alt.

Quote

Not the inaccurate "Jarl's List" but the official stats that are on my profile. Or are you accusing the official web site of lying?

Jarl's List aggregates data scraped from the official leaderboards. You can verify it against your stats for each season at https://mwomercs.com...le/leaderboards . Claiming that it's inaccurate amounts to claiming that the official web site's leaderboards are inaccurate.

Quote

I'm saying there is something beside "the meta" that can work, and work well.

It's not a question of "can work well", even total potato builds can crank out a ton of damage given sufficiently favorable circumstances. What we're looking at is a question of "can work well reliably with the least variance".

Edited by Horseman, 08 December 2019 - 03:45 AM.

[Void Angel]

/sigh

"Random" is not exclusive with "consecutive." You've taken a series of games from a random night and put them up as some kind of proof you're right. Somehow. Despite the fact that it's already been pointed out to you that results within prior random samples bear out criticisms. And the fact that you're not really clear on how statistical samples work, or how to interpret the data you do have.

You're arguing with people who, combined, have more experience playing this game than you have with being alive.

[Tesunie]

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 07:30 PM, said:

But it CAN take 3x RAC2's which are generally sneered at by the meta because of facetime and no burst dmg.

I will give "someone" credit though, for at least posting a great build for that mech, that used RACs. Although I would never run that specific mech due to the lack of jump jets.

OP would do well to head my advise and sell it for the version with 5mpl, 2 rac2s and some jump jets.

Being new they will find a lot of use for JJ in places where they get caught in a bad position (because they are new, after all, and besides, never know when an enemy lance my pull something odd, like in canyon network. Some JJ will easily make a massive difference in a lot of games.

And 5MPL are great for picking off weak components, something a new player should work on. Especially due to so many people running IS XL's, even on heavies and assaults. Yes, there are a lot of bad builds in QP.

Why two RAC2s? That set of hardpoints should be able to handle two RAC5s without much difficulty, depending upon size of engine and other factors, it might even still be able to retain 5 MPLs. If not, 5 MLs should be fine and shaves 5 tons off. Or even dual LB10s with 5 MLs (which is more conductive to JJ use, due to burst of damage over DPS).

Usefulness of JJs is dependent upon how much and in what ways a player uses them. Most people seem to take JJs, and then when I spectate them they seem to completely forget that they have JJs... For many players, JJs aren't worth the tonnage they invest in them because they don't use them. I'm not saying against having JJs available, but there are probably other mechs to try that potential on before committing to selling an already owned mech for a JJ variant of it "because so and so said it's better". There are plenty of good builds for the 3R the OP already owns. No reason for them to sell it unless they really disliked the mech (which then it's doubtful if a JJ version would appease them at that stage).

CherokeeRose, on 07 December 2019 - 06:40 PM, said:

A few random games?

Now you are "misrepresenting" what I just did. There is another word for that, but I won't use it in polite company.

---

Just scroll through all the threads on streaks to see what I mean. Page after page of moaning and complaining.

His point was that your sample size for your argument is too small to make an argument around. You would need a much larger data set to truly extrapolate a trend. Even then, that data set would only pertain to yourself and your performance, at your level of game play.

What you are doing here is taking a very small selection of data (5-15 matches) to try to prove a point. You don't have enough data there to prove anything, honestly. So, in the grand scheme of things, you've been posting "a few random games", rather it's consecutive or not.


I'll also mention here, no one here was mentioning SSRMs, only RACs. You've introduced SSRMs into your arguments as a counter to accusations against RACs (from my recollection of this thread). If you want to prove RAC performance (for yourself, at your tier level of play), then you should be taking strides to prove their effectiveness. The best way to prove your effectiveness for RACs would be to post your build, statistical data for said build from your profile with that mech's average performance, and post numbers based on that (rather than "random" screenshots).

Even then, you'll only be proving your effectiveness for said build when you use it, and it's effectiveness for your tier. I've gone through this in older threads based upon LRMs, and the argument ended up boiling down to "You've proven you can use LRMs well in matches on an average, but most people...", which I had to agree with. My statistical information proved I could utilize LRMs well in my matches based upon my performance with them. But, this didn't disprove the fact that many pilots do tend to use LRMs poorly, getting less than reliable results from them in matches.

Even then, this thread has nothing to do with SSRMs, so it would be more beneficial if you kept your posts related to the MAD-3R and, if desired, to your performance with RACs at your level of game play. Similar to if I was making an argument with my MAD-3R with single heat sinks... It would only relate to myself and only to the tier level of play my alt account is in. It wouldn't effectively prove that SHS are "good". Just that, in T4 rated matches I can perform well with SHS (though I know I could perform better with DHS).