791 replies to this topic

[Dren Nas]

Wispsy, on 11 November 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

There have been plenty of counter arguments.
Main one being you are doing it wrong, adjust your playstyle, play with skill, succeed.
Many people have not actually referred to that 48 hours and you and others have mistakenly labelled them as doing so...a few have but really that just highlighted how much damage they could actually do, which is enough to stifle gameplay. You may enjoy punishing people with your finger of god. Plenty of people have now realised they enjoy the game more that lrms are back to 1-2 a match and not 4-6....

It just so happens that "zomg! they were op and needed the nurf!" in regards to when LRMs were bugged seems to be what most people post about when they do post.

When an argument has no bearing in regards to another, but people keep pressing it as a rebuttal that's called a "straw man" ( http://www.urbandict...erm=straw%20man )...

So... dead horse... beaten to a pulp... no bearing on this thread whatsoever. Move on.

Edited by Dren Nas, 11 November 2012 - 05:34 PM.

[Wispsy]

Dren Nas, on 11 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

It just so happens that "zomg! they were op and needed the nurf!" in regards to when LRMs were bugged seems to be what most people post about when they do post.

When an argument has no bearing in regards to another, but people keep pressing it as a rebuttal that's called a "straw man" ( http://www.urbandict...erm=straw%20man )...

So... dead horse... beaten to a pulp... no bearing on this thread whatsoever. Move on.

And every time I have made a point you have also set up straw man arguments of "48 hours"....and completely ignored the fact that plenty of people are doing perfectly fine with lrms. They have changed, if you still wish to use them effectively, you also need to change.

[LionOne]

LRMs still work fine for me. I get kills with my CAT build, and I run a positive K/D ratio.

I don't usually fire them at anything further than 800m tho.

[Bloody]

Took out my AMS from my mechs as they are unnecessary expenditure.

All i see mainly are k2 gauss cats nowadays other than the occasional founder trying to grind to unlock.

[Shalune]

Dren Nas, on 11 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

It just so happens that "zomg! they were op and needed the nurf!" in regards to when LRMs were bugged seems to be what most people post about when they do post.

When an argument has no bearing in regards to another, but people keep pressing it as a rebuttal that's called a "straw man" ( http://www.urbandict...erm=straw%20man )...

So... dead horse... beaten to a pulp... no bearing on this thread whatsoever. Move on.

While those '48 hours' were blatantly broken, many people were already arguing LRMs were too strong before the patch.

[Dorque]

Dren Nas, on 11 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

It just so happens that "zomg! they were op and needed the nurf!" in regards to when LRMs were bugged seems to be what most people post about when they do post.

When an argument has no bearing in regards to another, but people keep pressing it as a rebuttal that's called a "straw man" ( http://www.urbandict...erm=straw%20man )...

So... dead horse... beaten to a pulp... no bearing on this thread whatsoever. Move on.

Not one person, not one single person except for you is saying that.

You are the only person in this thread to repeatedly mention the dead-horse 48 hour period as if it invalidates every perfectly valid counter-argument.

[Shaddock]

Dorque, on 11 November 2012 - 06:15 PM, said:

Not one person, not one single person except for you is saying that.

You are the only person in this thread to repeatedly mention the dead-horse 48 hour period as if it invalidates every perfectly valid counter-argument.

That is a wholeheartedly incorrect argument.

[Sahoj]

I'm no expert - but I strongly prefer to engage an opponent that has been softened by LRM's.

[Crosell]

I guess its just me but i dont see how a .3 damage nerf is overly significant. This seems like every other game where something gets nerfed, everyone is like OMG its useless OMG. How could they ruin it. When in actuality its fine. It seems people want there insta gib, but since the lrm nerf, boats are still there, and you seem more weapon diversity as a whole within the frame work of the game.

[Dren Nas]

Wispsy, on 11 November 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

And every time I have made a point you have also set up straw man arguments of "48 hours"....and completely ignored the fact that plenty of people are doing perfectly fine with lrms. They have changed, if you still wish to use them effectively, you also need to change.

I only went through the first 5 or 6 pages, and the only points you made is "you should l2p"... so.... that's not much of an argument.

Shalune, on 11 November 2012 - 06:09 PM, said:

While those '48 hours' were blatantly broken, many people were already arguing LRMs were too strong before the patch.

But the problem is, that they're too underpowered at the moment.

Edited by Dren Nas, 11 November 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[Dren Nas]

Dorque, on 11 November 2012 - 06:15 PM, said:

Not one person, not one single person except for you is saying that.

You are the only person in this thread to repeatedly mention the dead-horse 48 hour period as if it invalidates every perfectly valid counter-argument.

You haven't been paying attention to people's posts then.

[Dren Nas]

Crosell, on 11 November 2012 - 06:21 PM, said:

I guess its just me but i dont see how a .3 damage nerf is overly significant. This seems like every other game where something gets nerfed, everyone is like OMG its useless OMG. How could they ruin it. When in actuality its fine. It seems people want there insta gib, but since the lrm nerf, boats are still there, and you seem more weapon diversity as a whole within the frame work of the game.

Not only was it a .3 damage nurf, they nurfed the tracking and spread. Which means that there a much higher damage nurf overall.

[Scratx]

I tested my C4 Catapult with 4xLRM15's ... definition of LRM boat, pretty much. I saw nothing wrong with it, I could still wreak havoc.

Case in point, Atlas coming out of cave in E4 of Frozen City, I'm 3-400m away. I hammer him with 4 volleys and he starts backing away. Frontal armor in relative tatters (highly sandblasted, though no holes in it) and backing away from the LRM catapult 35 tons lighter than it and as a result also prevent him from joining his buddies outside in a brawl with the rest of my team.

If I can do that to an Atlas with a catapult, then someone has to tell me just what they're doing for their performance to suck so badly, according to many of the posters here.

[Virisken]

just give us a rollback to the lrm before artemis was introduced..lrm were fine then...now they are crap even with artemis

[Dorque]

Dren Nas, on 11 November 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

You haven't been paying attention to people's posts then.

Oh, I've been reading. I'm just frustrated that every valid counterpoint is met with "We're not talking about that 48 hour period!"

When people say you "just want to be OP again" they're not talking about that 48 hour period either. Please take that into consideration.

[Valdez Raptor]

Shalune, on 11 November 2012 - 06:09 PM, said:

While those '48 hours' were blatantly broken, many people were already arguing LRMs were too strong before the patch.

Judging from various polls if LRM's were OP, all of those polls stated that LRM's were just fine as they were. So really not sure where you are getting that information from.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Valdez Raptor, on 11 November 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

Judging from various polls if LRM's were OP, all of those polls stated that LRM's were just fine as they were. So really not sure where you are getting that information from.

You mean the entirely un-scientific polls that only get info from the relatively small subset of people who felt like responding at any given time, from the relatively small set of people who are forum regulars? If a forum poll says something, it must be true!

[Dren Nas]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 11 November 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

You mean the entirely un-scientific polls that only get info from the relatively small subset of people who felt like responding at any given time, from the relatively small set of people who are forum regulars? If a forum poll says something, it must be true!

Yeah, poll rock and it'll say paper is op 99% of the time.

Dorque, on 11 November 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

Oh, I've been reading. I'm just frustrated that every valid counterpoint is met with "We're not talking about that 48 hour period!"

When people say you "just want to be OP again" they're not talking about that 48 hour period either. Please take that into consideration.

LRMs were fine before the patch that bugged them. They punished you if you were dumb and ran into the open like a moron, but they were fairly wasy to avoid when you learned how to.

[Stone Wall]

Dren Nas, on 11 November 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

Yeah, poll rock and it'll say paper is op 99% of the time.

But paper beats almost everything in this case.

[Dren Nas]

Stone Wall, on 11 November 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

But paper beats almost everything in this case.

Mmmm..... Not if paper is considered to be a LRM mech. Rock is smashing through it atm.