1063 replies to this topic

[Pht]

Connatic, on 25 February 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Since dice are gone and you can aim based on personal skill...

You don't physically aim the weapons, and you don't do the calculations as to where to physically aim them.

The 'Mech does.

TechManual, pg 42 said:

BattleMechs are very capable and smart robots, with most of their intelligence embodied in the DI computer network. But they are not truly autonomous. Partly because they have so much firepower and could cause so much destruction if something went wrong, virtually all of the higher decisions are left in the hands of MechWarriors. MechWarriors decide when the BattleMech moves, where the BattleMech moves to and whom the BattleMech shoots.

...

But BattleMech computers do handle an incredible amount of lower-level decision-making. The T&T system, for instance, sorts, processes and interprets sensor data for the MechWarrior, who only has to look at his screens or HUD to get a concise picture of the battlefield. When targeting, a MechWarrior merely uses a control stick to aim a crosshair on a display that shows the enemy. It is up to the BattleMech to actually aim the weapons with all the calculations that entails.

It is also mostly up to the BattleMech to compensate for the recoil of its autocannons or the blasts of hostile fire while moving in the direction a MechWarrior sets. Yes, a MechWarrior can correct the BattleMech on its balance, such as telling the BattleMech when to ride with the blasts rather than leaning against them, or when to throw itself off-balance and into another BattleMech, but a lot of the decision-making gets done by the DI computer.

You *do* use the reticule on the hud to indicate to the 'Mech what it should try and physically aim it's weapons at; with all the FPS style player skill that manipulating a reticule involves.

Quote

taking everything from the table top will not work...

Nobody has said to do this.

Quote

...but at the same time makes me wonder why they try to stick with so many other numbers from the table top for the sake of "balance".

I have no idea why they thought they could pick up only the damage and armor numbers from the combat system and not the actual combat mechanic those numbers were designed for... It doesn't make any sense to me either.

You either take the system or you leave it ...

Edited by Pht, 25 February 2013 - 05:53 PM.

[Doc Holliday]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

Yes, I failed!

And I only failed because you say so!

Not because you can actually post how I failed!

No, it's quite clear how you failed. You claimed to have shown how Mchawkeye's posts were "irrational". You didn't. I found them quite rational, far more rational than your own.


Since you clearly didn't get the message the first time, I'll post it again. And I'll keep posting it until it sinks through your thick skull.

Your ideas suck. Get over it.

[ChrisOrange]

whoa whoa don't get the thread locked. Take it to private msgs.
(that's a hint to edit your post Doc and take the beef to private msg)

Edited by ChrisOrange, 25 February 2013 - 06:58 PM.

[Pht]

Doc Holliday, on 25 February 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

No, it's quite clear how you failed. You claimed to have shown how Mchawkeye's posts were "irrational". You didn't. I found them quite rational, far more rational than your own.

... and yet you refuse to do anything more than claim these things.

If it's "quite clear" and "you found his arguments more rational" than it would be very easy for you to show "how I failed" and how his arguments were "more rational."

If, however, you're doing nothing but blowing hot air, it will be impossible for you to do this, and than it would make sense why you refuse to engage.

Quote

Since you clearly didn't get the message the first time, I'll post it again. And I'll keep posting it until it sinks through your thick skull.

Your ideas suck. Get over it.

Or do you really think people will find your e-temper-tantrum more convincing?

Doc Holliday, on 25 February 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

No, that's exactly what I'd like to have happen. Nothing suggested in this thread would make the game remotely better. Getting it locked would be fantastic.

Of course you want this thread to get locked. Otherwise, it will become quite clear that your fine new suit of clothes is actually nothing at all and you are completely naked.

... as if it would hurt you physically to actually do more than claim "IWIN!" and tell everyone *why* "you win."

Edited by Pht, 25 February 2013 - 07:03 PM.

[Doc Holliday]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:

... and yet you refuse to do anything more than claim these things.

If it's "quite clear" and "you found his arguments more rational" than it would be very easy for you to show "how I failed" and how his arguments were "more rational."

No one in that thread found Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. Nor has anyone in this thread. Ergo, you have in fact, not shown his posts to be irrational. This is simple logic based upon the facts at hand.

Your ideas suck. Get over it.

[Pht]

Doc Holliday, on 25 February 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

No one in that thread found Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. Nor has anyone in this thread. Ergo, you have in fact, not shown his posts to be irrational. This is simple logic based upon the facts at hand.

So, in other words, you are saying that something is true simply because a majority claims it is true.

Therefore, all I have to do is get more people to agree with me than who agree with you and what I want will be come "true."

Edited by Pht, 25 February 2013 - 07:23 PM.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

You don't physically aim the weapons, and you don't do the calculations as to where to physically aim them.

The 'Mech does.

You are FN nuts bro.....

There is dumb and then there is crazy. My mech does what I tell it to. You must have hacked your mech into doing the work for you.

Either that or you are totally crazy out of your mind.

[Doc Holliday]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

So, in other words, you are saying that something is true simply because a majority claims it is true.

Therefore, all I have to do is get more people to agree with me than who agree with you and what I want will be come "true."

So, in other words, you completely fail at grasping the concept of "showing" something in the context of a debate.

Like you, I will make a claim to "have shown" something.

I have shown all your posts to be full of racial bias and sexual innuendo.


Also, your ideas suck. Get over it.

[Pht]

Mongoose Trueborn, on 25 February 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

You are FN nuts bro.....

There is dumb and then there is crazy. My mech does what I tell it to. You must have hacked your mech into doing the work for you.

Either that or you are totally crazy out of your mind.

I'm not crazy.

The authoritative source on the topic - the quote I referenced from the sourcebook "TechManual" - specificially and explicitly says that the 'Mechs do the physical aiming of the weapons and that the 'Mechs do the calculations of where to physically aim the weapons to hit what the pilot is indicating with the reticule.

... and we now know directly from the people whos job it is to maintain and know the BTUniverse lore that this is the way it is:

http://bg.battletech...ic,26178.0.html

Doc Holliday, on 25 February 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

So, in other words, you completely fail at grasping the concept of "showing" something in the context of a debate.

My pointing out that you just appealed to "truth by counting people who agree on a topic" does not mean I missed the context of what you just posted.

Quote

Like you, I will make a claim to "have shown" something.

I have shown all your posts to be full of racial bias and sexual innuendo.

And now ( if you care that anyone agrees with your claim) you have to actually demonstrate how this is true.

----

You just tried back your refutation of my argument once; even if you did so by the means of a false argument.


...


Do you give up so easily when you fail?

Edited by Pht, 25 February 2013 - 07:36 PM.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

I'm not crazy.

The authoritative source on the topic - the quote I referenced from the sourcebook "TechManual" - specificially and explicitly says that the 'Mechs do the physical aiming of the weapons and that the 'Mechs do the calculations of where to physically aim the weapons to hit what the pilot is indicating with the reticule.

... and we now know directly from the people whos job it is to maintain and know the BTUniverse lore that this is the way it is:

http://bg.battletech...ic,26178.0.html

Dude are you telling me that you believe some fictional book is the bible and that the developers use it to build a VIDEO GAME?

Wake up fruit cake. Not everyone believes every fictional book they read.

Why don't you try putting your finger in the barrel of a gun when it goes off. Worked for bugs bunny so it must be gold.

For review:

1) Fictional Books
2) Real life
3) Video game mechanics

None of the above are the same thing.

[mekabuser]

please move this thread to Kaetetoa so these individuals can battle out their epic ideas from now till the end of eternity..

ETERNITY>>>> I sMITE at thee!!!!

Edited by mekabuser, 25 February 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[Novakaine]

Your post is wasted on these CODer's.
Sorry this Casual Mechfarmville Online.
At least for now.

[Golfin Man]

The pinpoint precision of multiple weapons is truly most obnoxious on the current FOTM mech, the Poptart. That being said who gives a **** its a game with customization, meaning there will always be cheese builds driven by cheesy pilots, followed by hordes of cheesy nubs copying them in all their cheesy glory. Please cut my hands off so I can stop playing this stupid *** piece of **** of a game...that I can't stop playing.

[Doc Holliday]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

My pointing out that you just appealed to "truth by counting people who agree on a topic" does not mean I missed the context of what you just posted.



And now ( if you care that anyone agrees with your claim) you have to actually demonstrate how this is true.

Nope, you don't get it. At all. As of this moment, right now, without any further posting on my part, my claim of having shown your posts to be full of racial bias and sexual innuendo is just as valid as your claim of having shown Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. And you don't understand why, clearly.

[Novakaine]

On a side note I protest until I get my Fozzie Bear Holo.
Wocka Wocko.

[Pht]

Mongoose Trueborn, on 25 February 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

Dude are you telling me that you believe some fictional book is the bible and that the developers use it to build a VIDEO GAME?

Mech - battlemech from the BTUniverse/lore

Warrior - someone who does combat in said mech.

The btu/lore is established by the TT, and the fictional lore in the various books.

Said Mechs perform in combat as is described in the TechManual reference and the TT rules - the people who make and maintain the BTU/lore do their best to make sure the authors of the fictional lore behave, in combat, "inside" of the combat performance "box" established by the TT rules; as is explicitly and repeatedly said in the bg.bt forums link in my earlier post.

Quote

Wake up fruit cake. Not everyone believes every fictional book they read.

I haven't equated TM with reality. I have merely pointed out that it establishes that the 'Mechs handle the actual physical aiming and calculation chores in the fictional BTU lore.

[Connatic]

Quote

You *do* use the reticule on the hud to indicate to the 'Mech what it should try and physically aim it's weapons at; with all the FPS style player skill that manipulating a reticule involves.

Isn't that what I said? You aim instead of rolling dice. I think you are just splitting hairs here. "You" or the "Battlemech", it doesn't matter.

Edited by Connatic, 26 February 2013 - 02:38 PM.

[Pht]

Doc Holliday said:

Nope, you don't get it. At all. As of this moment, right now, without any further posting on my part, my claim of having shown your posts to be full of racial bias and sexual innuendo is just as valid as your claim of having shown Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. And you don't understand why, clearly.

Here's my basis of why:

Pht said:

You mean the one where Mchawkeye irrationally tried to say that we should be simulating mechs, as if they really existed... when they don't?

Or where he made the baseless argument that having 'Mechs in an MW video game perform in combat like 'Mechs in the TT (and thus like they do in the novels) would be "frustrating" when all one would have to do to learn to control their grouping is to slow down when you shoot, don't shoot when you're running hot, and use weapons that are appropriate for the range you're engaging at?

Or maybe where he says that it would make people feel "not in control of their 'Mech" - when it wouldn't result in such - he's making the mistake of thinking that a Mech simulator should put you in direct, simulated control of the weapons - not in direct, simulated control of the 'Mech?

Or where he makes the mistake of thinking that all 6 laser should *always* hit under the conditions I mentioned, forgetting that the lasers have to have an "on time" to do their rated damage, and that the target isn't a stable tank, but a swaying gangly target that can twitch and evade?

here's yours:

Quote

No one in that thread found Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. Nor has anyone in this thread. Ergo, you have in fact, not shown his posts to be irrational. This is simple logic based upon the facts at hand.

And Here's where I actually engaged with yours:

Pht said:

So, in other words, you are saying that something is true simply because a majority claims it is true.

Therefore, all I have to do is get more people to agree with me than who agree with you and what I want will be come "true."

And you apparently DO give up that easily.

You make one single argument that actually engages what was posted, and when that's refuted, you resort back to your temper tantrum.

[Doc Holliday]

Pht, on 25 February 2013 - 08:06 PM, said:

Here's my basis of why:



here's yours:



And Here's where I actually engaged with yours:



And you apparently DO give up that easily.

You make one single argument that actually engages what was posted, and when that's refuted, you resort back to your temper tantrum.

Nope, you still don't get it. At all. As of this moment, right now, without any further posting on my part, my claim of having shown your posts to be full of racial bias and sexual innuendo is just as valid as your claim of having shown Mchawkeye's posts to be irrational. And you don't understand why, clearly.

[Menetius]

Eh, I don't really care if this is implemented or not; I already chain-fire my long-range weapons, and I only group-fire at point-blank range.

STK-5M 4xSRM build is affected very little by this change. Same with my Trebuchet. And my Hunchback. And my Spider. And my Cataphract.

And what's all this about 'real' mechs? The Gyros and neural interfaces required to keep such mammoth creatures of endo-steel on their own two feet (neglecting the Goliath and Scorpion for a moment) is implausible.

Note that I did NOT say impossible.

Edited by Menetius, 25 February 2013 - 08:22 PM.