1063 replies to this topic

[BerryChunks]

Quote

Your such a slime ball going over your old posts to change what you said.

such as?

None of your continuous insulting and impotent rage have anything to do with proving your point, which you also failed to do.

maintaining balance is not the same as maintaining perfect accuracy.

Quote

I'm sure they would rock, settle and shoot again, just like a tank.

Im glad you're finally agreeing with me.. It took a few pages of arguing over prone/walking and braced vs not braced, etc. By the way, gyros, as your body, cannot transfer 100% of force into the leg.

Do you have any more insults for me? Laughter is a good remedy for boredom.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 04:01 PM.

[mekabuser]

EvilCow, on 26 January 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

I don't want to suggest a solution, it is dev's role to do that but I agree with OP about the double armor problem (not a solution, except for head probably).

Double armor is where MW4 failed to address the pinpoint accuracy issues and, IMHO, MWLL made the same error (after 0.2.x if I remember well).

Apparently MWO is falling for the same simplistic solution instead of reasoning out of the box (like they did for a lot of other things where MWO is a departure from the MW4 style so present also in MWLL). Laser beams duration partially addressed the problem luckily, MW4 was really screwed up in that regard, projectiles drift also is a nice touch in MWO, I liked that in Tribes too.

I don't like randomness in games, skill must always be rewarded but pinpoint accuracy is a problem, it is not even realistic, real weapons are never 100% accurate.

mwll had laser beam duration... first.. and more importantly had a substantial ballistic drop.. SOmething that i cant believe ISNT in this game. Because those two characteristics in tandem... really, for all intents and purposes takes care of most all the problems.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

your previous claim was that you were very accurate, while prone, but that didn't matter to the discussion. Then you shortened your "accurate range" when we started talking about more realistic comparisons, such as running or walking and firing. When shown an abrams (sitting completely still) being rocked by firing it's main gun, you talk about bracing. The abrams was sitting still, but not braced. A mech can be sitting still and not braced by standing, which is analogous to you standing unbraced. Your comparisons have always been flawed, and you keep changing the rules of the argument to suit your need to be correct.

I'll go from this edit. Lets forget about the fact that I'm accurate as all hell with a weapon, no matter if I'm running, walking, standing, kneeling, sitting or prone; because as you said, it is not relevant to the discussion.

You seem be be ignoring the fact that the technology for gyros and actuators with the capability of withstanding the weights and forces needed for the mechs is this game would be more advanced than we have now. So to assume what they are, and are not capable of is a moot point, because clearly the ones in the MechWarrior lore CAN do these things. Id Est stabilize a weapon system on a mech, that is moving, and counter act the forces, of which said mounted weapon system generates. This is the games fiction, the games lore. I'm appalled by me being tricked into arguing this fact with you.

My whole original post of my shooting ability was directed at someone whose post claimed that accuracy while firing multiple rounds at a time was not possible.

The whole topic on subject is convergence, and I agreed with the idea that they should implement a system of which, the player can choose the convergence of his weapon systems. In the lore, these machines are clearly capable of achieving weapon convergence at a set distance.

Again I shamed myself by being baited by your ad hominem arguments, and your childish behavior. I even acted like you. I was angry. Because as a man with testosterone that's what happens when passive aggressive people try their ad hominem tactics on me. I apologize for stooping to the level of BerryChunks, I'll do my best in the future to not ruffle my feathers so much with petty and childish qualms with people.


EDIT: Oh and a human body can transfer 100% of a force applied to any part of the body, to any part of the body in contact with the ground, into the ground. Your just not athletic enough if you think its impossible.

EDIT:
From my PM box

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

your anger is so cute. Do you have no other form of resolving something other than violence?

I think my post here speaks for itself.

Edited by Velba, 26 January 2013 - 04:14 PM.

[BerryChunks]

going off this, you have a profile of being very distinctly interested in others knowing how great you are, and are very attached to the idea of manliness to define yourself and others around you. Any question of your nature raises an out of control amount of rage. Every one of your posts was laced with abusive insults, and you still danced around the issue.

The fact is that it doesn't matter how good technology becomes, there will always by limitations and problems invoked by the realm of physics itself. It took 2 pages to finally get you to admit your "undocumented" personal prowess of shooting while running and being deadly accurate has no bearing on this.

The comments of childishness and trickery are another attempt for you to reclaim your sense of superiority, a sense you need others to validate by agreeing with you, which you lost in the argument, hence why you resorted so quickly to verbal abuse. What I find most interesting is that, how much you wish to show superiority, you minimize your own agency or efficacy in your behavior by saying "its not my fault, I have testosterone so I cant control myself". It's basically demanding we see you as better than other people, yet not having the same level of control we expect from people in daily life. That line wouldn't work in court as a defense if you murdered someone who upset you by "passive aggressive ad hominems like a woman".

The entirety of your behavior exhibits sexism towards both men and women and an attempt to appear to the caricature of masculinity in modern society.

Firing large caliber shells in close order to each other should rock and destabilize the aim. AC's shouldn't be allowed to fire simultaneously, but in series with a .2-.5 second delay. This coupled with the very real physics effect of the AC causing torque would mean that 2 AC's would basically hit two different spots.

Rock effect would be a variable that gets larger for larger ACs. This effect would create a general rule where the two AC's can hit Left and Right arm at Optimum range, or can hit LT or RT at half of optimum. This reduces the CT 1 shot coring to "point blank" for AC/20, ad slightly further for AC10, etc.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 04:23 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

going off this, you have a profile of being very distinctly interested in others knowing how great you are, and are very attached to the idea of manliness to define yourself and others around you. Any question of your nature raises an out of control amount of rage. Every one of your posts was laced with abusive insults, and you still danced around the issue.

The fact is that it doesn't matter how good technology becomes, there will always by limitations and problems invoked by the realm of physics itself. It took 2 pages to finally get you to admit your "undocumented" personal prowess of shooting while running and being deadly accurate has no bearing on this.

The comments of childishness and trickery are another attempt for you to reclaim your sense of superiority, a sense you need others to validate by agreeing with you, which you lost in the argument, hence why you resorted so quickly to verbal abuse.

Once again I'm going to ignore your Ad hominem remarks.

And once again the lore of BT and Mechwarrior is clear. They have the technology which is capable of conquering the forces at play with the weights and forces in question. Those weights and forces are a non issue. We do not. It does.

The only thing I lost in this argument is my cool. And I have apologized for it.

[BerryChunks]

you misunderstood me. Those aren't ad hominems because they aren't an attempt to discredit your argument. They're examples of your behavior that you might want to look at in a metacognitive examination. Your argument already had no substantiation and I provided the counterpoints.

Knock down wouldn't work in your fantasy land where physics is completely overruled by machines. We can either have rocking and knock down, or neither. Any disparate behavior would mean that physics itself chooses when to work and when not to work, and that doesn't make any sense.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 04:31 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

going off this, you have a profile of being very distinctly interested in others knowing how great you are, and are very attached to the idea of manliness to define yourself and others around you. Any question of your nature raises an out of control amount of rage. Every one of your posts was laced with abusive insults, and you still danced around the issue.

The fact is that it doesn't matter how good technology becomes, there will always by limitations and problems invoked by the realm of physics itself. It took 2 pages to finally get you to admit your "undocumented" personal prowess of shooting while running and being deadly accurate has no bearing on this.

The comments of childishness and trickery are another attempt for you to reclaim your sense of superiority, a sense you need others to validate by agreeing with you, which you lost in the argument, hence why you resorted so quickly to verbal abuse. What I find most interesting is that, how much you wish to show superiority, you minimize your own agency or efficacy in your behavior by saying "its not my fault, I have testosterone so I cant control myself". It's basically demanding we see you as better than other people, yet not having the same level of control we expect from people in daily life. That line wouldn't work in court as a defense if you murdered someone who upset you by "passive aggressive ad hominems like a woman".

The entirety of your behavior exhibits sexism towards both men and women and an attempt to appear to the caricature of masculinity in modern society.

Firing large caliber shells in close order to each other should rock and destabilize the aim. AC's shouldn't be allowed to fire simultaneously, but in series with a .2-.5 second delay. This coupled with the very real physics effect of the AC causing torque would mean that 2 AC's would basically hit two different spots.

Rock effect would be a variable that gets larger for larger ACs. This effect would create a general rule where the two AC's can hit Left and Right arm at Optimum range, or can hit LT or RT at half of optimum. This reduces the CT 1 shot coring to "point blank" for AC/20, ad slightly further for AC10, etc.

This is off the topic at hand, which is weapons should converge at a set point and have the ability to hit that convergence.
I've never said anything about continued stability after rounds going down range other than achieving accuracy within certain parameters is possible.

You are trying really hard to make me angry, I can appreciate the effort, but I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request... as they say.

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

you misunderstood me. Those aren't ad hominems because they aren't an attempt to discredit your argument. They're examples of your behavior that you might want to look at in a metacognitive examination. Your argument already had no substantiation and I provided the counterpoints.

Knock down wouldn't work in your fantasy land where physics is completely overruled by machines.

I'm also sorry to say this game is a world in which the forces of the physics that are being discussed have been overruled by the machines in the world.

[Inappropriate1191]

Still trolling this fool, Velba? Semper Iratus, indeed. Stop it. We gotta murder some pugs.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

This is off the topic at hand, which is weapons should converge at a set point and have the ability to hit that convergence.
I've never said anything about continued stability after rounds going down range other than achieving accuracy within certain parameters is possible.

You are trying really hard to make me angry, I can appreciate the effort, but I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request... as they say.


I'm also sorry to say this game is a world in which the forces of the physics that are being discussed have been overruled by the machines in the world.

All force goes somewhere. It doesn't disappear. Bipeds are the least stable form of movement, and millions of years of evolution hasn't managed to overcome the limitations of physics.

What you're arguing is that the laws of physics should not apply equally.

Inappropriate1191, on 26 January 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Still trolling this fool, Velba? Semper Iratus, indeed. Stop it. We gotta murder some pugs.

I called troll 2 pages ago.

[Velba]

Inappropriate1191, on 26 January 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Still trolling this fool, Velba? Semper Iratus, indeed. Stop it. We gotta murder some pugs.

I have a previous engagement at the moment. I'm trying to exit with some grace after my disgraceful behavior.

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:

All force goes somewhere. It doesn't disappear. Bipeds are the least stable form of movement, and millions of years of evolution hasn't managed to overcome the limitations of physics.

What you're arguing is that the laws of physics should not apply equally.



I called troll 2 pages ago.

No, what I'm telling you is that in the lore, the technology has overcome the forces. They of course have limitations, they are just greater than we have now. It is fiction, that's the way fiction works.

[BerryChunks]

Overcome the forces by reducing the effects of physics. Not by acting outside the control of physics. You're arguing the latter.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Overcome the forces by reducing the effects of physics. Not by acting outside the control of physics. You're arguing the latter.

No, I am telling you that in the lore, they have the technology to overcome the forces by overcoming them with counter forces.
Please refrain from asserting my argument for me, if you are unclear, I can clarify.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

No, I am telling you that in the lore, they have the technology to overcome the forces by overcoming them with counter forces.
Please refrain from asserting my argument for me, if you are unclear, I can clarify.

That counterforce still has to come from somewhere. Mechs dont slow down when you fire an AC.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

That counterforce still has to come from somewhere. Mechs dont slow down when you fire an AC.

That is not my problem, that is the lore's problem, I didn't make the universe, I cannot tell you for a fact that I know where these counter forces come from. I can tell you for a fact, that they are there.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

That is not my problem, that is the lore's problem, I didn't make the universe, I cannot tell you for a fact that I know where these counter forces come from. I can tell you for a fact, that they are there.

there's two ways for a mech to absorb such force:

by transferring it equally and being slowed down per each shot, or by allowing rocking. You have no supporting evidence for your facts, one way or the other.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 04:47 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:47 PM, said:

there's two ways for a mech to absorb such force:

by transferring it equally and being slowed down per each shot, or by allowing rocking. You have no supporting evidence for your facts, one way or the other.

I don't feel that I'm in a position to give you the lore of how mechs work. I've also never said anywhere that mechs should not rock, or the convergence point should not shift after firing, these are all your assertions.

Again. A mech should be able to achieve weapon convergence. A mech should be knocked over, by other mechs and other forces. A mechs weapon systems should affect a mech. Never said that it shouldn't, again, your assertion.

[BerryChunks]

You've changed the goalposts again. You were previously arguing that accuracy isn't affected by firing, and now you argue that you're not arguing that.

I said that stability would affect accuracy, and you gave your personal life story as to why it wouldnt, and then you said that bracing would help keep a mech accurate, and now youre saying you weren't talking about that all along but were talking about convergence.

Edited by BerryChunks, 26 January 2013 - 04:57 PM.

[Velba]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

You've changed the goalposts again. You were previously arguing that accuracy isn't affected by firing, and now you argue that you're not arguing that.

You not reading what I'm posting. I'm done here.

[BerryChunks]

Velba, on 26 January 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

You not reading what I'm posting. I'm done here.

its ok.

[Heeden]

BerryChunks, on 26 January 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

Knock down wouldn't work in your fantasy land where physics is completely overruled by machines. We can either have rocking and knock down, or neither. Any disparate behavior would mean that physics itself chooses when to work and when not to work, and that doesn't make any sense.

An important thing you are missing, is we need this fantasy-land of machines > physics otherwise battle-mechs wouldn't work at all, tanks-on-legs is an inherently stupid idea that only works with a liberal application of handwavium far in advance of a few basic recoil compensators.