BNC-3E "WRATH OF GOD" (1x LBX10, 2x Llas, 2x MLas, 3x AC2, XL340)

The only build where all caps is acceptable in the title. 22DPS, 44 Alpha, Endless Bullets; an Armageddon at any range.

Groups:
1- Lightning and Thunder: 2 LLas, LBX10 The button you always push, your most efficient bread and butter weapons.
8.2 DPS, 28 DMG
2- Shock and Awe: 3xAC2 While inefficient, 3 AC2s in short bursts provide shocking DPS, elite sniping and blinding covery fire.
11.5 DPS, 6 DMG
3- Cataclysm: 2 Llas, 2Mlas, LBX 10, 3xAC2, COOL SHOT 9x9! Pretty much an insta-kill, 'I win' button. Will overheat in 5 seconds without improved cool shot 9x9.
22.27 DPS, 44 DMG
4- Shit I'm overheating: LBX10, 1xAC2, Chainfired. A group you'll need plenty often to keep damage pouring while your sitting on 97% Heat.


Takes decent mech piloting skills since it is so prone to overheat; however it's effectiveness is no laughing matter. Consider that after a 44 DMG Alpha, in 4 seconds you belch 133 Damage. The highest armor mechs in the game will die in 4 seconds if your targeting is good. As soon as the armor is off the LBX has a great habit of insta-killing on the next shot.

Imp. Cool Shot 9x9 turns into an auto kill button giving you an additional 3 seconds of alpha(222 DMG, 8 Seconds.)

In this LRM hell hole of a game, over heating has benefits anyway, such as stopping missile locks ! Aside from its craziness, it also has viable options for more sustained fighting. Still, it is an absolutely unfair if you will bother to let your 14 Dbl Heat sinks cool ya off and just let 'er rip. 9 tons of Ammo is nearly endless behind a Laser weapon load that stands on by itself just fine.

All that with max armor on the head and torso, and 64 KPH speed. The end is here and it's got a shit load of weapons.

Less extreme XL 350 Variant, 15 DHS:


Even more toned down XL355, UAC Variant, 16DHS(engine is upgraded due to lack of slots.)


If you don't got the stones for the XL, use a standard 275 as shown in the post below. These are the only variants I endorse and nothing else ought to be considered a "Wrath of God" build!

Using the first build listed:

I've literally had this less than 2 hours- it doesn't even have all its basics...

 

Modified, The Wrath of God- Noah's Flood Variant.



Using the standard engine gives room for the Jager "Hoser" ballistic load out... but it packs an additional 2Llas, 2Mlas and huge improvements in durability. As a bonus, it's heat is a bit more like a normal mech than the rampaging inferno machine above while only giving up 1 dps and 2 alpha dmg(mitigated by the UAC5.)

It's much much slower, and it doesn't have the LBX instakill- but it's still a walking battleship.

 

Was just me and him early this AM. He wandered into our Vent, first time I've played with him.

 

Maybe replacing the LLas by one ERLLas and a third MLas, just to load the XL350 and one additional ton of ammo/Heatsink:



Three AC2s are producing so much Heat that most players will have problems with Heatmanagement if combining with two LLas. Besides managing four different Weapontypes could confuse alot.

Alternatively downgrade the Lasers and simplify the build for 3 Weapongroups and STD300, focussing on the Triple AC2s + LBX:


Can be built with XL375 also. But XL on the Banshee is like XL on the Atlas or Stalker. Be lucky or die soon.

 

I disagree that you can't have time to cool off in a banshee. No reason it can't be played like a 5xAC2 Jager or any other mech for that matter that needs time to cool off. In either event, the build has reasonable heat weapons for prolonged fights while its unreasonable burst remains the Ace in the hole anytime you can cool off to set it up.

As for your criticism of the LBX, its the biggest weapon you can fit with an XL while still having room for the 3 AC2's. The alternatives are not better and your personal preference does not change it's effectiveness in this particular load out. Of course the LBX shines after the armor is off, but on a build with 44 alpha and over 22 dps, the armor is off before the time the second LBX round fires anyway. This is using the LBX in the best way it could be: as an instakill to compliment your absurd damage. Of course I'd rather have an AC10, its a better weapon overall which is reflected in it taking more room and weighing more making it a non-option with the XL load out.

The Noah's Flood build is related to the normal god's wrath build because it's the same weapon setup and function except one AC2 is traded for a UAC5 and the lbx is traded for an AC. To me they are different flavors of the same build- both are over the top on weapon load out with fire suppresion, same weight engine and same 2Llas 2Mlas rounding them out.. Of course its slow, that's the trade off of using a standard engine. While I wouldn't consider dropping the Larger lasers for something even less heat efficient, the MLAS could probably come off if you're looking for 2 tons. Like this:


Still I wouldn't prefer it to the XL340 build because of the speed, lbx instakills, and insane burst. I was just providing an alternative to using an XL while giving a similar amount of fire power and and dps.

Of course you say its too hot. It's a hot build to be sure, but you said the same thing about the 5 AC2 Jager which turned out to be the most consistent performer of any of the Jager builds. You're not heating up for free, you're putting lethal amounts of damage in exchange. And not some exaggeration of lethal, 133 dmg with an LBX mixed in kills any Mech's center Torso in the game- and thats how much damage happens by 4 seconds. That ability to kill before what your shooting at realizes whats going on is not only extraordinary fun, it is a unique talent that will limit the damage you take and that you can only achieve by being able to heat up that fast. It's only a criticism if you use it that way, and when you can use it there is nothing else like it. AKA try it before you put your fork in it

 

@Blagg Zear
Maybe replacing the LLas by one ERLLas and a third MLas, just to load the XL350 and one additional ton of ammo/Heatsink:



Three AC2s are producing so much Heat that most players will have problems with Heatmanagement if combining with two LLas. Besides managing four different Weapontypes could confuse alot.

Alternatively downgrade the Lasers and simplify the build for 3 Weapongroups and STD300, focussing on the Triple AC2s + LBX:

First, it already is 3 weapon groups. The forth is just a heat managed option that is only there for the situations you can't get out to cool down.

Second, it makes no sense to replace the Llas with less heat efficiecnt weaponry on an already overly heated build. Dropping the 2 Mlas makes more sense so if you're gonna tinker do it right . You don't need the ER because the 3AC2's is more than you need as snipe and you can supplement with your LLAS/LBX as neccesary. The build carries too much LBX ammo to keep you form worrying about when it is prudent to fire. Point is, Er is less useful because of its heat and its function is bettetr handled by the 3 ac2's.

 

yeah i have seen your Weapongrouping:

Nothing to say against 2-4, but 1. Do you really recommend to fire 2x LLas and LBX always together (linked)? I myself run this combo very often in my mechs, but i always put them in separate Groups, so i can always decide to press Button A for Laserbeam at Targets up to 450m, and Button B for LBX for effective Range of 450m, while you can't with regular LLas.

I also considered to drop those two MLas, but keeping the Double LLas. But i think from Weight & firepower perspectives you have 10tons @ 18 Damage @

 

Build it solid, although situation awareness makes it a much different build than the 2AC2+2(U)AC5 style build. That's not a bad thing though. This build certainly has it's purpose and will work very well as an second-line assist assault. By that I mean that you shouldn't be the first mech to push or charge in, let a STD engine assault do that for you while you take advantage of the XL weight/risk compromise. This mech will excel by capitalizing on enemy positioning. It can take out another assault 1v1 pretty quickly, but it needs to happen fast and with no enemy reinforcements so you can step back an retreat without taking too much return fire.

Here lies the biggest weakness of the build, especially the XL version, if 2+ mechs prioritize you it's going to be very tough to weather a good focus of fire. This build doesn't have the resilience (or speed for the STD version) or sustained firepower to initiate a push or neutralize enemy counter-fire. This is a primary reason the super-sustainable 2AC2+2AC5 STD engine does well consistently. It is able to continuously dish out it's lethal DPS to anyone who wants to look it's way. Keep shooting at his face until he starts running, then either capitalize and kill him or move to the next target shooting your way. BUT that is not the strong-suit of this your build. Your build would be the one capitalizing and running behind the 2AC2+2AC5 sustained style build. Yours would finish off that mech that is trying to hide from the hell-fire.

Basically, The Wrath of God is the Heavy Hitter behind the sustained DPS front-line mech. At least I see this as it's ideal role. That and taking out any lone mechs with an iron fist.

Your change from the STD275 to an XL340 increased my initial rating from 3/5 to 4/5. It fits this build much better IMO even though it's a large risk and will hurt the consistency in the long-run (at least in pug matches). However, an XL in this build dramatically increases it's potential, and I respect that decision.

 

Now you have, as usual you start arguing before considering my reasoning

[quote author=Blagg Zear link=topic=6231.msg40632#msg40632 date=1396974828]
Nothing to say against 2-4, but 1. Do you really recommend to fire 2x LLas and LBX always together (linked)? I myself run this combo very often in my mechs, but i always put them in separate Groups, so i can always decide to press Button A for Laserbeam at Targets up to 450m, and Button B for LBX for effective Range of 450m, while you can't with regular LLas. [/quote]

Again, you don't address how what I said doesn't make sense and instead reiterate, so allow me to reiterate more clearly:
AC2 Erange: 720, Max 2160, .5 heat per point of damage.

ERLLAs Erange: 675, Max 1350, .944 heat per point of damage.

The AC2 is better at the ERLlas' range, does better pin point, is twice as heat efficient, provides suppressing ballistics and you have 3 of them.

An ErLlas does no favors for a build that overheats in 5 seconds and has 3 ac2's. You're not gonna use it at ER range, and the .77 heat per dmg of the Lllas is much more favorable when you do decide to hammer down with lasers.

It's not comparable to the super chicken because the super chicken doesn't have 3 more effective ac2's to snipe with, doesn't run a ridiculous hot load out and doesn't have the armor to keep line of sight for ballistics. Meanwhile My banshee only needs a few seconds to kill anything and is very heavily armored- and has the 3 ac2's.

 

Trounce, breathe bud. I've noticed you fall victim to the "Negative Internets keep screaming at me" syndrome. Blagg is simply posting his opinion of the build, that this forum is for. He is not arguing with you, only stating HIS position.

Like you said. Also, it goes both ways.


Personally, I don't think I'd ever play this build because I see far too many weaknesses compared to other builds. However, I see it has potential to do well and be a fun mech (considering your screenshot) and I can recognize your position, but I also see and agree with Blagg's points. We are just discussing the mech and what to be conscious of. You don't have to prove that you are right or the build is perfect, because there is no such thing as perfection and players will always have different styles and abilities.

 

I know that you try to defend your build by any means. I like it.

I never said that your build is poor, nor that my suggestions are better. I only suggested some "alternatives" for a slightly different taste or playstyle. So don't feel attacked by my comments or think that i want to put my "own foot forward". Just suggesting some alternatives. keep cool.

About your points:
1. Sure you can fire the LBX at any Range up to 1620. It's your playstyle and your decision to use that Pumpgun that way. I myself always try to make the most damage with this spreading weapon, so i only use it on sub200m on opened CTs, STs and Rears. I don't think that 45 Bullets are plenty enough to fire it everytime at the Range of LLas. Sorry Playstyle different.
2. Weapongrouping is just a matter of Usability. Sure you can have 5+ Weapongroups and don`t care about what other Players would usually do with them. But this is a Site to place builds for all Players reading this. And even if it is OK to have more than 3 Groups, it should be considered how to make it more userfriendly. But that`s optional, not crucial imho. Still i prefer to have LLas and LBX on two different Weapongroups (Buttons) to use them in a more versatile playstyle.
3. About the Heat Efficiency. Sure you can say that 3x AC2s are powerful enough for Sniping Range, so that the single ERLLas only handicaps the DPS, if firing together with the Dakkas. This is a valid argument against the ERLLas. But don`t forget the fact, that having a ranged Scanweapon can also give you some Critkills, if your Target is far away and having Red Components, while you must have more lucky pinpoint hits with the AC2s. The ERLLas can make sense in Range where regular LLas are limited. Besides at ranged enemies, which would quickly react to your fire, it is imo no problem to add in the hot ERLLas to the triple AC2s. It's additional Damage, before your target gets back to cover, so most times you don`t have enough time to overheat with the ERLLas. Also considering you burn up 6tons of AC2 Ammo very quickly, it is an option to make this trade to have some few free tons for e.g. more Ammo and the 15th Heatsink, which is a bonus if using a hot Trio of AC2s. Besides IF you run out of Ammo, you still have one ER Weapon for Range Attacks. Might be useful if you really need it for Endgame.

4. If Fast Killing DPS at Range is important for you, i'd rather suggest replacing the LBX for a ranged (U)AC5 with even more Range & Pinpoint & Damagescore Capability, but then keeping the 2x LLas + 2x MLas Combo as Backup (2nd & 3rd Group), not as second hot Mainweaponsystem. Just an Idea. Might be interesting. Something like this craziness:

 

The 3 AC2's are mounted high on the Toros, so are the 2 Llas. There is an Mlas on top of it's head. While Jager have slightly higher mounts for its ballistics, the Banshee's mounts are plenty high- similar to a Shadowhawk. Typical Jager moves 69 KPH, a WHOPPING 5kph faster(less than 10%.) The XL 350 Variant does 66 KPG and so is only 3 KPH slower. You're making a mountain of a mole hill.

No build can just stand around in enemy fire, Banshee or Jager. But the Banshee has the advantage of having much higher armor. You can play it defensively the same as a Jager, sometimes even better since you can abuse your asymmetry around a corner and either be firing 2 LLas and an 2 Mlas or 3 AC2's and an LBX10. Either scenario is stronger than any ballistic heavy jager can do around a corner.

In short, it can be played defensively just like a Jager, has more armor than a Jager, has more fire power than a Jager and has 4 more heat sinks than the 5 ac2 so it can even cool off better.

And yet the 5ac2 Jager consistently outperforms all other ballistic variants in damage. Why is that?

Because as you note, you generally do not get to sit on a target. You are forced in out of battle whether you can fire for 20 more seconds or not. The reason these new wave of uber burst dps builds work is because they are making the most of the opportunities they get- a bit like a poptart but with much more dps to go along with a higher alpha.

Thats why being able to burst so hard is so effective, you only get so much time to fire at anything. If they react slow then 5 seconds is all you need. If they are quick to cover, then you're not going to get more than 5 seconds anyway. So which is it, do I not have 5 seconds to fire making it's dmg superior to anything else because it bursts higher than anything else possibly can in that time? Or do I have the 4 seconds I need to kill the Mech? Nothing says I have to overheat in 5 seconds by the way, it has a typical weapon group that takes 36 seconds over heat in the 2 Llas, LBX10 inside 450 or can use 3 ac2's for better dps or increased range that takes 18 seconds to overheat. It is only when you make the decision to go ape shit that you over heat any worse than a usual mech- and when you decide to you can be sure nothing is matching your output, and nothing is surviving you overheating from full(especially with 9x9.) It is much more devastating than a Jager popping out of cover because whether it gets 4 seconds or 10 seconds, it's going to get huge damage on target.

For all these reasons, in my opinion it is more conducive to Jager style play than even a Jager is in my opinion.

The UAC vs LBX question is an interesting one and I'm still debating between the 2. It is funny that the lbx10's unreliability to instakill a mech is a hanging point for you yet in the same breath dismiss the unreliability of the UAC5 firing at all. The LBX10 is heavier and takes more spots because it is a better weapon. Situationally its exponentially better. The only reason I've considered it is for an XL350 variant that personally I'd rather remove the MLAS for. Still if thats what you like, its what you like, Enjoy

Your concern for forum etiquette is noted. It is also unimportant to me and more importantly- not germane to the discussion.

Theory crafting also has its limits, which you ought to be able to acknowledge by now. You can't foresee the way things play out and have a horribly inaccurate account of how much time you spend doing what.

The 5 ac2 Jager is a shining example of this. So terrible under the lens of theory crafting that I couldn't get anyone to try it at all- despite good evidence of its effectiveness.

Theory crafting should take back seat to experimenting and results just like scientific theories are tossed aside when they don't align with reality. Never, ever, should it work the other way. I will not have a 1268 damage, 6 games in a row over 800 damage and say... Oh well my theory about it being bad is probably right and the results ought to be dismissed. Reality is the ultimate judge, not meandering often misguided or tangential criticisms that have no experience with the build nor an accurate idea of whats actually occurring in the game.

Not to say that it's useless, only that it is inferior in every way to actually experimenting.

 

Well I'm arguing the point. His questions about the LBX range and ammo was answered. Spitting 3 stacks of ammo out of a single LBX is something I have yet to accomplish, yet he insists its a problem.

Am I supposed to just grant it? Or can I, piece by piece, explain what is informing my preference. I listed 4 reasons(there are actually 5) they are grouped, and explained what was a legitimate concern and what was not. Very plainly. This is just an example, it's not claiming to be definitively correct to discuss the logic behind what I'm doing. It's not acceptable in normal discourse to dismiss a main point by repeating a dead ore mute point as he does in the post above this one.

Read his first point which is a reaction to a detailed list of reasons I include the LBX in the Laser group:

"1. Sure you can fire the LBX at any Range up to 1620. It's your playstyle and your decision to use that Pumpgun that way."

No point made here.

"I myself always try to make the most damage with this spreading weapon, so i only use it on sub200m on opened CTs, STs and Rears."

Just stating his preference, these is no reason to only use the LBX inside 200M if you have Ammo to spare. He's saying unless the target is inside 200M he won't increase his damage output by firing the LBX10. This doesn't make sense to begin with, but more importantly is once more, not a point.
Keep in mind that this is a response to my explanation of my logic- a normal response would include addressing how that logic is wrong or "ok I see." Repetitive statements of preference get no where.

"I don't think that 45 Bullets are plenty enough to fire it everytime at the Range of LLas. Sorry Playstyle different."
A restatement that has been addressed in the thread 3 times. He's fine to think what he wants, but what is he adding to the discourse by saying something so empty? How empty?

It would take 2 MINUTES of constant fire with the LBX 10 to run it out of ammo. For a moment, lets ignore that my build has 3 ac2's, 2 LLlas, and 2 MLas as back up. Let's also for a moment not consider how hot the build is which severely limits the amount of time you can be firing. IT WOULD STILL TAKE 2 MINUTES OF NONSTOP FIRING TO USE. It's a nearly impossible feat, and certainly not something he would continue to repeat with any testing or more than a surface analysis.


Whether my build is good or not hardly matters. There is no way discussing it in such a way leads anywhere because the premise he's making in his assertions on are baseless. I guess I'm just old fashioned and think if you logically discuss something with someone that your efforts would have some effect on the their responses.

Sera, Sera I guess. I'm not the first one to get drawn into endless ignored explanation with Blagg- something he's been banned for just recently and won't be the last. He does make me doubt the faith I have in logic though... lol.

 

I easily go through 3 tons of ammo in a single LBX, my firebrand build does so on a consistent basis. And that's picking my shots carefully and up-close-and-personal. No ammo to waste at 400m pair'd with the LLs. So I'd have to agree with Blagg on that one.

Explaining your reasoning is one thing, stating it as the one-and-only approach is entirely another. This is what you are doing, because no matter what someone suggests, not only do you disagree with every point, but you make it your duty to prove why you are right and they are wrong. It doesn't work like that. No one is bashing the idea or attacking you for your reasoning, only investigating what can be done with your build and stating our own opinions. Feedback doesn't have to align with your views or your own opinion. It also doesn't need to be heeded, but someone else reading this thread might like what others suggest.

again, as above, I run out of ammo consistently, but your build plays different than my high-alpha firebrand. Your build will hide and disengage because it has to cool down. Sure you can keep firing the LBX alone, but single LBX firing for 2 minutes is not scary... You're going to put down serious firepower on the first mech you see, then shoot at the rest with just an LBX. At that point you must hide, or pray you have backup while you cool down and are able to be scary again. Reminds me of the ERPPC boat: Scary as hell alpha, but it's a one-trick pony. Sure this build is not as extreme, but it's very similar.

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong? How is this build more effective than what Blagg suggests? His reasons can be called equally as "correct" as yours, it all depends on play-style and the situation.

No need to get personal man... you're the only one attacking people here... umad trounce? UMAD!?

 

You see it as no reason to spare 45 shots at ranged targets, for the reason to increase your damageoutput. With spreading Damage!? With Damageoutput falling down to Zero the more ranged the target is. So then tell me, why is it no reason to have an ERLLas for the (same!) reason to increase your damageoutput without Ammo.Wasting? I don`t dare to say the damageoutput would be higher, but the fact of firing a not ammowasting weapon IS a POINT. But telling me, my playstyle is "empty" is simply not reasonable, because you give me the same reason to waste LBX Ammo as i did with the ERLLas. Not logical for me. There is a reason why i repeat this point again and again, just to make you understand my point as well. But you just don't get it. You don`t want to.

Dude, i run 45shots on AC10s, LBX, even 42 AC20 Shots at much closer Range for maybe hundreds of practical games. It is practically VERY possible to run out 45 bullets, if you shoot at any target at sight. Don't try to tell us things, which is not correct. Or trying to make a fool out of me. This is not nice Mister. I never attacked you, only making some suggestions. But always do you react very aggressively, just like it is a fault to give you Reasons, which you experience in a different way.


You talk about your "Preference". I talk about my "Preference". You have your valid points. I have my reasons. If you have success with your Build, keep on using it. No Reason to stop. But i am getting bored, if you always reacts like "WTF, how dare you suggest me other builds, which are totally nonsense against my so much more superior one".

Don`t make false assumptions, Trounce. This is not right, what you just said. The Reason why i was banned, was because some dude here insulted me, and i dragged Michael into the topic, by saying it is usual that ppl here sometimes post theoretical builds and that he does it too. Michael was upset because of that single reason. So don´t put false belief into the world, ok?

Lets end this. If you think i just ignore your explanations, ok. Think what you think is correct. I tried to give you some input, but i always get the feeling, that you are just refusing any input. I haven`t read any single friendly word like "thx for the input, but i see things differently etc." to anybody replying to you here. Is there a reason for your aggressive attitude?


BTW - Recently i told someone that running an XL Engine in the Banshee has it`s weakness by losing STs, but the guy said, his experience told him differently. I accepted that. I even didn't mention this point in your build. Everyone should run the build he has most success or most fun. If you think, that I insulted you in any ways, i apologize. If you think, i am only talking empty BS, ok be it. I can talk to other people, who don`t reacts like this every time.

 

The reason for "aggressive" attitude, is that plain and dry logical discussion comes off as aggressive when read.

I can continue to counter point but it seems rather pointless.

The difference of course is I don't bother meandering about, I don't take an aside to say I respect an idea that I don't. But I'm far from the only one. For example:

SubjectSeven "The hardpoints are not all high (above cockpit level for Jager,) This is simply a fact and not up for debate.

Um, ok? But the hard points are high? Ok not up for debate. Got it. And I'm the unreasonable one?

Or Solahma "This is what you are doing, because no matter what someone suggests, not only do you disagree with every point, but you

Flatly untrue. I've agreed with various input and created alternatives based. So Blagg says try ER and drop a Llas. I say no and explain my reasoning, yet admit that I see the value in dropping Mls instead.


Or sometimes it's something not germane to the discussion yet "you make it your duty to prove why I'm wrong are right and they are right:
"I easily go through 3 tons of ammo in a single LBX, my firebrand build does so on a consistent basis. And that's picking my shots carefully and up-close-and-personal. No ammo to waste at 400m pair'd with the LLs. So I'd have to agree with Blagg on that one."
Say you run through 3 tons of Ammo in your FB consistently(I know better but whatevs.) As you point out they are different play styles. But more importantly, 3 tons of Ammo per gun is over ammo'd by most standards. Hoser for example has 2 tons for each ac2, 2 for the ac5, 3 for the UAC. 2 ac5/2ac2 on a jager holds 1 ton more. And this is for all out ballistic builds with no back up.

Yet here we are, as a MAJOR point of contention, discussing if the ammo implications of a weapon grouping should be of concern. Of course it shouldn't, the heat maybe... The ammo? Come on. Even in normal use 3 tons of ammo on a gun is hard to put away(AC20 aside)- even with a uac that I spray with on the Joser build. Much less in this discussion. Some how me dismissing this means I'm the one that won't listen?

Someone with less experience on a Jager and admittedly not enthusiastic about the Banshee says it can't play like a Jager. I say it plays like a Jager just fine and point out the minor differences while also pointing out the forgiving higher armor and ridiculously more burst. The response to this is to say the debate is closed on the subject because he likes to run XL 280s instead of XL 255. Can Xl255 Jagers now no longer play like Jagers? How does any of this address what I said? And Why am I wrong for pointing out that it doesn't? How is this not exactly what you are complaining about from me? In "his experience the hard points are low," therefore, "This is simply a fact and not up for debate." The fact that the hard points are relatively high on a banshee don't matter. Do you not see the hypocrisy of your criticism Solahma, considering where I'm coming from?

Read over what I'm responding to and tell me how it is just their expression of preference. How is Subject saying "Firing an LBX10 at 350 meters is an absurd viewpoint," not doing exactly what your saying I am? What if they are exposed, or they are a light, or that combining the Llas with your other ballistics creates an aiming problems as you try to lead for the AC2 or AC5 and the lasers can't hit while your doing it... or you just aren't worried about the ammo. Obviously there is varied scenarios here to provide different conclusions.


How is explaining my reasoning supposed to differ from "stating it as the one-and-only approach?" I don't flatly say this is the best build ever to be made. Less extremes builds like the one Falconium uses is a better all around Mech. I have granted questions about the UAC and other variations have merit that I'm considering- I don't flatly say I'm right about anything.

"So anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong? How is this build more effective than what Blagg suggests? His reasons can be called equally as "correct" as yours, it all depends on play-style and the situation."

Not at all, all I'm saying is that logical discussion should provide some effect on those who genuinely taking part. However, when a reason is given to change something because of X scenario, and I explain why X scenario is better suited because of Y reasoning. It doesn't mean him not agreeing with me is the reason he is wrong. It means my analysis of that statement revealed logical fallacies that I point out.

It's not because someone doesn't agree with me that they are wrong, its that logical structure inherently shows their explanation of their position is inaccurate.

Anyway, its whatever. I' m not here to ruffle feathers. I was a 2 time state champion debater, a response style that doesn't tend be taken well by ANYONE. It doesn't make it any less viable, but be aware that my perceived crassness is not about my own ego or opinion. It has structured, logical basis that is stated flatly because genuine logical arguments are correct on face value.

I love everyone. Cept Blagg. Guy posts 500 times a day and never has bothered to game with us- yet is obtuse enough to not understand why people aren't friendly about it.