Jump to content

Nox And Suk Ii


10 replies to this topic

#1 Strykewolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 394 posts
  • LocationRogue River, Oregon

Posted 13 February 2015 - 06:44 PM

Are under heavy attack and, appear to be lost unless we get some major help.

Looks like ms went back to the clans.

#2 Tumbling Dice

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts
  • LocationThe Outer Limits of the Twilight Zone

Posted 13 February 2015 - 09:23 PM

View PostStrykewolf, on 13 February 2015 - 06:44 PM, said:

Are under heavy attack and, appear to be lost unless we get some major help.

Looks like ms went back to the clans.

Yes, MS is Gummi Bear again. But you will not be able to save our planets as long as there are among our leaders those who think they can launch a successful assault of a clan held world. We do not have the numbers for such an assault and it completely obliterates our chances of holding what we own. Our leaders need to rethink and realize we waste entire attack cycles trying to gain that which we simply do not have the numbers to gain. We need to keep what we have until they can show us their recruiting skills because their battle planning skills are severely short sighted.

#3 Shredhead

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,939 posts
  • LocationLeipzig, Germany

Posted 13 February 2015 - 10:47 PM

View PostWolfiac, on 13 February 2015 - 09:23 PM, said:

Yes, MS is Gummi Bear again. But you will not be able to save our planets as long as there are among our leaders those who think they can launch a successful assault of a clan held world. We do not have the numbers for such an assault and it completely obliterates our chances of holding what we own. Our leaders need to rethink and realize we waste entire attack cycles trying to gain that which we simply do not have the numbers to gain. We need to keep what we have until they can show us their recruiting skills because their battle planning skills are severely short sighted.

You're actually wrong. Going on the offense is what keeps planets, as the opposition has to dedicate their forces to defend. The problem with Suk was, that the planet was already at 93% 2 hours before cease fire. You want to keep planets? Keep the percentage low during the calmer times and start attacking in the last hours before cease fire. If nobody really cares for the planet earlier, there's absolutely nothing we can do to take it back.

Edited by Shredhead, 13 February 2015 - 10:48 PM.


#4 Tom Sawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 1,384 posts
  • LocationOn your 6

Posted 14 February 2015 - 05:39 AM

The problem is the game mechanics and the numbers.

You can drop and win every battle but when you have 3 or 4 times the number of opposing players ghost dropping or cheese rushing you loose the war.

OLD continues the fight. We are NOT giving up. But beta or not this current system of CW is a farce and PGI needs to seriously step up.

#5 Jakob Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,286 posts

Posted 14 February 2015 - 06:20 AM

View PostTom Sawyer, on 14 February 2015 - 05:39 AM, said:

The problem is the game mechanics and the numbers.

You can drop and win every battle but when you have 3 or 4 times the number of opposing players ghost dropping or cheese rushing you loose the war.

OLD continues the fight. We are NOT giving up. But beta or not this current system of CW is a farce and PGI needs to seriously step up.


So, you are volunteering to be the first player to have your friends and Unit ripped apart and distributed as PGI determines they need to be to ensure all Factions have equal numbers of players, without chance for ever changing where you are slotted? Because that is the only way this can ever be different. As long as players have the control as to the side they fight for and who they fight with, you will always have unbalanced numbers, and the same situation.

In effect, you are advocating that CW is a 'farce' as long as it promotes players forming Units and playing with their friends. Are you really ready to give up yours?

#6 Kageru Ikazuchi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 1,190 posts

Posted 14 February 2015 - 07:17 AM

Concur w/ Shredhead ... FRR needs to go on the offensive, and dictate the terms of the engagements, rather than counter-attacking or defending against the invaders.

#7 Ilithi Dragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 475 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWazan

Posted 14 February 2015 - 09:33 AM

The FWLM learned long ago, back when we were suffering the onslaught of Davion early in CW, that defending alone is a losing scenario.

If you want to successfully hold territory, let alone regain territory, you need to counter-attack. Hit the Clanners back, start taking worlds. Let the SLDF volunteers hold your worlds, and focus everything you have on the offense. You'll pull Clanner forces off the attack to shift to defense, and that alone will lighten the burden on your defense worlds, as well as creating the opportunity to gain worlds. Even if you only end up trading planets, you've still broken even and accomplished the same thing as a successful defense.

#8 Divine Retribution

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 648 posts
  • LocationArizona

Posted 14 February 2015 - 05:05 PM

View PostJakob Knight, on 14 February 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:


So, you are volunteering to be the first player to have your friends and Unit ripped apart and distributed as PGI determines they need to be to ensure all Factions have equal numbers of players, without chance for ever changing where you are slotted? Because that is the only way this can ever be different. As long as players have the control as to the side they fight for and who they fight with, you will always have unbalanced numbers, and the same situation.

In effect, you are advocating that CW is a 'farce' as long as it promotes players forming Units and playing with their friends. Are you really ready to give up yours?


Where's my "Jumping to Conclusions mat"...


There are other possible ways to give smaller factions a chance. Find a way to discourage derp rushes, force attackers to have a kill lead at the end of the match in addition to taking out Omega (similar to the counterattack option), altering queue times and number of planetary zone dynamically based upon faction populations; came up with those ideas in about 2 minutes.

No one is advocating the government ripping families apart to control population density PGI forcing players wherever they want to manage player density. No one will be taken from their MWO home in the middle of the night, no MWO babies shall be ripped from their mother's arms. I think that response is at a level appropriate to your response. Mmm mmm mm, that's some tasty hyperbole.

As for the other posts, yes the FRR should always be attacking somewhere.

Edited by Divine Retribution, 14 February 2015 - 05:18 PM.


#9 MingTheMerciless

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 200 posts
  • LocationSomewhere between here and Sian

Posted 14 February 2015 - 06:13 PM

Been dropping in support of FRR most of tonight. We held off the clanners for a bit on Nox but they keep on coming. However, we had an excellent victory: no shared Voice comms but decent fire discipline and simple orders that everyone followed.

FRR: you're not alone; many in House Liao are with you however many are also torn on reclaiming the worlds and systems seized by the Davions.


http://imgur.com/RsZ6zCm


Posted Image

Edited by WaiMingLee, 14 February 2015 - 06:16 PM.


#10 Tom Sawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 1,384 posts
  • LocationOn your 6

Posted 15 February 2015 - 05:19 AM

View PostJakob Knight, on 14 February 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:


So, you are volunteering to be the first player to have your friends and Unit ripped apart and distributed as PGI determines they need to be to ensure all Factions have equal numbers of players, without chance for ever changing where you are slotted? Because that is the only way this can ever be different. As long as players have the control as to the side they fight for and who they fight with, you will always have unbalanced numbers, and the same situation.

In effect, you are advocating that CW is a 'farce' as long as it promotes players forming Units and playing with their friends. Are you really ready to give up yours?


I am advocating that PGI step up and revamp CW. How about lobbies so you can see who is queing up on a planet? Instead of "breaking apart" dedicated groups and searching in vain for new "friends" to add or waiting for that last pug to join your group as you wait for 15 minutes you instead see who is queing. You can form temporary 12 mans and drop instantly by asking a couple people in the lobby. Or you can run to the forums and post "dropping on X and hope someone is reading instead of playing.

Ghost drops need attention. I can accept there will be more players on Team A vs B. But if this mechanic can be abused to the point where the last 15 minutes of CW before ceasefire is 4 groups vs 2 and those 4 are just gaming the system to get a ghost for a win then that needs a fix.

I as others feel CW is geared to dedicated teams willing to talk and work together. It can be a cold splash of water for a pug to experience. But those that enjoy team play will come back for more, find a good group, improve and prosper.

PGI has been trying to improve and make this game even more fun. Fixing CW will not only gain more players, it will bring more cash to the PGI coffers.

#11 razor31

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 31 posts

Posted 15 February 2015 - 05:31 AM

Don't worry the 228th IBR has come to rescue the FRR forces. With in the coming week I'm sure the FRR will gain some ground due to our forces.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users