3
Dimento Graven, on 04 May 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:
Unfortunately it's the majority of those nitwits who do NOTHING BUT cap that are the problem, that make capping a problem.
The game gives rewards based on the level of destruction meted out, and a mech that is cap'ing is not rewarded to any extent the same as 'mech that battles, because it has a significantly less amount of risk in doing it, especially on the larger maps. Those that go exclusively for the cap are doing it ONLY FOR the "win", artificially inflating their W/L ratio, and preventing their team from maximizing their battle based rewards.
The game gives rewards based on the level of destruction meted out, and a mech that is cap'ing is not rewarded to any extent the same as 'mech that battles, because it has a significantly less amount of risk in doing it, especially on the larger maps. Those that go exclusively for the cap are doing it ONLY FOR the "win", artificially inflating their W/L ratio, and preventing their team from maximizing their battle based rewards.
I'm going to both agree to agree and agree to disagree on this subject. I have mixed feelings about the carrot on a stick approach and right now my stance is that its a necessary evil. The gaming community needs to be led by the nose by such rewards to get them to perform objectives outside the norm. But I realize this isn't a problem with game design, but with the current generation of gamers in general. And I'm not suggesting you are one of these players, and I'm not pointing my finger at anyone who plays MWO, its every multiplayer team based game that has this issue. But its not something I can change.
Quote
Again, there's no real logic to cap'ing in Assault in the first place, OTHER THAN having a mechanism where by if a 'mech client goes 'ape do-do' and you've got a DC'd mech dry humping a mountain, or have some jerk who found a hiding spot and shut down and now wants everyone to wait the remaining 8 minutes for the game to end, a way out.
Placing a single cap point equidistant to the drop points still gives that way out.
Placing a single cap point equidistant to the drop points still gives that way out.
I think a single base is too simple. It turns the game into a snipe fest if there is no cover, or a brawl fest if there is cover while in the base. Right now with two bases, the battle happens inbetween with multiple avenues of approach. And you have to make decisions at the start that all have consequences. Do you stay back but prevent yourself from getting a cap win, or do you press forward and possibly expose yourself?
I'm actually surprised not many try the total defense. I did a few times in Closed Beta just for kicks and giggles and the results were sporadic, but still pulled off a win more times than not (times we didn't were against 5+man premades when they allowed it back then). I say sporadic because you never know how your opponent will react. But its usually in your favor.
The hard part of course is getting the team to cooperate outside a 8man. But it can happen. But here's the gist of how it works. Your team is already in a dug in position. The enemy is already committed and do not realize the crapstorm they are walking into. You focus fire anything that comes in. Usually their lights first as they try to cap or ping the base and walk into a trap. Then you just mop up the rest of their slow movers.
I dare say its the most effective tactic a PUG can do. Even against premade 4mans. But I'm getting off topic there.
Quote
Devs put out a lot of stats and have done a lot more significant things based on much smaller percentages than that (ala: only 10% of pug stomps were happening with premades of more than 4 people, yet they totally f'd up match maker to limit pre-mades to no more than 4, or a hard 8, didn't they?) so quoting their statistics (which I don't neccessarily believe are ALWAYS presented to the player community accurately) and saying "it's ok as is because it's a small number" won't wash here.
By my own account I have seen less caps in Assault than what many people make there out to be. So while I'll agree that the numbers given aren't entirely accurate. I would dare say its lower than they claim. Whether I trust PGI or not is irrelevent here. I trust my own experiences.
Quote
The single base in the middle circumvents that problem nicely, UNLESS they happen to 'bunch up' on the cap point, in which case your superior tactis will be neccessary to pull them off. After all, the cap point still provides you and your team the avenue of practicing "capping tactics" if you want, it's just not going to be such an overwhelmingly finale tactic, especially on the larger maps.
I still think a single base idea is just a simplified conquest mode and we'll not ever see it. Its not realistic to argue for something that likely will never see the light of day.
Quote
Heck, you could even improve the quality of neccessary tactics needed by making the cap point a random spot each drop so that the point has to be located by scouts.
Now this is an interesting idea. I would use the bigger maps coming out to accommodate this and up it to at least 3 points scattered throughout the map. Would work great with 12v12 in the future too. Ties in well with the lore of BattleTech too, could be like a search for lostech and the like. Perhaps once you find one of the points and start capping it, it becomes visible to the other team so now you have to defend your prize. Capture 2 out of 3 and you win. Get more points for all 3. And capping takes a bit longer than a base cap to give the opponent time to react.
I like it because the scouts have to go look for them. But they don't want to immediately start capping if they feel they can't defend it themselves and don't want to quite give away its location yet. These little strategies and decisions are what I think this game needs more of.
Quote
It's not been proven that less than 12% end in cap, it's only been stated. To "prove" it, we'd need access to the actual statistics, not to have it propagandized by PGI, beyond that again, the cap'ers get to have their way, but the majority of us just have to "deal with it", being held hostage to lazy minority, dumbing down the gaming experience.
As far as what PGI says, and what actually comes to pass, I only believe what I actually see when its delivered. PGI has back peddaled, 'reversed course', and otherwise changed their mind so often on what they've said, promised, and otherwise communicated that I've got a bad case of propoganda whiplash.
If the 10% or less of pugs that were getting stomped can influence PGI to bastardize grouping to the point they have, surely 12% of cap'ed games should influence a change in/addition of the game modes.
As far as what PGI says, and what actually comes to pass, I only believe what I actually see when its delivered. PGI has back peddaled, 'reversed course', and otherwise changed their mind so often on what they've said, promised, and otherwise communicated that I've got a bad case of propoganda whiplash.
If the 10% or less of pugs that were getting stomped can influence PGI to bastardize grouping to the point they have, surely 12% of cap'ed games should influence a change in/addition of the game modes.
I have no doubt that PGI is truthful in the things they say. With being said, you have to understand that what they said on a subject last is what is true, not what is before. I know that sounds very convenient for them and it makes it sound like they can simply break promises. But you have to take things as they are and not promises. Businesses don't deal in promises. Promises have no value. Guarantees and warranties do, but we weren't given guarantees on things like coolants or 3rd person (both things I dislike).
Now there is a difference when it comes to straight up numbers. It would not be in their best interest to outright lie to the customer, thats a horrible business practice as we all know. So i doubt when they quote a 12% (or whatever the number is), that it is actually 30%+. They have no reason to lie about that. There's no motive behind a lie like that. So even if you don't trust them, you don't have much of a reason to think they are lying about this. Information given by a criminal isn't all false simply because they can't be trusted. You always have to look at the circumstance and in this case, I think they are telling the truth simply because they have no reason to lie about the statistic.
Quote
As far as the personal insults go, I give when I receive. Insult me, and I'll be happy to insult you back. I realize that you probably don't 'notice' the insults from those that are posting in agreement with your POV, but they are there, and they've been just as vehement in telling me how "I" should play as I've been about getting either a new game mode, or the Assault game mode updated.
I understand and I am the same way, come at me and I'll return it. Though I neither personally insulted you nor did I tell you how to play. But I think you've realized that now and all is water under the bridge. And I will say this, they are pieces of crap for trying to tell you how to play. I guess I could have come out and said it, but the focus of the topic was on base capping, not on community etiquette. Though I did use it to my advantage for my own argument. But hey, thats the nature of the game in debating
You've been a good opponent thus far and mostly sporting especially towards the end. Its good that we see eye to eye, even if we don't agree. Good luck to you.
