179 replies to this topic

[Atheus]

Neverfar, on 06 May 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

I could actually work with and be fine with a delayed capture mechanic, or one preventing multiple-Mech base rushes too early on.

The proposal of "only a team already winning in kills should be able to cap" is inherently silly to me. That means that there's absolutely no recourse to a failure-cascading team but to grab the knees and take it.

You're sort of tinting it a different color when you put it like that. You aren't automatically winning if you kill 4 of the opposing team. If they've killed 6 on your team, I'd say you're pretty much losing. It's more like "you don't get to win unless you've made some progress killing off the enemy team". There's nothing unreasonable about that to me.

Having one team mop the floor with 7 of the enemies, suffer no casualties, then lose to a base cap seems quite unreasonable, by contrast. Perhaps it seems unlikely, but so does a match where nobody dies.

JuiceKeeper, on 06 May 2013 - 01:52 AM, said:

isnt this game is supposed to be sim little bit? then u need tactics right? going allways to middle to meet enemy in middle to bash each other allways same way i dont find interesting. Cap is one of MAIN OBJECTIVE also with killing enemy mechs. So if u would start to thing in match where to position ur self and have little bit of situational awareness u wouldnt get outcapped by for people. Simple like that. If u ignore part of mission objective get ready to be on losing side. It can be frustrating to kill 6 mechs in middle then got capped by 2 other which went around. But if nobody from ur team saw them and nobody was even thinking u can get capped from side then problem is on ur side not on opfor for doing what are they supposed to do.

I'll probably regret replying to this, but if your description of assault is lobbing yourself into the middle of the map and shooting "always the same way", it doesn't sound like you're not really making an effort at having a relationship with tactics. If the only "tactical" thing you can imagine involves base capping, you should think a little harder about it.

Edited by Atheus, 06 May 2013 - 01:59 AM.

[ShinVector]

Proper base defense when a capture attempt is detected early is another skill.

[Atheus]

Neverfar, on 06 May 2013 - 01:58 AM, said:

There's something in strategic warfare called "overextension".

There should be an opportunity, however small, for a losing team to turn things around, especially if the currently-winning enemy team is so overcommitted with low-mobility boats all in tight formation in one place at a time. I have very rarely seem a base cap turn a match around when matches are going this bad, and for good reason: usually at least one Mech has a chance of getting there and stopping the capper(me).

And if the team is so super-committed in an ultra-tight "all damage nothing else" super formation of boating, I consider it a service to the game if I can pull off a win and make maybe one of them consider bringing a more mobile Mech next time.

Why do you care what sort of mech they bring? Is there something wrong with piloting an assault, or a team whose more mobile mechs died in combat? You're making a lot of weird assumptions about this hypothetical team. Why are you so obsessed with being able to win when your team clearly couldn't cut it? If they can't even kill half of the enemy team, why do they deserve to win?

[Atheus]

Neverfar, on 06 May 2013 - 02:10 AM, said:

I care as much about what mech they bring as you do. I do care, because if everyone is bringing the one or two blandly "optimal" Mech for one specific purpose, and everyone who doesn't is a liability, that makes for a very poor game where there are many choices but so many of them are "failure traps".

Cute that you call me obsessed. I can ask the same question if I turn it around: why are you so obsessed with the possibility that someone might cap your base instead of going out to die for you in the middle of the map? You are apparently so obsessed that you created a bias-loaded poll that is designed to marginalize people you disagree with.

I never stooped to the loaded poll tactic. So I think you're more obsessed, actually.

I also turn the last question around. Just because you are rigid and narrowly focused on your super-optimal builds, what makes you think you're entitled to an easy win where we just march up to you and die instead of, you know, making you pay the price for lacking speed or reactive thinking?

Tell me how you would poll this topic without bias and collecting all the same data, since it's such a problem for you?

You're making a serious straw-man here, too. I do have a few ppc snipers, but I get bored playing the same mech every match, so I mix it up quite a bit for the sake of variety. I don't really have anything against PPC's or boats, but they certainly blow away any LRM based mech at the moment, but super-optimal builds? lol. I don't build mechs with SHS, or inappropriately applied FF armor, or anything like that, but to act like I've got some sort of Excalibur mech I'm using to mow down an inferior opposition is just your imagination gone wild.

Regarding speed and reactive thinking, more wild imagination on your part. Most of my mechs are pretty darn quick, not because I want to be able to RTB in a flash, but because speed is vital to survival and offense on the battlefield. Most of the time I get capped out it's because I just don't feel like going back to the base to deal with some jerk (yeah I think base-rushers are jerks) who doesn't play by my rules, just like I don't play by his. I don't particularly feel like I lost when someone cap rushes me, regardless of what the game says, especially when the guy's whole team is dead by the time he finishes capping. Maybe I could make it back in time, maybe not, but either way I just don't feel like doing it. Just because I don't feel defeated doesn't mean it's not annoying that the game does think I was defeated, though. The enemy team that wins a salvage bonus of 0 because it didn't kill any mechs, the light who cap rushed and did 0 damage — all look pretty pathetic to me.

Is it so inconceivable to you to think that the team that performed better as a team wins? A team that gets slaughtered like cattle except for that one guy who ran off by himself to stand in the most sensitive spot probably shouldn't win? You act like I'm talking crazy here.

Edited by Atheus, 06 May 2013 - 02:37 AM.

[Atheus]

Neverfar, on 06 May 2013 - 02:41 AM, said:

I'm ignoring all but the first line of what you said because it was going the way of another reactive insult-fest. I think it'll be good enough to rebuke the first line.

I would collect data on a poll without loading the questions and especially loading the answers. "Do you prefer skill based gameplay or speed based gameplay" was the most glaring example, but there were others strewn throughout.

So that is the problem, right there. I rest my case.

On a final note, I do apologise with sincerity if I missed something of value below that line I called you out on. I am skeptical, considering your other responses to me, if you had much else to say but the usual rage I get directed toward me.

I see, so you would avoid loaded questions and poll bias by not loading the questions or being biased. Thanks for the clarification. Second time now you're "taking the high road" instead of responding. I guess we'll leave it at nolo contendere for you, then.

[JuiceKeeper]

Atheus, on 06 May 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

I'll probably regret replying to this, but if your description of assault is lobbing yourself into the middle of the map and shooting "always the same way", it doesn't sound like you're not really making an effort at having a relationship with tactics. If the only "tactical" thing you can imagine involves base capping, you should think a little harder about it.

seems like u didnt understand anything what i was trying to tell there. Firstly its part of mission objective same as capture vip, escort convoy etc that means part of winning that particular mission is to escort convoy, save/kill vip whatever it really doesnt matter what skin u put on that idea. meaning allways stay same. If u on escorting convoy and head the other side becouse u saw enemy there with ur whole team and leave convoy for slaughter dont expect to win that game.
And this is exactly whats happening with assault mode. Everybody is ignoring 50% of mission objectives. When u starting game and u know its big map u definitly should start to use that thing on upper part of body.... lets see what might happen on big map - assault...... u quess that they probably have at least one scout or 2 that means if u dont have scouts on ur team u cant move too much from base becouse they can run around and cap u before u can get back(if u do have scouts order them to find enemy units so u can start to predict their movement, ofc u have to have for this actualy lights which wanna play scout role and not assault role with er ppc and standing next to assaults and heavies).
If u dont have any scouts then u should start to think where to position my self so i can see incoming mechs but i am also close enough to base so i can head back if its needed. If they dont have any lights which is even more funnier. And u get base cap by slow marching assault into ur base whos going around while u concetrate on other 6 his teammates which actualy might be just buying time for those flankers. And u dont think about that there are some mechs missing and that they might go around U definitly deserve to get base capped.
Dont take me wrong i would love to see here just pure deathmatch without any other objectives except destroying opposing team. Just for random bashing. But we dont have this and till people will dont start to think about what they are doing, they will be allways complaining on those ones who exploit lack of this effort.

[Atheus]

Neverfar, on 06 May 2013 - 02:53 AM, said:

If you read your own poll questions and offered answers and not see the loaded "my way of playing is fun and your way lacks skill and is abusive and not fun" from the very words you chose, I can not help you.

Clearly, though I suspect the "If" part of this statement is just your self-excusing noise, a lot like your "I'm that guy" thread.

JuiceKeeper, on 06 May 2013 - 02:59 AM, said:

seems like u didnt understand anything what i was trying to tell there. Firstly its part of mission objective same as capture vip, escort convoy etc that means part of winning that particular mission is to escort convoy, save/kill vip whatever it really doesnt matter what skin u put on that idea. meaning allways stay same. If u on escorting convoy and head the other side becouse u saw enemy there with ur whole team and leave convoy for slaughter dont expect to win that game.
And this is exactly whats happening with assault mode. Everybody is ignoring 50% of mission objectives. When u starting game and u know its big map u definitly should start to use that thing on upper part of body.... lets see what might happen on big map - assault...... u quess that they probably have at least one scout or 2 that means if u dont have scouts on ur team u cant move too much from base becouse they can run around and cap u before u can get back(if u do have scouts order them to find enemy units so u can start to predict their movement, ofc u have to have for this actualy lights which wanna play scout role and not assault role with er ppc and standing next to assaults and heavies).
If u dont have any scouts then u should start to think where to position my self so i can see incoming mechs but i am also close enough to base so i can head back if its needed. If they dont have any lights which is even more funnier. And u get base cap by slow marching assault into ur base whos going around while u concetrate on other 6 his teammates which actualy might be just buying time for those flankers. And u dont think about that there are some mechs missing and that they might go around U definitly deserve to get base capped.
Dont take me wrong i would love to see here just pure deathmatch without any other objectives except destroying opposing team. Just for random bashing. But we dont have this and till people will dont start to think about what they are doing, they will be allways complaining on those ones who exploit lack of this effort.

Fair enough, however there is no game mode for the players who basically want TDM, so they'll just make do with what we've got, make their opinion known, and hope for the best. You can get a sense for that population by the numbers who are dissatisfied with early cap-out matches.

[Alucard291]

I love this game's community...

People are buttwhacked about having to turn around and walk back to base to scare off a lonely light.

This game is so fracking boring as is it is anyway. 5km^2 maps No real strategy, tiny teams, no real objectives except ctf... (And ppl crai rivers about ctf)

I mean you lot are complaining about someone using a light to do what a light should do - disrupt. So I agree lets all buy an assault each and just walk at each other - is that what you want? Because that's pretty much what it is already.

Anyway this game's dire. And if it didn't have a half dead franchise to prop it up it would already be dead.

Atheus, on 06 May 2013 - 03:18 AM, said:

Clearly, though I suspect the "If" part of this statement is just your self-excusing noise, a lot like your "I'm that guy" thread.

You asked Leading questions - you gave terrible answers as options to those questions and now you're squirming with excuses and random abuse. Well done

You're the quintessential example of this game's sterling community of ******** children.

Edited by Alucard291, 06 May 2013 - 04:37 AM.

[Vellinious]

Atheus, on 05 May 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

Whether or not he intends to fully cap the base, the whole tactic is only effective because the enemy has to assume that he's there to fully cap it out — and needless to say, that's exactly what usually what happens when a team decides to "call the bluff" and not send anyone back to defend. What I am seeing in this poll, though, is that generally speaking, capping out a base early in a match will undoubtedly leave at least some players from both teams very dissatisfied with the match.

This is not healthy for a game — it is one thing to be frustrated about being outplayed and defeated head-on. It's entirely another to feel your presence was pretty much circumvented in a way you could not reasonably contest. It will leave you with negative feelings toward the other players, and negative feelings toward the game.

Any "Defend the base" concept is just unrealistic in a map where the halfway point is literally 2.5 km away from the bases (~2 minutes of walking at 70 km/h). Both teams can not defend their base on such a map while also attacking the enemy forces without dividing up in a rather suicidal manner, just as lights can't both attack the enemy base and defend their own base. It's no secret that most base rushers who admonish you for not defending your base had no base defense on their side either.

My main suggestion is that playing a game should always be fun — win or lose. That is clearly not the case, here.

Actually, defending the base on some of these maps, is quite easy. Ya just stay there...or stay within range of it. Scouts should go run about, and do their job, but the big guns should stay within a defensible range. It will allow you to better dictate the terms of the engagement, instead of allowing the opposing team to do it.

This game is more than just running full on into each other, and blasting each other to bits. Tactics and strategy will play a role...as in, the team that has the better one is going to win more often than they lose. Don't like jump snipers? Make them engage you in an area that takes their advantage away. Don't like base cappers? Most of them are going to be lights...so, make it painful.

I've always thought that if people put as much energy into a workable strategy as they do b*tching about it on the forums, they'd probably be more successful in the game.

[Arete]

The only problem with the assault game mode is when a team decides not to try to win, but not to lose. This means the whole team ONLY goes for base defense, with no offensive actions attempted.

I'd suggest placing four mini caps on the map, with very fast cap times. If you manage to cap the enemy base, you win, but if the timer runs out the team that holds the most mini-caps in the end wins (if equal mini-caps, most kills wins). This would ensure that there were some incentive to move out of the base instead of just setting up a defense at base.

[Cham King]

"I'm an assualt mech and I don't like to lose"

-This thread

[Zerberus]

Seriously, I can't wait for the oceans of tears and qq when CW starts up.

Yes, right now we can only grind for c-bills.

However, we can also start working on tricks and tactics for each map, and many of us do.

Those of us that are trying to win without whining every second match about how this is not "hulk smash robots" /TDM will have a MASSIVE advantage when CW comes.

"What advantage?" you ask. "THew advantage of being fast and a ******* troll?"

No. The advantage of already knowing the map, knowing the choke and ambush points, and nowing when to go where to guarantee a win. IC CW, if I can win a match w/o firing a shot and get rewarded for it with a whole ülanet and Faction bonus X, then you can bet your 100 ton, 20km/h *** that I will do exactly that, in an Atlas if I have to.

[Curccu]

You should change "Accomplishing victory through superior movements speed" to "Accomplishing victory through superior tactics"

You are starting from your own base takes you zero seconds to get there. So you leave it, don't bother to scout where enemy is and/or what is it doing.

[Atheus]

Alucard291, on 06 May 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

I love this game's community...

People are buttwhacked about having to turn around and walk back to base to scare off a lonely light.

This game is so fracking boring as is it is anyway. 5km^2 maps No real strategy, tiny teams, no real objectives except ctf... (And ppl crai rivers about ctf)

I mean you lot are complaining about someone using a light to do what a light should do - disrupt. So I agree lets all buy an assault each and just walk at each other - is that what you want? Because that's pretty much what it is already.

Anyway this game's dire. And if it didn't have a half dead franchise to prop it up it would already be dead.


You asked Leading questions - you gave terrible answers as options to those questions and now you're squirming with excuses and random abuse. Well done

You're the quintessential example of this game's sterling community of ******** children.

Squirming with excuses? Funny! Go ahead and rewrite the questions if you feel you can do better. You think you'll get different results?

So according to you the game is boring, but the players who don't like doing boring things like hiking 2km back to their base, then another 2km back to the front lines (usually just in time to see the end of the match) are unreasonable and childish? Well that's interesting. Could it be that it's actually just annoying as hell having to do this tedious, nearly worthless task, and the players who dislike it are justifiably frustrated? When people drop in for a good brawl, but wind up being kited around by a trolling light instead, is it shocking to you that they are annoyed? The world must be full of surprises for you, if so.

Vellinious, on 06 May 2013 - 04:42 AM, said:

Actually, defending the base on some of these maps, is quite easy. Ya just stay there...or stay within range of it. Scouts should go run about, and do their job, but the big guns should stay within a defensible range. It will allow you to better dictate the terms of the engagement, instead of allowing the opposing team to do it.

This game is more than just running full on into each other, and blasting each other to bits. Tactics and strategy will play a role...as in, the team that has the better one is going to win more often than they lose. Don't like jump snipers? Make them engage you in an area that takes their advantage away. Don't like base cappers? Most of them are going to be lights...so, make it painful.

I've always thought that if people put as much energy into a workable strategy as they do b*tching about it on the forums, they'd probably be more successful in the game.

This has been covered quite a few times. Engagements on large maps happen > 2km from the base for both teams. If neither team is willing to extend that far, they had better be packing plenty of ERPPC's and maybe a couple sandwiches because you're going to be doing a lot of waiting around.

[VonRunnegen]

wow, impressively biased poll. Winning by cap != winning by superior movement speed. I've won by cap in my fatlas before as last member on my team.

Honestly the assumption seems to be that we must all waddle to the middle and then only try to move back to defend when we hear that 'being capped' warning message. And sure, by then its too late. But thats where scouting fits in - yes, in your Stalker you rely on faster team mates to fulfil this role. But that is as it should be. Every mech has weaknesses and slowness is the primary one for the bigger boys. In a meta where it seems everyone goes for the most PPCs/Gauss possible its a good thing to have the loss to cap mechanism, to remind people that there is more to the game. Sure, its frustrating to simply be too far away but when it happens its your fault. You lose without dying but its still because of a mistake you as a team made.

I don't really enjoy winning by cap without seeing combat, it happens very occasionally. But neither do I enjoy winning by shooting a totally hapless ***** who is LRMing me from 100m. Which happens much more often. If the other team are poor players the game will not be fun, which ever way you win.

[Atheus]

Cham King, on 06 May 2013 - 04:52 AM, said:

"I'm an assualt mech and I don't like to lose"

-This thread

That's deep. You fit right in with the rest who try to cast me as a die-hard, brain-dead and tactically deficient assault PPC jump sniper with a tiny engine.

Curccu, on 06 May 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

You should change "Accomplishing victory through superior movements speed" to "Accomplishing victory through superior tactics"

You are starting from your own base takes you zero seconds to get there. So you leave it, don't bother to scout where enemy is and/or what is it doing.

It's superior tactics, huh? Are you sure it's not just stepping on the enemy cap because it's the easiest and lowest risk thing a light can do short of shutting down on the edge of the map somewhere? I joke, but I recognize that base rushing or base tapping is "tactical", however so is moving in formation, setting up a firing line, claiming high ground or spotting for an LRM boat. I honestly don't mind changing the question, but "superior tactics" is a pretty broad net when you're really just talking about base capping vs. victory through combat.

VonRunnegen, on 06 May 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

wow, impressively biased poll. Winning by cap != winning by superior movement speed. I've won by cap in my fatlas before as last member on my team.

Honestly the assumption seems to be that we must all waddle to the middle and then only try to move back to defend when we hear that 'being capped' warning message. And sure, by then its too late. But thats where scouting fits in - yes, in your Stalker you rely on faster team mates to fulfil this role. But that is as it should be. Every mech has weaknesses and slowness is the primary one for the bigger boys. In a meta where it seems everyone goes for the most PPCs/Gauss possible its a good thing to have the loss to cap mechanism, to remind people that there is more to the game. Sure, its frustrating to simply be too far away but when it happens its your fault. You lose without dying but its still because of a mistake you as a team made.

I don't really enjoy winning by cap without seeing combat, it happens very occasionally. But neither do I enjoy winning by shooting a totally hapless ***** who is LRMing me from 100m. Which happens much more often. If the other team are poor players the game will not be fun, which ever way you win.

I didn't say that winning by cap == winning by movement speed, either. It certainly is in the case of a cap rush, though. I should hope that if you're parking your Atlas on the cap your team is either dead, or you're there with your remaining team. When that's the case, though - and your enemy can't stop you because you've pummeled them into submission or retreat rather than just stole their base before they could catch you, that's not "winning through movement speed", that's winning through combat skill.

[Vellinious]

Atheus, on 06 May 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

Squirming with excuses? Funny! Go ahead and rewrite the questions if you feel you can do better. You think you'll get different results?

So according to you the game is boring, but the players who don't like doing boring things like hiking 2km back to their base, then another 2km back to the front lines (usually just in time to see the end of the match) are unreasonable and childish? Well that's interesting. Could it be that it's actually just annoying as hell having to do this tedious, nearly worthless task, and the players who dislike it are justifiably frustrated? When people drop in for a good brawl, but wind up being kited around by a trolling light instead, is it shocking to you that they are annoyed? The world must be full of surprises for you, if so.


This has been covered quite a few times. Engagements on large maps happen > 2km from the base for both teams. If neither team is willing to extend that far, they had better be packing plenty of ERPPC's and maybe a couple sandwiches because you're going to be doing a lot of waiting around.

And the problem with that is....what? My point is, running head long to the middle part of the map is about the WORST tactic I have ever encountered. If that's the game you want to play, plan on losing a lot....

[Alucard291]

Atheus, on 06 May 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

Squirming with excuses? Funny! Go ahead and rewrite the questions if you feel you can do better. You think you'll get different results?

So according to you the game is boring, but the players who don't like doing boring things like hiking 2km back to their base, then another 2km back to the front lines (usually just in time to see the end of the match) are unreasonable and childish? Well that's interesting. Could it be that it's actually just annoying as hell having to do this tedious, nearly worthless task, and the players who dislike it are justifiably frustrated? When people drop in for a good brawl, but wind up being kited around by a trolling light instead, is it shocking to you that they are annoyed? The world must be full of surprises for you, if so.


This has been covered quite a few times. Engagements on large maps happen > 2km from the base for both teams. If neither team is willing to extend that far, they had better be packing plenty of ERPPC's and maybe a couple sandwiches because you're going to be doing a lot of waiting around.

No no no my friend you misunderstand.

I find this game boring - thus I uninstalled it. Then a bit later a little bird told me that this game's forums are made of rivers of tears. I couldn't resist to come in and laugh. Ergo I'm here laughing at you - squirming with excuses as you are.

And I don't care about the results. The % of the population that is ever on the forums is ALWAYS tiny. In another notable lobby shooter (much better than this one - at least it has a lobby! rofl) the forums are full of people who fly in fully realistic mode (yes its a plane game) but in game they don't make up 1% of the population (the rest flies the arcadest mode possible)

So yeah using forums to gauge community's response is stupid.

Do keep up the waves of tears though.

Edited by Alucard291, 06 May 2013 - 05:40 AM.

[Atheus]

Vellinious, on 06 May 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

And the problem with that is....what? My point is, running head long to the middle part of the map is about the WORST tactic I have ever encountered. If that's the game you want to play, plan on losing a lot....

So since I'm not a cap rusher and I dislike cap rushers, I must be "running head long into the middle part of the map"? I see. I'll chalk you up as another "randomly casts me as a meathead ppc jump sniping assault tactically challenged, small engine fotm clubber".

Alucard291, on 06 May 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

No no no my friend you misunderstand.

I find this game boring - thus I uninstalled it. Then a bit later a little bird told me that this game's forums are made of rivers of tears. I couldn't resist to come in and laugh. Ergo I'm here laughing at you - squirming with excuses as you are.

And I don't care about the results. The % of the population that is ever on the forums is ALWAYS tiny. In another notable lobby shooter (much better than this one - at least it has a lobby! rofl) the forums are full of people who fly in fully realistic mode (yes its a plane game) but in game they don't make up 1% of the population (the rest flies the arcadest mode possible)

So yeah using forums to gauge community's response is stupid.

Do keep up the waves of tears though.

Wow, it must feel amazing being above it all like you. You really are trolling these forums and you don't even play the game? I guess there are all sorts of people in the world.

Edited by Atheus, 06 May 2013 - 05:47 AM.

[Hayashi]

Moved to the Maps & Modes forum as this discusses the cap mechanic in the Assault game mode.