Jump to content

"stick Together." The Assault Racket And Player Created Imbalance.


396 replies to this topic

#281 RG Notch

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,987 posts
  • LocationNYC

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:26 AM

View PostMaddMaxx, on 15 May 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:


The reason is to Win. It is Simple. Poetic and ultimately, Defensible. :(



That being the case, a proper one I might add, then why gross on those who have their FUN doing something other than what you perceive to be FUN?

So it is your FUN or no FUN? Is that it?

Where did I say they couldn't have their fun? I in fact encouraged people to do just that, let them stand in the Red Square and have fun and get the big W. I'll have my fun while they wait the countdown to the big W. Everyone has fun, although I imagine people who want to fight will not enjoy having their fun limited but it only happens rarely. What I don't understand is why the People of the Red Square don't play the mode that has more Red Squares and is designed for more mobile action. Seems like then people who want to fight and the People of the Red Square could be happier if they played the mode more suited to their playstyle. Of course that supposes, one is interested in having fun and not just ruining other people's.

#282 Livewyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 6,733 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:35 AM

Maxx.. just stop. He's stuck on final objectives only thought in regards to the "red square" and not it's use in dictating the necessary distribution of forces or the direction of the fight.

(for the record, I do not advocate immediate capping for the purpose of ending the game, but for impact on the match. It allows either a dramatic shift in the enemy's original plan.. or if mostly capped, it leaves an iWin available in case your team's fight goes sour.)

#283 I am

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:41 AM

What is the point in emphasizing credits as a relevant consideration in shaping one's playstyle. I am sure I am not teh only one with about 20 mill C bills to spare and nothing worth spending it on. I noticed today I have 15 PPCs. I don't even have any on my mech's, but there they sit from a time when I was using them more. We have so much stuff. I can get the money for an Atlas DDC in a weekend. Making sure I get max c-bills per round is a non-issue. What I am looking for is a chance to divide the masses and capitalize on solo'd out mechs. It is fun to 1v1 down an atlas with a commando.

Then sometimes you meet that Atlas that can lead, and you end up legged, and feeling silly as he mangles you. But hey, it was an exilerating challenge.

We have plenty of C-bills, so arguing we make less on a cap win is moot.

View PostLivewyr, on 15 May 2013 - 06:35 AM, said:

Maxx.. just stop. He's stuck on final objectives only thought in regards to the "red square" and not it's use in dictating the necessary distribution of forces or the direction of the fight.

(for the record, I do not advocate immediate capping for the purpose of ending the game, but for impact on the match. It allows either a dramatic shift in the enemy's original plan.. or if mostly capped, it leaves an iWin available in case your team's fight goes sour.)


I do emphasize capping early, how else will they learn. If they don't turn back the match is over in minutes. If they bother to come back, plan B is battle battle cap. If they come back in force, plan is battle till they are all dead. See above.

#284 RG Notch

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,987 posts
  • LocationNYC

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:51 AM

View PostI am, on 15 May 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

What is the point in emphasizing credits as a relevant consideration in shaping one's playstyle. I am sure I am not teh only one with about 20 mill C bills to spare and nothing worth spending it on. I noticed today I have 15 PPCs. I don't even have any on my mech's, but there they sit from a time when I was using them more. We have so much stuff. I can get the money for an Atlas DDC in a weekend. Making sure I get max c-bills per round is a non-issue. What I am looking for is a chance to divide the masses and capitalize on solo'd out mechs. It is fun to 1v1 down an atlas with a commando.

Then sometimes you meet that Atlas that can lead, and you end up legged, and feeling silly as he mangles you. But hey, it was an exilerating challenge.

We have plenty of C-bills, so arguing we make less on a cap win is moot.



I do emphasize capping early, how else will they learn. If they don't turn back the match is over in minutes. If they bother to come back, plan B is battle battle cap. If they come back in force, plan is battle till they are all dead. See above.

Guess what, people who want to fight have plenty of C bills too and if a match ends prematurely then oh well, it's on to another with an 80% chance of it ending with actual fighting. It's not only the People of the Red Square who have money to spend. Some people are just here for fighting W or L. I know I'd rather have a fun fight that ends in a loss to a cap racer than a boring win where I wait for a cap racer, blow him up and then have to catch up with the real action.
If you're here for easy W's good for you, I will let you enjoy the thrill of standing in the Red Square while I enjoy the fun of fighting even if I get an L.

#285 Livewyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 6,733 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:52 AM

View PostI am, on 15 May 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:


I do emphasize capping early, how else will they learn. If they don't turn back the match is over in minutes. If they bother to come back, plan B is battle battle cap. If they come back in force, plan is battle till they are all dead. See above.


I think they would also learn if: they ignored you, you capped it to 95% and stood by it.

They've already lost.. and they know it. (I think they'd learn from that.)
But your team can still get its rocks in a fight.

Edited by Livewyr, 15 May 2013 - 06:54 AM.


#286 Zerberus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,488 posts
  • LocationUnder the floorboards looking for the Owner`s Manual

Posted 15 May 2013 - 07:01 AM

View PostLivewyr, on 15 May 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:


I think they would also learn if: they ignored you, you capped it to 95% and stood by it.

They've already lost.. and they know it. (I think they'd learn from that.)
But your team can still get its rocks in a fight.

Been doing exactly this for about a week now.

Not once has someone come to defend against me, but numerous times their lights have tried to countercap just to get torn up by OUR defense.

Get out with a sliver left to go, and tear up the6 remaining mechs on teh enemy team still camping near the middle of the map.

Works 19/20 times, and still has the effect of annoying people that complain about capping... And then ******* in their wheaties even harder by NOT capping but taking them apart one by one instead after they`re done huffing, puffing, and blowing nothing down but their own Elo :(

Edited by Zerberus, 15 May 2013 - 07:01 AM.


#287 Nonsense

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • LocationAnn Arbor, MI

Posted 15 May 2013 - 07:46 AM

Weight class balance will change assuming CW has drops with weight limits. Until then, balance talk of this type is rather pointless

#288 Snuglninja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts
  • LocationJagger Cockpit

Posted 15 May 2013 - 08:18 AM

All we have is a console game with no incentive to play anything other then tdm. Doesn't matter what the weapon is. Lrms op, guasapaults op, streakcats and now poptarts. Its the same march up to point a wait for enemy and start slinging punches wait for QQ. No reason to play smart.
Pgi tried with R&R not perfect it gave you a reason to cap, team up, not boat expensive tech.
I don't know what CW will bring but I hope they concentrate on the sim aspect more. More risk reward. If you want to play and be part of Cw and matter then they need some kind of risk / reward style. A chance to make a fortune or lose it all. If this isn't your stylethen que up a pug match and play tdm with little risk and even smaller reward.
Until then lights cap away.

#289 Keifomofutu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,547 posts
  • LocationLloydminster

Posted 15 May 2013 - 09:15 AM

View PostMaddMaxx, on 15 May 2013 - 06:02 AM, said:


Well according to some, that tedious wait, the one that is so painful, will last less than 2 minutes, (minus the travel time to said Camp grounds just outside of said Base) then that 4 man Cap group will have arrived and all that is required is to have one friendly Mech be on the base and hold out until the fat arses get back to help out.

Certainly if the argument is to fight and not cap, the first to arrive back at base will at least get what they desire, a fight...right? Or do the fights now have to be Fair as well? :(


For you to argue that a strategy is sound you would have to argue it from the side of both teams. With the way the game mode is now the "right play" for both teams is to camp no farther from their base than they can get back without getting capped by a couple lights with cap accel.

Only if both team do the "right play" on the big maps they will be parked so far from each other that there will be no engagement. There will be no combat and the match will end in a draw at 15 minutes.

But of course people don't do the "right play" because it would lead to no combat and no battle. Trying to paint everyone who moves up enough to actually engage the enemy as a "bloat boat sniper" is a pretty dumb thing to say. Everyone goes to the middle because it is the only way the actual battle that people hit the button for will happen. Brawling mediums, fast heavies, standard brawling heavies, ecm lights, and assaults everyone.

If you don't go to the middle then there is no fight. If you take the long way round and "play tactical" you get capped. People blob because the game mode is designed that way.

And no splitting your force isn't the right play either. This game thrives on numbers and focus fire.

#290 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 15 May 2013 - 09:25 AM

View PostRG Notch, on 15 May 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

Where did I say they couldn't have their fun? I in fact encouraged people to do just that, let them stand in the Red Square and have fun and get the big W. I'll have my fun while they wait the countdown to the big W. Everyone has fun, although I imagine people who want to fight will not enjoy having their fun limited but it only happens rarely. What I don't understand is why the People of the Red Square don't play the mode that has more Red Squares and is designed for more mobile action. Seems like then people who want to fight and the People of the Red Square could be happier if they played the mode more suited to their playstyle. Of course that supposes, one is interested in having fun and not just ruining other people's.

Could be that they are playing both modes to perfect their technique. If I see the enemy is nowhere near their base when My Atlas waddles up to it behind all my team mates I am not going to try to find them. I will send an invitation to meet me at their house. now come play or let me take a nap and win an easy victory.

#291 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,022 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:01 PM

View PostKentiah, on 15 May 2013 - 02:04 AM, said:


Except they could have done it many other ways if they didn't want capping to be a viable way to win. Reward was reduced because it's something that's easily abused, deal with it.

Which is pretty much the complaint against rush cappers - the mechanic is being abused. Sure, they reduced the rewards, but unfortunately the in-game rewards are not what's driving toxic player capping.

View PostI am, on 15 May 2013 - 03:38 AM, said:


That's a really fancy way of saying, I don't feel like defending my base, so you shouldn't capitalize on teh fact that I don't feel like defending my base.

[description of play in a different game]

What you have here is the deathball crying, don't exploit the tactical hole we left in our strategy, which is so big you could drive an Atlas through it. You mention 4 Ravens, in a 4 man. Sure is harder when half the enemy team is of alike mind and specialize to cap you out, but that's a 4 man premade issue, that is a "allowing half a pub team to be comprosed of a single group of pals singing the same tune on ts" issue. Don't confuse the two. At least that, is a valid complaint.

So this is your response to being informed that the current tactic of massing fires is in place because it's necessary? First, misrepresent what you're told in order to ridicule the opinion by straw man fallacy (also called "lying.") Then, tell an anecdotal story about another game to muddy the waters. Finally, wrap it up with another misrepresentation, making ad hominem attacks and hedging your bets. "Oh, well, partial premades are different." I hate to tell you, but PGI told us that most players play in groups at least part of the time. Most matches you're in likely have multiple partial premade teams with them. My use of a clear-case example (4-raven premades) doesn't alter the fact that many people are abusing the mechanics of capping - particularly on Alpine and Tourmaline

View PostKentiah, on 15 May 2013 - 12:54 AM, said:


Hold up, you're saying it's unfair to have a mech that can't match in straight firepower and reduces the amount of straight firepower on his team, to make some of the enemies firepower fall back to help balance/tip the odds in his teams favor? Maximum stupid. Typical assault player, etc.

View PostMaddMaxx, on 15 May 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:


Just note where it is he calls home. LOL! We call that stuff he wrote Make-No! btw. Not hyperbole. :(

(Actually, it's called "reductio ad absurdum," and is a valid and time-honored method of exposing stupidity in an idea. But you don't care about that.)

More straw men and ad hominem attacks - in other words, name-calling and lies. I wish I were surprised, but I can't claim to be shocked that the trend from word one has been followed out to page fifteen. Those who value their own desires and opinions above truth simply do not change their stripes because you give them logical reasons to do so.

So, one more time for the record: no one cares if you cap in order to break up enemy formations or pull victory out of defeat when your team is losing the firefight. Where the vast majority of the player population will hate you for capping is when you avoid combat to cap as your primary means of victory. This hatred is justified for a variety of reasons:
  • As has been pointed out here several times, it is not feasible to simply leave a force back to camp the base in most matches. All things being equal, doing so will dilute your combat power, often causing a loss if there are no CapWarriors on the other team.
  • CapWarriors screw over everyone else on both teams. This is why players from both teams tend to yell at them. Capping costs most of the other players on the team experience, c-bills, and most importantly fun. We are playing a MechWarrior game - a game of armored combat. The draw of this game is to match your skills against others - not to play Super MechWarrior Kart off by yourself.
All the rhetorical horsecarp that's being thrown around in here by the CapWarriors attempts to obscure the issue. They try to say that they're just playing the game as it was oh-so-obviously intended to be played, and that the mean people comprising some made-up "Assault Racket" is engaging in widespread social engineering to force them to play at a disadvantage. When challenged, they resort to smear tactics and misrepresentation of the facts (the above examples are just the tip of the iceberg.) After all, anyone who disagrees with them must be a mean "Assault Racket" player!


The truth is that massed fire tactics are not crippling to a light pilot - lights are valuable contributors to massed fire tactics. Further, once the fighting starts, they serve a unique and important role as harassers and on-call QRF (that's Quick Reaction Force, for those who don't know the jargon.) That means chasing down wounded enemies who flee, harassing and jamming enemy 'Mechs, and yes, capping at times in order to break up formations and occasionally pull victory from the jaws of defeat. None of this requires the main body to diverge from the ineptly characterized "Assault blob." But that's what the OP and others in this thread want to happen - because they don't feel like they can get kills if the heavier 'mechs stay together. That's the core of this: they're accusing everyone else of doing what they want to do: forcing others to play against the Light's strengths instead of making use of their own. Certainly, it's hard to do the Newbie Circle Strafe to kill a larger 'mech if they have teammates to shoot at you - but the answer is to stop using that bad technique, not to encourage bad tactics so you can circle isolated opponents unmolested.

Don't be drawn in by the hypocrisy, gentle readers. Don't be decieved by the lies. As for me, I'm going to take my own advice at last, and stop feeding the trolls.

Edited by Void Angel, 15 May 2013 - 12:43 PM.


#292 Soy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,689 posts
  • Locationtrue Lord system

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:09 PM

Void you equated the meta pushback of capwarrioring to freeing murders into the streets in order to kill rapists.

Seriously stop talking.

#293 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:11 PM

View PostSoy, on 14 May 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

4 man light teams capping is a good thing.

It pushes back against the turretmech/poptart snipefest of slow boats at the moment.

Welcome it with open arms.


Meh it being a good thing is the wrong approach.

You are basically taking one unfun game meta, and replacing it with a second unfun game meta.

We need fun.

Fun is shooting eachother a lot, and people not dying from 3 high damage alpha's via mechs that you only see when they jump jet over a ridge.

Fun is having a reason to actually disable an arm, and not always shooting the center torso.

Fun is needing your light mechs to scout and find the enemy, and not knowing pretty much exactly where they will be every match.

Fun is taking over a base that actually requires you to maybe shoot the base, and disable the bases defenses. Instead of just standing on it with a module.

....

There is just a lot of non-fun things going on right now.

#294 Soy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,689 posts
  • Locationtrue Lord system

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:20 PM

I keep looking forward eagerly in anticipation of anything like BAP or possibly even Seismic Module, as potential nutcrackers for getting good angles at bringing brawling back into the realm of things.

I like the addition of more and more stuff, we need variety of course, but we need to start thinking creatively and outside of the box if we want to push the limits of what is inside of that box [tarting, turreting, alphas, boating, sniping, etc].

You guys do realize there is a natural shock wave gap between when something is mechanically introduced or changed, and when the community actualizes upon it right? All the current stuff was built up and we eventually grabbed ahold of it. The table was set up, it didn't just materialize and 90% of the community serendipitously stumbled upon it.

Edited by Soy, 15 May 2013 - 12:21 PM.


#295 DegeneratePervert

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • LocationKansas

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:24 PM

Mediums are only less-than-adequate right now because they lack their "right hook" srms. As soon as missiles come back to being balanced and not confetti, Centurions will be seen as good again.

#296 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:27 PM

View PostSoy, on 15 May 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

I keep looking forward eagerly in anticipation of anything like BAP or possibly even Seismic Module, as potential nutcrackers for getting good angles at bringing brawling back into the realm of things.

I like the addition of more and more stuff, we need variety of course, but we need to start thinking creatively and outside of the box if we want to push the limits of what is inside of that box [tarting, turreting, alphas, boating, sniping, etc].

You guys do realize there is a natural shock wave gap between when something is mechanically introduced or changed, and when the community actualizes upon it right? All the current stuff was built up and we eventually grabbed ahold of it. The table was set up, it didn't just materialize and 90% of the community serendipitously stumbled upon it.


Well this is what I worry about.

Come the 21st, almost everyone is going to run BAP. The people running ECM are going to finally switch to chassis that they either enjoy more, or that can run better loadout's, since ECM will be negated early and often.

But then we're going to see that switch over, when people stop taking BAP due to the lack of ECM in the field.

it's an ongoing process.

But I still thing the underlying mechanics are bad.

#297 Soy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,689 posts
  • Locationtrue Lord system

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:29 PM

I just think thats a lack of enough counters, that the initial ones appear powerful. Cuz, well, they are.

#298 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:32 PM

View PostSoy, on 15 May 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

I just think thats a lack of enough counters, that the initial ones appear powerful. Cuz, well, they are.


Why do we need so many counters for one 1.5 ton 2 slot item that never made it so you couldn't lock missiles?

Blah, I feel like I've been having these same stupid conversations for half a year now.

Wtf.

I must be dumb.

#299 Livewyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 6,733 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:41 PM

View PostVoid Angel, on 15 May 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

Which is pretty much the complaint against rush cappers - the mechanic is being abused. Sure, they reduced the rewards, but unfortunately the in-game rewards are not what's driving toxic player capping.

So this is your response to being informed that the current tactic of massing fires is in place because it's necessary? First, misrepresent what you're told in order to ridicule the opinion by straw man fallacy (also called "lying.") Then, tell an anecdotal story about another game to muddy the waters. Finally, wrap it up with another misrepresentation, making ad hominem attacks and hedging your bets. "Oh, well, partial premades are different." I hate to tell you, but PGI told us that most players play in groups at least part of the time. Most matches you're in likely have multiple partial premade teams with them. My use of a clear-case example (4-raven premades) doesn't alter the fact that many people are abusing the mechanics of capping - particularly on Alpine and Tourmaline


(Actually, it's called "reductio ad absurdum," and is a valid and time-honored method of exposing stupidity in an idea. But you don't care about that.)

More straw men and ad hominem attacks - in other words, name-calling and lies. I wish I were surprised, but I can't claim to be shocked that the trend from word one has been followed out to page fifteen. Those who value their own desires and opinions above truth simply do not change their stripes because you give them logical reasons to do so.

So, one more time for the record: no one cares if you cap in order to break up enemy formations or pull victory out of defeat when your team is losing the firefight. Where the vast majority of the player population will hate you for capping is when you avoid combat to cap as your primary means of victory. This hatred is justified for a variety of reasons:
  • As has been pointed out here several times, it is not feasible to simply leave a force back to camp the base in most matches. All things being equal, doing so will dilute your combat power, often causing a loss if there are no CapWarriors on the other team.
  • CapWarriors screw over everyone else on both teams. This is why players from both teams tend to yell at them. Capping costs most of the other players on the team experience, c-bills, and most importantly fun. We are playing a MechWarrior game - a game of armored combat. The draw of this game is to match your skills against others - not to play Super MechWarrior Kart off by yourself.
All the rhetorical horsecarp that's being thrown around in here by the CapWarriors attempts to obscure the issue. They try to say that they're just playing the game as it was oh-so-obviously intended to be played, and that the mean people comprising some made-up "Assault Racket" is engaging in widespread social engineering to force them to play at a disadvantage. When challenged, they resort to smear tactics and misrepresentation of the facts (the above examples are just the tip of the iceberg.) After all, anyone who disagrees with them must be a mean "Assault Racket" player!


The truth is that massed fire tactics are not crippling to a light pilot - lights are valuable contributors to massed fire tactics. Further, once the fighting starts, they serve a unique and important role as harassers and on-call QRF (that's Quick Reaction Force, for those who don't know the jargon.) That means chasing down wounded enemies who flee, harassing and jamming enemy 'Mechs, and yes, capping at times in order to break up formations and occasionally pull victory from the jaws of defeat. None of this requires the main body to diverge from the ineptly characterized "Assault blob." But that's what the OP and others in this thread want to happen - because they don't feel like they can get kills if the heavier 'mechs stay together. That's the core of this: they're accusing everyone else of doing what they want to do: forcing others to play against the Light's strengths instaead of making use of their own. Certainly, it's hard to do the Newbie Circle Strafe to kill a larger 'mech if they have teammates to shoot at you - but the answer is to stop using that bad technique, not to encourage bad tactics so you can circle isolated opponents unmolested.

Don't be drawn in by the hypocrisy, gentle readers. Don't be decieved by the lies. As for me, I'm going to take my own advice at last, and stop feeding the trolls.


Irony.

#300 Rasako

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 214 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:56 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 13 May 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:


I was wondering when you were going to show up to miss the point.

Block checked. (Now where's hr? He's still missing.)

all I've really heard out of you is a wailing little child ******* and moaning about how "I WANT THE GAME PLAYED MY WAY AND NO OTHER WAY IS ALLOWED!" because other people are acting that way. instead of being a pathetic *****, why don't you just play the game properly? if your way is capping, then you better weigh the negatives to capping and not just troll your team because "you like capping" which is basically all you've stated throughout this entire thread other than verbally assaulting other players for having an opinion different from yours. There's absolutely nothing wrong with capping and very rarely in any of my games do people complain about it unless its a 0-0 grief cap, you're just here to **** in everyone's cheerio's and rile up a shitstorm for no other reason than to please your sadistic sense of self entitlement





20 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 20 guests, 0 anonymous users