396 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Megalosauroid, on 13 May 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

Its a legitamate question though, if standing in a little red square is how you get your rocks off there is a much eaiser way of doing it. There isnt even that pesky time limit on how long you can stand there.


Better yet, you could draw a red square around your computer desk. That way you could be 'maneuvering' and 'strategizing' while actually playing the fun part of the game.

I'm going to address you once more, and then you're dismissed- clearly literacy is not one of your strengths, and neither is clever trolling.

Things I've said throughout this thread:
-I do not prefer victory by base capture.
-I prefer using base capture as motivation to split the enemy group.

What that means: I use the base to split the enemy team but if that fails and nobody comes back, I will take a vested interest in how my team is fairing in the fight. If we're doing well I will sit next to the base and let them finish it. If it looks as though they're going to all die, I will ensure my team's victory by capping. We get more XP and credits for winning than we do for losing.

Why I made this thread:
People (like you) have vilified capturing for "taking away the fun" of Assault group focus fire tactics. With that, they are enforcing a monotony and removal of the medium roll that has players quitting, or asking that Mediums be given Heavy armor, or Light speed...(Implication: they're trying to change the medium to fit a light role, or a heavy role.. in case you weren't sure.)

Edited by Livewyr, 13 May 2013 - 05:03 AM.

[Syllogy]

Neverfar, on 12 May 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:

According to the zealots on this forum, that is skill™ and tactics™ and you need skill™ and tactics™ to counter it.

Some people say that Skill and Tactics are required to get the upper hand in a match regardless of the makeup of enemy mechs.

I don't remember the last time the enemy team volunteered to flop over like a fish just because the paintjob on my mech made them cower.

Edited by Syllogy, 13 May 2013 - 05:09 AM.

[RG Notch]

Megalosauroid, on 13 May 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

Its a legitamate question though, if standing in a little red square is how you get your rocks off there is a much eaiser way of doing it. There isnt even that pesky time limit on how long you can stand there.


Better yet, you could draw a red square around your computer desk. That way you could be 'maneuvering' and 'strategizing' while actually playing the fun part of the game.

I often wonder why the people of the red square don't play conquest mode more, than I remember there is often other people who want to go to the red square and they will actually fight in the red square. It's not as easy to win by just standing in the red square when lots of people want to go there. I mean sure you may get one or two fast mechs who come back one at a time and you can always run away. You also don't get to grief people as effectively so there's that too.
Conquest would seem to have everything the people of the red square love, except one more often finds the red square defended and can't get their jollies ruining the game for folks here for the fighting.

[Megalosauroid]

Livewyr, on 13 May 2013 - 05:02 AM, said:

I'm going to address you once more, and then you're dismissed- clearly literacy is not one of your strengths, and neither is clever trolling.

Things I've said throughout this thread:
-I do not prefer victory by base capture.
-I prefer using base capture as motivation to split the enemy group.

In seriousness though, capping isnt even the most effective way to split up the enemy team. In pug games if you flank the enemy blob in your light mech ( so you dont get shot too much, theres your maneuvering and use of speed) and shoot them in the back a bit 2/3 of them are guaranteed to chase you across the map. Works better and doesn't **** anyone off.

[Livewyr]

RG Notch, on 13 May 2013 - 05:08 AM, said:

I often wonder why the people of the red square don't play conquest mode more, than I remember there is often other people who want to go to the red square and they will actually fight in the red square. It's not as easy to win by just standing in the red square when lots of people want to go there. I mean sure you may get one or two fast mechs who come back one at a time and you can always run away. You also don't get to grief people as effectively so there's that too.
Conquest would seem to have everything the people of the red square love, except one more often finds the red square defended and can't get their jollies ruining the game for folks here for the fighting.

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

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

[Ewigan]

Occasionally i just like to win.
Occasionally i just like to **** everyone off.

So yeah, occasionally i cap.

[PerfectTommy]

Here is the inherent problem with telling everyone that they need to change their tactics instead of forcing them to do so with game mechanic changes.

They won't.

Game theory treats player populations as reactionary masses instead of intelligent thinking individuals for a reason.



-PT

[Cyke]

Meh, I rarely post in a thread until I've read every single post so far.
There are exceptions from time to time, and I'm going to make this one of them.

Seems it's an argument between two groups of people:
- Basically there's one group of people who say that moving around the enemy team and starting to cap their base is a good strategy, because it will force them to split up (therefore making them easier to kill) or not split up (therefore losing the game).
- The other group of people consists of victims of this strategy.


If PGI didn't like the game being played this way, they would've reworked Assault already.
Until the time comes that they do, then it's obvious that they intend for it to be part of the game, contrary to accusations of capping the enemy base to be "borderline bug abuse" (I chuckled a little there).

I hardly think that back capping is fun, but yelling at people for playing the game effectively makes you a scrub. I think it's the game mode design itself that needs to be changed.

Edited by Cyke, 13 May 2013 - 05:39 AM.

[RG Notch]

Livewyr, 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.)

Awesome, as usual no answers. People of the Red Square unite! All the usual ones are here already. Fortunately one doesn't need to make threads about how legitimate killing all enemy mechs is because most people already know that. I'm still curious why the People of the Red Square don't play conquest where there are many more red squares.

[Vodrin Thales]

Livewyr, on 12 May 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

I see what you're saying, but I disagree wholeheartedly.

Range Boating happened like this:
Large maps with large open spaces kicked brawling off the thrown.
Adding an assault mech with Jumpjets just made a more effective jumpsniper than the Cat 3D, the previous jumpsniping champion (that is still in service).
Host state rewind made clicking your mouse accurately with a bunch of weapons much more effective- meaning you could strip all the armor off of (or one-shot) smaller mechs.

I'd also add the heat gen reduction on PPC's to the factors above along with the missile damage nerf.

[Pale Jackal]

Out-maneuvering is perfectly legitimate. The other day, it was me and another light versus 3 enemy 'mechs. We were tore up, so we ran and capped, and no one complained. It was a good game.

However, if you cap within the first 3-5 minutes of a match when only 1 'mech has been destroyed, even if you "won" - your team is getting basically no C-bills, since there's no salvage. It's a big fat waste of time for everyone involved.

So, it is legitimate to be annoyed regarding certain types of capping.

[Livewyr]

PerfectTommy, on 13 May 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

Here is the inherent problem with telling everyone that they need to change their tactics instead of forcing them to do so with game mechanic changes.

They won't.

Game theory treats player populations as reactionary masses instead of intelligent thinking individuals for a reason.



-PT

The only game mechanic changes that I can think of, is adding more rewards for capping so the lights and mediums aren't shafted because it's more tedious and lengthy for them to do damage and get kills... the only two currently rewarding things.

The player tactics should be shifted to think about their base, but instead they've made it socially unacceptable to do something outside their tactical limits. (Cowardly, trolling, bug abuse, etc..)

That's why I made this thread, they're trying to enforce fighting/brawling monotony because maneuverability is outside their tactical range of strengths.

[Livewyr]

RG Notch, on 13 May 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

Awesome, as usual no answers. People of the Red Square unite! All the usual ones are here already. Fortunately one doesn't need to make threads about how legitimate killing all enemy mechs is because most people already know that. I'm still curious why the People of the Red Square don't play conquest where there are many more red squares.

As usual, no legitimate questions. (You don't get answers to a lack of questions..)

Pale Jackal, on 13 May 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Out-maneuvering is perfectly legitimate. The other day, it was me and another light versus 3 enemy 'mechs. We were tore up, so we ran and capped, and no one complained. It was a good game.

However, if you cap within the first 3-5 minutes of a match when only 1 'mech has been destroyed, even if you "won" - your team is getting basically no C-bills, since there's no salvage. It's a big fat waste of time for everyone involved.

So, it is legitimate to be annoyed regarding certain types of capping.

Very true, capping within the first 3 minutes is bad. (I [would] prefer bringing the base down to about 5-10% and sitting there until the fighting outcome is more apparent.)

Not doing a darn thing about your base and insulting the person that took it, is also bad.

Edited by Livewyr, 13 May 2013 - 05:52 AM.

[Agent of Change]

Pro Tips:

• Don't Bait ball, you will be flanked, surrounded, capped and it's your own fault
  
• Defend the base if you get capped it's your own fault
  
• Watch your flanks if an enemy gets around you it's your own fault
  
• There are in fact other classes of mechs other than assault and heavy if the other teams has them and you don't it's your own fault
  
• Most things on the battlefield can be affected by your choices, take some responsibility for what happens and accept that many things that go wrong are your own fault
  
• when things are your fault figured out how to change them and do that, that's called learning.

Also:

Vassago Rain in his"I'm Closing the MWO Tab" thread, on 24 April 2013 - 05:26 AM, said:

Due to new legislation, I'm closing my MWOmercs tab, as there's simply no information or discussion to be had here.

How do you feel about this?

Edited by Agent of Change, 13 May 2013 - 05:54 AM.

[RG Notch]

Livewyr, on 13 May 2013 - 05:44 AM, said:

As usual, no legitimate questions. (You don't get answers to a lack of questions..)

Wow, so that's how people manage, if I can't answer it the question is obviously not legitimate. The question was perfectly clear. If you want to stand in Red Squares why not play the mode with more Red Squares? Why play the mode that is designed for fighting and has the cap mechanism there to prevent there from being one player who can ruin a match by hiding out some where powered down? Why did the devs reduce capping rewards? Because capping is designed to be a last ditch move when a match is won and a lone survivor is dragging things out by hiding with no intention of trying to win. There is a mode that allows for lighter mechs to flourish, but some people aren't interested in that when they can grief those people who want to fight.
Also wanting to fight doesn't mean you are driving a small engine high alpha assault mech. Some people can manage other things in a non assault mech than standing in a Red Square. Some folks would just prefer to fight and not skirt map edge like a rat or have to stand around and wait on the off chance some rat will come looking for the cheese in the Red Square.
One should ask why something is deemed socially unacceptable. Could it be that the method is not fun for lots of people. I know the unenlightened unwashed masses need champions like the People of the Red Square to liberate them from their sad ignorance. Rise up People of the Red Square, you have nothing to lose but the fun of actually fighting with giant stompy robots. Who wants to fight when one can stand in the Red Square of victory! Who doesn't enjoy cap racing or camping! Fighting, over rated clap trap!

[Yankee77]

One of the problems with game balance right now, that promotes loading assaults, is that there is basically no incentive to bringing a lighter mech other than mobility.

By this I mean, there's no real reason to bring a Cataphract poptart when a Highlander can fill the same role better. Why bring a Catapult LRM boat, if you can bring an Awesome or Stalker instead?

The ONLY advantage lighter mechs provide right now is mobility, and the reality is that only the Lights (and CDAs) are really mobile enough to be truly worthwhile.

But in Battletech, there's another reason to bring Medium mechs besides mobility... heck, sometimes medium mechs aren't really that mobile. Look at the stock Hunchbacks and Centurions: they generally focus more on armor and firepower than mobility, something which is Verboten in MWO: if you bring a Centurion, you better be FAST or you're basically useless.

So why have mediums that aren't fast brawlers? What's the point in having "pocket brawlers" like the Hunchback or Centurions?

The reason is simple: one of the main reasons medium mechs are useful is the lighter tonnage. Not because they can move faster, but because you can fulfill a role in a smaller, lighter, less expensive package.

That's why this game needs some sort of tonnage or resource limit: to make Heavy and Medium mechs more useful by virtue of their lower tonnage instead of just their potential mobility.

With tonnage limits, "pocket brawler" builds like the stock Hunchback become useful again. Sure, you'd be better off using an Atlas, but by using a Hunchie to round out your brawler lance you free up 50 tons for other roles that might need it better. The same goes for basically any other roles. Need an LRM boat? Use a Catapult instead of a Stalker and save 20 tons, or a Trebuchet and save 35!!

This way we can finally break the silly meta of Assaults and Light groups only. Because right now anything in between gimps any competitive group. Give us tonnage limits, and competitive groups will have incentive to integrate Heavies and Mediums in roles better suited to Assaults (which is pretty much all of them, aside from scouts).

Thank you.

[Keifomofutu]

Livewyr, on 13 May 2013 - 03:45 AM, said:

Remember how the title of the OP said "Player created imbalance?"

Here's the imbalance stated in the simplest terms:


This is what it should be:
Focus Fire Group Tactics = Maneuverability Objective Tactics

(Equal sign representing validity, for clarification)



this is what it is currently in player attitude:
Focus Fire Group Tactics > Maneuverability Objective Tactics

(Not because FFGT is any better, but MOT is cowardly/bug abuse/trolling according to FFGT)

does that clarify it for you?

Wow you missed the point badly. Players will never act how they "should". They'll just act how they act. But hey if you want to scream at your team all day to "fix" them be my guest.

[Livewyr]

RG Notch, on 13 May 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

Wow, so that's how people manage, if I can't answer it the question is obviously not legitimate. The question was perfectly clear. If you want to stand in Red Squares why not play the mode with more Red Squares? It's not legitimate because it assumes I/We don't play conquest as well. Why play the mode that is designed for fighting and has the cap mechanism there to prevent there from being one player who can ruin a match by hiding out some where powered down? Oh, is that why it's there? Thanks for enlightening me, and here silly me, I thought it was there in order to give objectives to give direction to the battle. Why did the devs reduce capping rewards? Because they were trying to fix the player issue of not understanding the concept of defense with a game mechanic change- which has resulted in the problem we have now. (Not: Because capping is designed to be a last ditch move when a match is won and a lone survivor is dragging things out by hiding with no intention of trying to win. There is a mode that allows for lighter mechs to flourish, but some people aren't interested in that when they can grief those people who want to fight. Some people are interested in both, what you're point?
Also wanting to fight doesn't mean you are driving a small engine high alpha assault mech. Some people can manage other things in a non assault mech than standing in a Red Square. Some folks would just prefer to fight (Like a stupified drunk..yelling at the sober person to stand still and fight like a man... aren't one-sided general and baseless insults fun?) and not skirt map edge like a rat or have to stand around and wait on the off chance some rat will come looking for the cheese in the Red Square. And then, like you, get mad at the people who don't want to play like them...
One should ask why something is deemed socially unacceptable. Could it be that the method is not fun for lots of people. Much like the complaints of monotony and poptarting. I know the unenlightened unwashed masses need champions like the People of the Red Square to liberate them from their sad ignorance. You're stupid. Rise up People of the Red Square, you have nothing to lose but the fun of actually fighting with giant stompy robots. Let them eat cake? Who wants to fight when one can stand in the Red Square of victory! Who doesn't enjoy cap racing or camping! Fighting, over rated clap trap!
My way or you're a noob?

It probably won't be as satisfying as a response, as you were hoping for.. but it's more than your post deserves.

And with that, you're dismissed.

Edited by Livewyr, 13 May 2013 - 06:32 AM.

[Livewyr]

Keifomofutu, on 13 May 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Wow you missed the point badly. Players will never act how they "should". They'll just act how they act. But hey if you want to scream at your team all day to "fix" them be my guest.

I'm not trying to fix them through reasoning.. that's futile.. just look at RG.

I am however intent on encouraging people (who want to) to use MOT tactics despite the current attitude towards it.
This thread did do a nice job of highlighting the current meta's reaction to being threatened by someone playing NOT on their terms.

[pow pow]

sorry but I truly despise capping in this game. Purely due to the big distances and amount of time to get to places without things happening. And I just don't understand the mentality of light pilots who don't fire a single shot whole game, thinking they are some sort of badasses by being able to outmaneuver or outrun much slower opponents (especially on the larger maps).

I log this game to ride robots and shoot lasers. If i don't see things go boom boom in a match I generally had a bad/boring game...

Lights are great in fights.... meds needs some buffs, dunno what exactly but they are generally much easier to kill in anything. So you should stick with your lance and assist them in whatever role you have when they go looking for a fight. Remember, we don't launch to go have a smoke and a walkabout.

To me capping is the same as trolling and you surely can't be having fun, running on your own to cap Also it takes very very very little skill to outrun/outmaneuver a much slower guy in a massive map.

Don't get me wrong, i am not talking about tapping the base here, or running to distract, or bait. I have no problem with that and usually encourage it. However, even tapping in larger maps will most often lead to capping cuz it takes forever to get back and is no fun at all.... whoever taps/caps he would have not fired a shot the whole game and for the others... it would have been an unfair/imbalanced fight.