Jump to content

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


396 replies to this topic

#241 Keifomofutu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,547 posts
  • LocationLloydminster

Posted 14 May 2013 - 01:06 PM

View PostStoicblitzer, on 14 May 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

strategy in a pug? i would rather run in a herd and shoot what others are shooting than type a dissertation about sun tzu's art of war only to be dismissed by the mcdonalds burger flipper as an "internet general" and being told "NOBADY TELLZ ME WAT 2 DO!!1" Then he proceeds to suicide in his lrm atlas.

Usually the guy quoting Sun Tzu IS the guy suicide charging in his LRM Atlas.

#242 Stoicblitzer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,931 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 14 May 2013 - 01:13 PM

View PostKeifomofutu, on 14 May 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

Usually the guy quoting Sun Tzu IS the guy suicide charging in his LRM Atlas.

LMAO

#243 Spades Kincaid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 164 posts
  • LocationMyrtle Beach SC

Posted 14 May 2013 - 03:34 PM

I consider a start of match full cap rather bad form, but I'm not going to berate anyone over it. It is, ultimately the team's responsibility to prevent it if they don't want it to happen.

That is entirely possible in all situations. The myriad excuses for not preventing it are just that, excuses. It's inconvenient, it's boring, etc. That's fine, everyone is entitled to do as they please. None of it changes the fact that it's a choice that's made.

It doesn't require a light to do it. A medium can just fine. So can faster heavies. You don't have to go wandering -way- off to do so. Remember, I'm talking about quick-caps here. All it takes is a mech flanking out on each side and using their eyes. You can usually get by with only one in fact. Because the standard clashing points on Alpine and Tourmaline allow for view of at least parts of one flank.

That is, if anyone even bothers to pay attention. On many occasions I've flanked to the cap of an enemy, open to view at points to most of the enemy team - if any of them bothered to idk, look around?

There I am popping out to their side/rear because there's no more available cover to use or a sizeable gap in it. All it would take is one of them standing there or trudging along, waiting to snipe or for the midfield brawl to start. To do a little sightseeing instead.

Twist that torso, see if some light ****** is trying to run to cap.

Because I was.

And I saw you, not even looking for me.

And you're probably going to complain if I start a cap. Ha!



Note, I'm not a quick-capping sort as I said. If I do head to the cap and get no response I'll leave it at 5-10% and go scout more, harass, etc. until I see an outcome starting to develop. Then it's keep fighting to the win, or run my speedy butt back to try and finish the cap because we're getting decimated.

To me, the only truly unfortunate outcome is when both teams have a light or lights who manage to flank to cap without running into each other. Because then what may have been only a tactical intent becomes a case of neither dares to stop capping unless forced to.

Edited by Spades Kincaid, 14 May 2013 - 03:37 PM.


#244 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,114 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:20 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.

... The current wave of serial murders is keeping people off the streets at night and reducing crime! Welcome these murders with open arms!

#245 Soy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,689 posts
  • Locationtrue Lord system

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:32 PM

View PostVoid Angel, on 14 May 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

... The current wave of serial murders is keeping people off the streets at night and reducing crime! Welcome these murders with open arms!


Did you study hyperbole in school today or something.

#246 Hellcat420

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,520 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:43 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 12 May 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

There was a state of mind bred by the first 4 maps and their alternates: The Blob mentality.
The whole team sticks together and moves as a single blob, focuses targets and attempts to take out the other team faster.
If anyone caps, they're automatically a noob/loser/*******/jerk/*****/moron/etc...
This is blob mentality- or what I personally call; The "Assault Racket."

Assault mechs are undeniably the best at slaughtering mechs face to face, and now even in long range combat with the release of the Highlander.

So, what is the weakness of the Assault mech? Being the slowest on the battlefield.. that makes them vulnerable to being outmaneuvered. Now, as an assault mech, players know they can't go fast AND have ridiculous firepower so in order to negate their maneuverability disadvantage, they've made it socially unacceptable to outmaneuver them: "I've come here to blow up robots, not cap!" or "CapWarrior: Online" are common (un)clever epithets regarding capping.

This mentality has led to the crippling of the medium and light classes, it wasn't felt harshly until recently when the HSR removal of lag-shield made medium/light brawling non-viable.
The advantage of the medium and light chassis has been their maneuverability, which has been effectively outlawed by the Assault racket.

--------------------------------

So what needs to happen?

Start maneuvering.

I see a consistent battlefield routine in Alpine where the northeastern team moves a little ways away from their base to the closest ridge, sets up a firing line, and sits waiting for the other team, who dutifully runs right to them, intent on meeting in straightforward combat. Except the combat isn't straight forward, they get picked apart while maneuvering the open terrain to get to the enemy. You can see on the heat-map that there is where the majority of the deaths are.

Solution: Have some patience and don't engage them on their protective ridge. Stay back, flank to another side, send a jumpjet light mech to their base just to tap it and retreat up the hill just to create concern in two directions. Do not engage them when they have protective hill and you have open terrain. You will get picked apart, PPCs, Guass, LLasers, etc.. you will get picked apart.

Don't play into the Assault Racket. Cap them, force them to move. If they wish to bring the biggest load of weapons they can, make them pay for it, you're already paying a handicap in fighting by being completely outmatched in firepower, make them pay a handicap of being completely outmaneuvered.

In the Desert, same thing: Out maneuver them.


If anyone calls you something because you aren't fighting straight up, tell them to F-off and figure out how fights are really won.

I can tell you now, I will be capping bases until people figure it out. It could be considered trolling, but to that; I say the Assault Racket is trolling and therefore it's fair.

-Livewyr

(minor grammar edits)

if you are trying to brawl in a light mech you are the one that sucks. light mechs are not brawlers, they are scout mechs. capping the base is what you should be doing in light mech, but nomatter what people are going to trashtalk because its a video game. quit being a girl about it.

Edited by Hellcat420, 14 May 2013 - 04:58 PM.


#247 TroubleEntendre

    Member

  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 05:10 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 12 May 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

they've made it socially unacceptable to outmaneuver them: "I've come here to blow up robots, not cap!" or "CapWarrior: Online" are common (un)clever epithets regarding capping.


I've not seen this. What I have seen is many instances where light mechs were encouraged by other players to take objectives while the main battle groups slugged it out.

The common "stick together" refrain is simply good tactics. When I die quickly it is because I'm caught alone by a large enemy force. When my enimies die quickly it's because they made the same mistake. In these situations one team generally roflstomps the other. When my battlegroup sticks together and their battlegroup sticks together, it's usually a slaughter with most mechs on both sides destroyed; in other words a close match. Or hardly anyone is destroyed because a light mech has done its frakking job and capped the point out from under everyone, and in those cases I have never seen anyone whine that the light mechs didn't line up to get gunned down by the Stalkers.

#248 Donas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 416 posts
  • Locationon yet another world looking for a Bar and Grill

Posted 14 May 2013 - 06:27 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 13 May 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:


I was with you until this.

What would be the way to stop a spiteful light mech from prolonging the game to the full match length and really wasting everyone's time? (not sarcasm or barbed, just a question)


Yeah, thats always the problem. One thing that might work is an engagement timer that starts to count down when the match is down to one mech remaining, but resets with any engagement. Essentially an end-game mechanic that fulfills the role for anti-spite-troll capping, yet does not offer the ability to be used prior to end-game.

And for the record, your question did not sound like a barb in any way. Nor is the end-game timer something I've vested a great deal of time into as an idea. Its actually something right off the cuff, though I'm sure others have proposed similar mechanics in other threads.

Essentially, I'm fully in favor of capping in scenarios that use it as a victory condition. Its a tactic that must be accounted for or you get burned by it. I also fully support the folks that dont want to be bothered with it having the opportunity to play without it. A Solaris style 'every man for himself' match for example. Something in a closed arena that is too small for troll-hiding. Something that offers prestige and the opportunity for individual renown.

#249 I am

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 06:40 PM

I put a cap mod in my triple SSRM comando. It helps me alot, since I am usually capping right off the bat, and my team isn't there to help me.

Every time I cap a team out I ask myself the same question.. "Were they really dumb enough to leave their base totally undefended, and expect that to work out for them?" or "Do they just not care if they win?"

Used to play a game called Supreme Commander 2. It is an RTS, and unlike most RTS's you can turn off alot of different units, restricting the play to just land units, air units, etc etc. Basically a team could limit all units to land, then specialize in anti-land units, and win way more than not. They could completely disregard teh danger of not building AA towers, because they limited the ways they could lose, and air units was one of the disabled options.

Thats waht you have here. Guys that cant fathom base D, are crying getting capped. That would be like ODB complaing he had to pay child support. You chose to leave your base wide open, you accept that. I promise to continue to remind every team I play with, only in asslt mode, of this fact. Your minimizing your vulnerabilities, then specializing with no regard for them. Better engine, nah, we'll jsut QQ the forums enough, and PGI will ensure we never have to consider defense again.

Threads like this make me want to rush cap more. I might buy a second commando, so I can cap while I cap, albeit in different matches.

Edited by I am, 14 May 2013 - 06:42 PM.


#250 Keifomofutu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,547 posts
  • LocationLloydminster

Posted 14 May 2013 - 06:42 PM

View PostI am, on 14 May 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

I put a cap mod in my triple SSRM comando. It helps me alot, since I am usually capping right off the bat, and my team isn't there to help me.

Every time I cap a team out I ask myself the same question.. "Were they really dumb enough to leave their base totally undefended, and expect that to work out for them?"

Used to play a game called Supreme Commander 2. It is an RTS, and unlike most RTS's you can turn off alot of different units, restricting the play to just land units, air units, etc etc. Basically a team could limit all units to land, then specialize in anti-land units, and win way more than not. They could completely disregard teh danger of not building AA towers, because they limited the ways they could lose, and air units was one of the disabled options.

Thats waht you have here. Guys that cant fathom base D, are crying getting capped. That would be like ODB complaing he had to pay child support. You chose to leave your base wide open, you accept that. I promise to continue to remind every team I play with, only in asslt mode, of this fact. Your minimizing your vulnerabilities, then specializing with no regard for them. Better engine, nah, we'll jsut QQ the forums enough, and PGI will ensure we never have to consider defense again.

Threads like this make me want to rush cap more. I might buy a second commando, so I can cap while I cap, albeit in different matches.

If only MWO was full of mindless drones like in an RTS who had nothing better to do but putter around base hoping something might actually happen. Oh well.

Guess we'll have to make the game mode actually good instead of making a bad comparison to a real time strategy game.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 14 May 2013 - 06:43 PM.


#251 I am

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 07:02 PM

View PostKeifomofutu, on 14 May 2013 - 06:42 PM, said:

If only MWO was full of mindless drones like in an RTS who had nothing better to do but putter around base hoping something might actually happen. Oh well.

Guess we'll have to make the game mode actually good instead of making a bad comparison to a real time strategy game.


Sounds like you want to leave your base wide open, and expect it to not get attacked. Maybe they'll add an easy mode in for players such as yourself in the future. A Kiddie mode where the base defends itself and you can go camp mid-map without a strategic care in the world.

Signifigant difference in the comparison is this. In supcom2 they can turn the sea units off with a checkbox. Here, you have to cry on the forums and hope PGI decides to respond to your tears. (Which does not work with regards to base capping) Keep playing without considering the strategic value of defending your base though really. I'll keep exploiting your lack of foresight.

Edited by I am, 14 May 2013 - 07:03 PM.


#252 Keifomofutu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,547 posts
  • LocationLloydminster

Posted 14 May 2013 - 07:22 PM

View PostI am, on 14 May 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:


Sounds like you want to leave your base wide open, and expect it to not get attacked. Maybe they'll add an easy mode in for players such as yourself in the future. A Kiddie mode where the base defends itself and you can go camp mid-map without a strategic care in the world.

Signifigant difference in the comparison is this. In supcom2 they can turn the sea units off with a checkbox. Here, you have to cry on the forums and hope PGI decides to respond to your tears. (Which does not work with regards to base capping) Keep playing without considering the strategic value of defending your base though really. I'll keep exploiting your lack of foresight.

Don't spend the 35,000 cbills all in one place.

#253 Caustic Canid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 256 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 10:47 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.



With mechanics the way they are, 4 man light premades rushing to cap can completely take the base in less than 2 minutes. Even on smaller maps, that may be too quick for most people to get back, even if they didn't stray too far from base. I'm not saying they couldn't function at all, they would just have to defend the capper for longer. Besides, if multiple mechs didn't change the speed of the cap, 3 of the 4 could harass would-be defenders as they return to base, while only one stays in the cap zone.

#254 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,114 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:26 AM

View PostI am, on 14 May 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

I put a cap mod in my triple SSRM comando. It helps me alot, since I am usually capping right off the bat, and my team isn't there to help me.

Every time I cap a team out I ask myself the same question.. "Were they really dumb enough to leave their base totally undefended, and expect that to work out for them?" or "Do they just not care if they win?"

Used to play a game called Supreme Commander 2. It is an RTS, and unlike most RTS's you can turn off alot of different units, restricting the play to just land units, air units, etc etc. Basically a team could limit all units to land, then specialize in anti-land units, and win way more than not. They could completely disregard teh danger of not building AA towers, because they limited the ways they could lose, and air units was one of the disabled options.

Thats waht you have here. Guys that cant fathom base D, are crying getting capped. That would be like ODB complaing he had to pay child support. You chose to leave your base wide open, you accept that. I promise to continue to remind every team I play with, only in asslt mode, of this fact. Your minimizing your vulnerabilities, then specializing with no regard for them. Better engine, nah, we'll jsut QQ the forums enough, and PGI will ensure we never have to consider defense again.

Threads like this make me want to rush cap more. I might buy a second commando, so I can cap while I cap, albeit in different matches.

Nonsense. The problem with rush capping is that it puts combat 'mechs in an impossible position. If they leave a force back at base, they risk getting run over by a combat team. If they stay together in order to deal with the combat team, they run the risk of getting base capped. There's no way to tell for sure which is better, because there's no way to predict what the enemy team will have based on your own team comp any more. Which means you may not have enough scouts available to even cover all the approaches to your base in many maps. That's not tactical gameplay, and it's certainly not you being a smart, special player - it's just Russian Roulette with BattleMechs, and it's lowering the quality of the game.

All of which is somewhat beside the point. The above diatribe completely misrepresents the issue; no one really cares if you cap normally on most maps. It's part of the game, and everyone knows it. What's being objected to is toxic players like the poster above who rush cap in order to support their own egos at the expense of both teams. It's about premade teams of 4 Ravens who, having deliberately broken tonnage matching, rush the base with cap modules by the most covered route they can find - leaving their team as unwilling bait while they refuse combat. It's about people who abuse Alpine and Tourmaline's huge scale and too-short cap timers to make certain that no team which did not simply camp its base will be able to get back in time to stop them. This is about certain game mechanics driving negative behaviors from a minority of toxic players for their own unhealthy gratification - at everyone else's expense.

And make no mistake, this is about ego, not gameplay: it's all right there in the quote. "Were they really dumb enough...?" ".. can't fathom base defense [proper spelling and punctuation added]..." Players of this stripe are in it to get the win any way they can so that they can feel smart and superior - and the negative attention they receive in-game (and in threads like this one) are a benefit of their behavior. They don't care if their team is winning already, or would like to match their skills against the other live players on the enemy team. They don't care that they're actually doing material harm to the players on their own team by denying them combat practice, c-bills and enjoyment. This is about them getting their way, and the justified ire their behavior evokes simply serves as a means for them to pretend superiority. They slander their detractors as being stupid, and ignorant of tactics; they make up lies, claiming to know things they cannot possibly know ("most people don't need [c-bills] any more.") And they make posts advocating their toxic behavior so they can feel justified in their own eyes. After all, if you don't care if your argument is true, as long as you keep arguing you get to feel right.

That's what this thread is really about; an ego boost from arguing with the made-up bullies of the "Assault Racket," who are being mean and oppressing the smart, upright CapWarriors by pushing them around with nasty words. Sadly, this toxic little fairy tale will keep going on and on as long as we feed into it. So I guess the only thing left to say is this:

Don't feed the trolls. "To give truth to him who loves it not is only to give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation."

Edited by Void Angel, 15 May 2013 - 12:33 AM.


#255 Zolaz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,510 posts
  • LocationHouston, Tx

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:42 AM

View PostPanzerman03, on 12 May 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

Mediums suck because they're at a disadvantage against everything that's not a medium in almost any scenario.

Capwarriors suck and I have zero compunctions about accidentally legging them when I see them.


Posted Image

#256 Kentiah

    Member

  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:51 AM

View PostDonas, on 14 May 2013 - 06:27 PM, said:


Yeah, thats always the problem. One thing that might work is an engagement timer that starts to count down when the match is down to one mech remaining, but resets with any engagement. Essentially an end-game mechanic that fulfills the role for anti-spite-troll capping, yet does not offer the ability to be used prior to end-game.

And for the record, your question did not sound like a barb in any way. Nor is the end-game timer something I've vested a great deal of time into as an idea. Its actually something right off the cuff, though I'm sure others have proposed similar mechanics in other threads.

Essentially, I'm fully in favor of capping in scenarios that use it as a victory condition. Its a tactic that must be accounted for or you get burned by it. I also fully support the folks that dont want to be bothered with it having the opportunity to play without it. A Solaris style 'every man for himself' match for example. Something in a closed arena that is too small for troll-hiding. Something that offers prestige and the opportunity for individual renown.


I'm confused, are you saying you think a mech made to outmaneuver retardedly slow mechs based on more firepower is not allowed to do its job when it's the last one left, and is forced to fight possibly multiple heavier mechs? That sounds utterly stupid. If your all assault team is winning and you know they have a light left, you better have a person or two start heading back if you outnumber them enough, it's quite daft to think you deserve to win because you picked a big mech and someone else picked a light mech and their team is lacking in straight firepower. If they get extra c-bills for capping, more power to em. This whole assault thing is pretty absurd when you take into account the 200 tonnage difference allowed, that's the difference between a team having 4 medium mechs, and the enemy having 3-4 assaults in their place.

That being said, I get 500+ damage in a fair number of matches with my Jenner, and once this beagle change happens, it'll be even more glorious, but if a match is going south, you can damn well be sure I'm gonna try to cap, as well as using the caps to try to pull back some of their forces as well. There's nothing wrong with capping, and is a stupid notion to look down on it at all, really. Yes, early game cappers can be annoying, but you guys act like there's any queue time at all. I think the real issue is that you guys pick these stupidly slow mechs, and the game can be over before you even reach combat. It'll be nice if there's less assaults in matches some day, having 4+ in a match is pretty absurd.

Until then, people picking very slow mechs will continue to cry about getting capped.

#257 Kentiah

    Member

  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:54 AM

View PostVoid Angel, on 15 May 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

Nonsense. The problem with rush capping is that it puts combat 'mechs in an impossible position. If they leave a force back at base, they risk getting run over by a combat team. If they stay together in order to deal with the combat team, they run the risk of getting base capped. There's no way to tell for sure which is better, because there's no way to predict what the enemy team will have based on your own team comp any more. Which means you may not have enough scouts available to even cover all the approaches to your base in many maps. That's not tactical gameplay, and it's certainly not you being a smart, special player - it's just Russian Roulette with BattleMechs, and it's lowering the quality of the game.

All of which is somewhat beside the point. The above diatribe completely misrepresents the issue; no one really cares if you cap normally on most maps. It's part of the game, and everyone knows it. What's being objected to is toxic players like the poster above who rush cap in order to support their own egos at the expense of both teams. It's about premade teams of 4 Ravens who, having deliberately broken tonnage matching, rush the base with cap modules by the most covered route they can find - leaving their team as unwilling bait while they refuse combat. It's about people who abuse Alpine and Tourmaline's huge scale and too-short cap timers to make certain that no team which did not simply camp its base will be able to get back in time to stop them. This is about certain game mechanics driving negative behaviors from a minority of toxic players for their own unhealthy gratification - at everyone else's expense.

And make no mistake, this is about ego, not gameplay: it's all right there in the quote. "Were they really dumb enough...?" ".. can't fathom base defense [proper spelling and punctuation added]..." Players of this stripe are in it to get the win any way they can so that they can feel smart and superior - and the negative attention they receive in-game (and in threads like this one) are a benefit of their behavior. They don't care if their team is winning already, or would like to match their skills against the other live players on the enemy team. They don't care that they're actually doing material harm to the players on their own team by denying them combat practice, c-bills and enjoyment. This is about them getting their way, and the justified ire their behavior evokes simply serves as a means for them to pretend superiority. They slander their detractors as being stupid, and ignorant of tactics; they make up lies, claiming to know things they cannot possibly know ("most people don't need [c-bills] any more.") And they make posts advocating their toxic behavior so they can feel justified in their own eyes. After all, if you don't care if your argument is true, as long as you keep arguing you get to feel right.

That's what this thread is really about; an ego boost from arguing with the made-up bullies of the "Assault Racket," who are being mean and oppressing the smart, upright CapWarriors by pushing them around with nasty words. Sadly, this toxic little fairy tale will keep going on and on as long as we feed into it. So I guess the only thing left to say is this:

Don't feed the trolls. "To give truth to him who loves it not is only to give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation."


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.

#258 MrZakalwe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 640 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:54 AM

The real problem with this is that approached logically the only real strategy that is actually viable is to take a defensible position somewhere with enough cover to poptart that has good lines of sight on its approaches and is rather close to your base.

And camp there.

Nobody does this because it is painfully tedious.

P.S. got some friends who sometimes run 4 lights with cap modules. Caps long before anybody can get back.

Edited by MrZakalwe, 15 May 2013 - 12:56 AM.


#259 Dungeon Keeper

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 784 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 01:00 AM

I believe base capture is fine in 8 players premade groups and in conquest mode, but please dont cap in pug assault! The whole mode is based on killing em all.

#260 Caustic Canid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 256 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 01:08 AM

View PostDungeon Keeper, on 15 May 2013 - 01:00 AM, said:

I believe base capture is fine in 8 players premade groups and in conquest mode, but please dont cap in pug assault! The whole mode is based on killing em all.


Except it's not.

Base capture is built into the game.

If the devs wanted a deathmatch, they would have made it a deathmatch.





8 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 8 guests, 0 anonymous users