49 replies to this topic

[Hammerfinn]

Harleen Quinzel, on 14 May 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

This is starting to get like a cracked record - these threads of It is / is not ok to base cap.....

On the "other" thread I've also posted my views on this many a time. But, I was thinking about this whilst skim reading this particular thread.

If you're a new pilot or an old pilot in one of the inferior light mechs, would base rushing and winning net more XP/C-Bills per hour than running around in Raven 4X or similar, desperately trying to tag mech kills for C-Bills before being cored by a pop tart?

My purpose here is for new players to see the real issue and not get raged into bad decisions. As you say, if you're leveling your first commando, a cap is really gonna be better for you than instagib by snipers. My point is trying to show players that yes, they can win by cap, but many people think it's cheap, and often they're right that it's cheap--but not always.

[Troggy]

From a strictly selfish perspective, sneak capping in your trial commando is probably better than trying to fight in it. For about 3 matches. At least in terms of rewards per minute. After that, I doubt it. For example:

C-bill farming would be even more lucrative (co-tagging with a friend) i.e. you each take an LRM 5 and a TAG, and earn each other TAG bonuses. Literally hundreds (even >1000) xp per match (Assist + TAG + SPOT + Maybe a saviour or two). It works win or lose, and everyone will ignore the LRM light. You might even get good this way. You are still despised, BTW. But, maybe, less despised. If you add an ER PPC (or LL), you wouldn't even be hated anymore (though you might be a target). With the current bonuses you could even start doing it on like match 6 with a cheap mech (LRM5s are cheap and the engine doesn't matter). Hell, you could even cap if it starts to go south.

-- Satire starts here --

For that matter, just run and hide in the corner and play a second game in the background. That way you can earn xp and c-bills WITHOUT EVEN PLAYING. Just move around a bit, so no-one thinks you are farming - just timid.

-- End Satire --

In short. There are always ways to game the system. Here, using sneak-caps on big maps (or worse yet 4-man CapWarrior Online) is one of them. Tag bonuses are another.

Is it more lucrative than just playing and being awful? Probably. Is it more lucrative than being good? No! (well...tagging might actually be - at least for xp). But, Capping? Earning 300 XP? GOD NO! Also, there is usually one decent trial mech in which 300 XP per match is totally obtainable with mediocre play.

This isn't about the ethics of cap. Everyone understands capping and it's mechanics. This is about how sneak-caps and CapWarrior represent an awful decision for a new player. Both in terms of maximizing rewards and in terms of learning to play. It will get you 300 xp wins against bad players, and 0 xp losses against good ones. Unless you specifically make it exploitative with a pack of Ravens. In which case you get ~300 xp, most of the time. And no money.

I don't get the argument here.
--
Troggy

[Hammerfinn]

I'm not trying to make an argument, I'm trying to let new players know the issues and reasons behind different decisions on capping.

Personally, I dislike and do not sneak-cap; I do not cap if my team is ahead in kills or close; I do not cap if I have full armor and an enemy I can harass.

But too many people immediately rage at capping, and I don't want new players to get the wrong idea. There are times and places when they SHOULD cap. And times when it's a gray area and they CAN cap, but people will get mad, and they shouldn't care. And times when they SHOULDN'T cap, and when people get mad it's for a good reason, and they should listen.

Edited by Hammerfinn, 14 May 2013 - 09:08 AM.

[Dracorean]

Is it not normal to have one or two guys defend the base or have your teams light mechs ready to rush back to the base to ward off people trying to capture it?

I mean a game cant always be played out as "Kill everything in sight and hope you don't get killed yourself" right?

[Koniving]

Void Angel, on 13 May 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

Did I miss a Dev post on Community Warfare? I haven't seen anything about it's implementation, so I'm curious as to why you're telling me that base capping will be the most important objective when Community Warfare comes out?

There's a new game mode coming with CW that's a one sided assault mode, where Team A is sent to take the base of Team B. Team B is required to stop it.

Team A will not have a base.

Team B will have automatic base defenses of some sort (ATD 36, 37).

[Hammerfinn]

Dracorean, on 14 May 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

I mean a game cant always be played out as "Kill everything in sight and hope you don't get killed yourself" right?

Many games I'm in, that's exactly what the majority of both teams seems to want. Thus, part of the impetus for this thread: letting new players know that cap-win isn't always bad.

[Koniving]

Dracorean, on 14 May 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

Is it not normal to have one or two guys defend the base or have your teams light mechs ready to rush back to the base to ward off people trying to capture it?

It is actually not normal. On larger maps the team can't afford to drop one or two guys on the base to defend while the rest go out to die. With 8 mech teams there's not enough players. With the upcoming 12 mech teams the tactic will be more appealing.

Occasionally I pretend to be disconnected as to not receive any gripes about staying behind to defend the base.

Edited by Koniving, 14 May 2013 - 09:29 AM.

[Grenadapult]

I'll be upfront. I am a cap hater. The original post didn't really give all the facts, so I'm glad this is an entire discussion for rookie pilots. 300XP vs 100XP for triple XP is NOT true. That is the win/loss stats ONLY. If you actually did... anything, you usually get 300xp or more even in a loss, total, mind you. But I drive primarily assault mechs. Its very common for high speed cappers to get me a win. YAY, a WIN! That yields 30,000 c-bills and 300XP. Not worth the the time it took to find the match. Its not just about the moral decision of capping in assault games. It just doesn't make sense and totally screws over any teammate that can't keep up. Conquest games are a whole different scenario. If you are in Conquest in a light, get capping, thats your job! Seriously though, thanks for making the thread so we can the community all the facts to make informed decisions.

[Hammerfinn]

Bumping because it's short, readable, and educational.

[Harleen Quinzel]

Grenadapult, on 14 May 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

I'll be upfront. I am a cap hater. The original post didn't really give all the facts, so I'm glad this is an entire discussion for rookie pilots. 300XP vs 100XP for triple XP is NOT true. That is the win/loss stats ONLY. If you actually did... anything, you usually get 300xp or more even in a loss, total, mind you. But I drive primarily assault mechs. Its very common for high speed cappers to get me a win. YAY, a WIN! That yields 30,000 c-bills and 300XP. Not worth the the time it took to find the match. Its not just about the moral decision of capping in assault games. It just doesn't make sense and totally screws over any teammate that can't keep up. Conquest games are a whole different scenario. If you are in Conquest in a light, get capping, thats your job! Seriously though, thanks for making the thread so we can the community all the facts to make informed decisions.

Sorry Gren, but I don't agree with the points you made from a numbers perspective; from a gameply / moral standpoint I agree with the sentiment of your post.

If all a player cares about is to max their W/L ratio and XP/hour then as a light it makes perfect sense, as a base cap nets 425XP for 3-4 mins work (>100XP/Min). For a full duration match of say 10mins, a light pilot would have to get an additional 700XP. With the paltry return on TAG/NARC bonuses (particularly with the lack of LRM's in the game at the moment, and the difficulty to get the bonus when there are), spotting and low damage output that's a very tough call on most PuG light pilots, let alone in a bad mech.

Just one more point, In my JM's I average about 50% more XP per match (regardless of a W/L) simply due to the amount of damage I can do, yet I still need the same XP to improve my mech? I guess it would be even more (60-65%) in an Assault mech?

Maybe we should be asking for a balance in XP returns per match. I would think a 50% increase in Spotting/TAG assists, or a reduction in the XP required to rank a mech up based on class? would help. Mind you if you did this, you should add a penalty to cap win say decreasing XP for a win from 100% at tim = 0 to 0% at 10mins.

[Grenadapult]

Point taken Harleen. I WAS looking at it from an Assault Mech standpoint. So I guess we could agree that the game is broken (or at least bent) when a cap win yields great returns for Lights but miserable for Assaults, and a deathmatch wind is the exact opposite. Do we agree that winning should have similar results for everyone who contributed? Lights SHOULD be able to get equal XP through TAG, NARC, spotting bonuses, assists, etc. Maybe the problem is in that? All I know, is a 48kph (ok, MAYBE 60kph) heavy Assault, is not able to contribute to a cap win.

[zraven7]

Grenadapult, on 16 May 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:

Point taken Harleen. I WAS looking at it from an Assault Mech standpoint. So I guess we could agree that the game is broken (or at least bent) when a cap win yields great returns for Lights but miserable for Assaults, and a deathmatch wind is the exact opposite. Do we agree that winning should have similar results for everyone who contributed? Lights SHOULD be able to get equal XP through TAG, NARC, spotting bonuses, assists, etc. Maybe the problem is in that? All I know, is a 48kph (ok, MAYBE 60kph) heavy Assault, is not able to contribute to a cap win.

Ok, most people now know I am a FIRM proponent of the base capture mechanic. However, it does need to be improved. This is one method in which it could be improved significantly. From a purely gameplay standpoint, not taking into account rewards, pulling of a 0 shot, 0 damage base capture can be pretty darned satisfying. It's like winning the war by tricking the king into signing the surrender. However, I do acknowledge the distinct lack of reward incentive. Win by capture needs to be made more difficult, while the rewards for doing so need to be increased a lot. Making the Base Capture win attractive would solve a lot of problems the player base has with each other.

First, I would suggest a two primary changes to the rewards. First, a base capture should yield a flat 100,000 c-bills and 500 experience. It's not amazing, but it's not abysmal by any stretch. Second, I think that, if a match times out without either a Base Capture or an entire team destroyed, then it should be deemed a draw, and everyone involved should get the old rewards for base capture (30,000 cbills, 300 exp) regardless of any other factors. Considering I have NEVER seen a game time out, I don't see this being a problem, but it would discourage people from simply base camping.

Second, changes need to be made to the base capture itself. The ideas I have seen gain the most amount of traction are capture rate being dependent on map size, resource acquisition requiring some sort of action, and automated base defenses.
The first one is primarily for Alpine and Tourmaline, of course, but could also mean that smaller maps, like Forest Colony, might get shortened capture times. It would honestly all have to be reviewed and tested. The second would be something to the effect of having to attack the base rig while in the capture zone to acquire resources, or having to stand on a large buton or something. It would essentially force at least one mech to choose between fighting or resource gathering, but not do both. This would prevent a single light mech from just running around the rig dodging while gathering resources. Automated base defenses could take many forms, but I believe they should be destructible, and they should alert the team when they are being attacked, similar to the alert you get when the base is being captured.

Implementing any of these changes would help player friction considerably, but I think the biggest and easiest would be the flat increase in base capture reward. I don't think 100,000 cbills is unreasonable, and I think everyone would certainly be happier with that than 30,000.

Edited by zraven7, 16 May 2013 - 04:58 AM.

[BoPop]

Harleen Quinzel, on 16 May 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

If all a player cares about is to max their W/L ratio and XP/hour then as a light it makes perfect sense, as a base cap nets 425XP for 3-4 mins work (>100XP/Min). For a full duration match of say 10mins, a light pilot would have to get an additional 700XP.

*calmly* you're wrong.

this match i'm about to show you lasted 4 minutes (but stupid me cropped out the effing time and saved before i realized, which is the whole reason i took the screenshots in the first place... was to prove that fighting vs capping = more everything per second squared hehe

Spoiler

facepalmed when i realized i'd cropped out the time...

but anyways, you see how just in that kill (i leeched it, stole it, ofcourse) that kill almost = a win, my kill assists + savior kills = more than a win, my spotting assist + component destruction = 1/3 a win. so, in 4 minutes it's like i played 3ish quick cap games, see what i'm saying? not to mention the cbills and gxp.

it does take practice to get in good and be nasty in a light, but the payoff is so much better than being an exclusive quick capper. everyone's guilty of doing it a few times though heheh, present company included, fosho

and in a cicada3m a couple seconds ago-not a light but same basic tactics to achieve same results.

Spoiler

GLHF

~edit, oh yea, all they need to do is make a small pulse laser turret on the oil rig pump thingy that shoots at targets in the cap perimeter, this would make two lights want to go toe tap it together, which takes more strategy. that way one measley spider couldnt just go win game after game, boringly. and i LOVE spiders!

Edited by BoPop, 16 May 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[Hammerfinn]

I'm loving the discussion, especially its cordiality. I like most of the arguments presented here.

However, please remember that I'm trying to keep this purely informative for new players.

Bo--

I see your point, and yes, in heavies and assaults, it is almost always better to fight.

In fast lights and mediums, with efficiencies, custom loadout, and decent piloting skills, yes, it is almost always better to fight.

If you're in a non-optimized, low-firepower mech, though, you can get WAY more xp from a cap win. That's just the math.

Now, should you use that XP to get to that optimized loadout with efficiencies, so you can stop capping? Yes. But at least for a while, until you get to that point, cap can be your best option in many circumstances.

[Hammerfinn]

Just because I don't want arguments doesn't mean I don't want discussion; please post here if you think you have anything informative to add!

[LapsedPacifist79]

I think the main thing for new players to remember is this is a team "sport".

As anyone who's ever dropped with me knows, I'm a barely competent pilot. But I always play for the team and always have in any online game. That's the point yeah? I'll throw myself on every grenade if it helps and KDR be damned. I'm not fussed about persistent stats.

As I've said before there is a time to capture. When it's good for the team. Capture feints are great, just a few minutes ago my team got torn apart because of a clever Cicada drawing a lance back to base while his buddies tore us a new one. It's hard to ignore a hard contact close to you when all you've got to shoot at is some assaults, half the map away, lashing down some serious firepower right? Great tactic and the kind of thing fast movers are made for.

New players, bear the team in mind. If we're winning then hold off / don't finish the cap until it needs to be done. You will not be popular if you take c-bills and XP out of anyones pocket. If we look like we're going down most players won't mind if you do it a bit prematurely so we get the salvage and win bonus.

The main problem comes on the big maps, mainly from frustration about not being able to get back in time, and i d i o t s levelling lights at the cost of everyone's time. And, blatantly, griefers!.

VOIP (with an option to mute certain players of course!) would mitigate a lot of these problems I think.

[Harleen Quinzel]

Grenadapult, on 16 May 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:

Point taken Harleen. I WAS looking at it from an Assault Mech standpoint. So I guess we could agree that the game is broken (or at least bent) when a cap win yields great returns for Lights but miserable for Assaults, and a deathmatch wind is the exact opposite. Do we agree that winning should have similar results for everyone who contributed? Lights SHOULD be able to get equal XP through TAG, NARC, spotting bonuses, assists, etc. Maybe the problem is in that? All I know, is a 48kph (ok, MAYBE 60kph) heavy Assault, is not able to contribute to a cap win.

I agree with you 100% Gren; all I ask is for a balanced battlefield. If players want lights to perform scouting roles, so that the heavies / assualts can go pew pew / pop tart each other, then they have to be given the opportunity to reap equal rewards.

[Harleen Quinzel]

BoPop, on 16 May 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

*SNIP*

but anyways, you see how just in that kill (i leeched it, stole it, ofcourse) that kill almost = a win, my kill assists + savior kills = more than a win, my spotting assist + component destruction = 1/3 a win. so, in 4 minutes it's like i played 3ish quick cap games, see what i'm saying? not to mention the cbills and gxp.

it does take practice to get in good and be nasty in a light, but the payoff is so much better than being an exclusive quick capper. everyone's guilty of doing it a few times though heheh, present company included, fosho

BoPop, hmmm, ok.

The points you posted and (made in those matches) are very good. I also love my Cicada 3M and Raven 3L and enjoy terrorising the opposition etc, stealing the odd kill here, blowing a hunchies leg off there and watching other lights run in fear from me, but, those aren't bad mechs, indeed I find them the best in their respective types given the use of ECM on both. I should check, but I think my average XP yield in those is about 900XP per match. Like most I will be interested so see how these builds fair once the change to BAP is implemented.

I have to say, that on my Cicada-3M I have never exceeded 2000XP in one match, so I doff my hat to you in respect of a superior pilot. But, in that action, I also say that you are not an average or bad pilot in a bad mech that we are forced to utilise unless we wish to use MC to level it. Your figures also include premium bonus, something I did not consider in my posts above (although in both cases you earnt 225XP/min and 320XP/min excluding Premium) . One thing you did not say is if this was in a PuG game without teamspeak or similar, but I will assume it was.

Therefore I believe that my points are still valid. For an average pilot in a bad mech who only cares about their W/L ratio and XP/hour, the base rush method is optimal. In response to your valid post, An average or better player in a good mech can make more by not base capping

[LapsedPacifist79]

*sighs*

I guess this is the crux of the matter isn't it? Base rush at everyones expense to level your mech. So much easier and less time consuming than fighting. Totally against the spirit of the game but the rules are the rules and if you're within them then fair enough. Not much different from suicide farming though IMO.

[Harleen Quinzel]

LapsedPacifist79, on 17 May 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

*sighs*

I guess this is the crux of the matter isn't it? Base rush at everyones expense to level your mech. So much easier and less time consuming than fighting. Totally against the spirit of the game but the rules are the rules and if you're within them then fair enough. Not much different from suicide farming though IMO.

Just to ensure I am clear, I don't condone this route.

Doesn't matter what the game is, there will always be min/maxers out there.

The only true way to deal with them is to remove the incentive to do so - hence my suggestion of applying a time based sliding scale of reward for a cap win.