419 replies to this topic

[Plonky]

Dracol, on 25 July 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

If you keep losing to base caps, you only have yourself to blame.
You might have to blame yourself for always running an assault mech or slow heavy.
You might have to blame yourself for always wanting to fight in the middle of the map.
You might have to blame yourself for wanting to follow the blob.
You might have to blame yourself for not wanting to leave the brawl.
You might even have to blame yourself for not reading the ways the match can be won at the beginning of the match.

So what you're saying is you deserve to lose if:
You play an assault or heavy.
You like fighting the enemy.
Your team stays together.
You don't leave combat to walk for a minute, then stand inside a square, or perhaps be killed by lights.

You seem to be implying that playing a heavy mech is bad, fighting as a team is bad, and that walking around the map standing in squares or chasing lights is good.

It's true that there are a lot of strategies you can do that minimize the risk of losing to a base cap. But those strategies aren't fun. I'm pretty sure you could win on Alpine most of the time if your team was all lights, and you just avoided the enemy the entire game while capping. Yes, there needs to be something for light mechs to do, but that something should involve interaction with other players (like scouting, flanking and harassing).

Consider these statements:

I play MWO because I enjoy Mech combat.
I play MWO because I enjoy running around a map capping points.

Which is the most likely to describe your average MWO player? Let's face it, if all the game was was mechs fighting, it'd be fine. All the capture points do is distract people from the fun part of the game - combat.

[One Medic Army]

Possible solution:
When both teams have players present in the other team's cap zone, all capping ceases.

That'd put an end to both teams missing each-other and going straight for a basecap.

Edited by One Medic Army, 26 July 2013 - 12:05 AM.

[Qrbaza]

Its not the rewards. I play this game to smash robots not to cap race like some captard. So Again its not the rewards nor XP im after! Im looking for decent fight even when im in light. Ok i go cap to distract or possibly devide enemy team or if we are clearly loosing like they have 6 kills we have 1. Than its requested from players to try and outcap enemy horde as you cant defeat them with brute force.

[Lord Perversor]

Whats the point of capping you ask??

A: A win is a win that's what mattera
B: it makes some players like the Op rage.

Those 2 reason alone make it worthwhile for a large large part of the playerbase.

[Rhakhas]

I used to be in favor of a timer or a certain number of kills required before capping is enabled. Now I'm more of the opinion that capping actually needs to be more heavily rewarded. This is because, during the last couple challenges, players DID have an incentive to cap (to win the match as quickly as possible. And do you know what happened? People actually started defending their bases. O.o

Moral of the story being, most people don't bother defending, because most people don't bother capping, because it's not rewarded. And then when someone does cap, it just ends up seeming like a {Richard Cameron} move.

All that having been said, I think they could increase the cap times on the large maps like Alpine and Tourmaline....

[Desdain]

PeenyPoke, on 25 July 2013 - 11:56 PM, said:

So what you're saying is you deserve to lose if:
You play an assault or heavy.
You like fighting the enemy.
Your team stays together.
You don't leave combat to walk for a minute, then stand inside a square, or perhaps be killed by lights.

You seem to be implying that playing a heavy mech is bad, fighting as a team is bad, and that walking around the map standing in squares or chasing lights is good.

It's true that there are a lot of strategies you can do that minimize the risk of losing to a base cap. But those strategies aren't fun. I'm pretty sure you could win on Alpine most of the time if your team was all lights, and you just avoided the enemy the entire game while capping. Yes, there needs to be something for light mechs to do, but that something should involve interaction with other players (like scouting, flanking and harassing).

Consider these statements:

I play MWO because I enjoy Mech combat.
I play MWO because I enjoy running around a map capping points.

Which is the most likely to describe your average MWO player? Let's face it, if all the game was was mechs fighting, it'd be fine. All the capture points do is distract people from the fun part of the game - combat.

What he's saying is that the assault game mode requires strategy to defend/attack bases. What you are saying is that you want team death match without worrying about land resources. Why don't you petition to have the game mode you want brought into the game?

Let me say that again. Assault is not Team Death Match.

Edited by Desdain, 26 July 2013 - 04:36 AM.

[Spawnsalot]

Desdain, on 26 July 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

What he's saying is that the assault game mode requires strategy to defend/attack bases. What you are saying is that you want team death match without worrying about land resources. Why don't you petition to have the game mode you want brought into the game?

Let me say that again. Assault is not Team Death Match.

The problem is, people *have* been petitioning for new game modes (and not just TDM) and those threads end up filled with militant cappers shrieking at them for have the sheer audacity to want to play another game-type, apparently terrified their favourite game-mode will become a barren wasteland once there's a more entertaining way to play.

[Joseph Mallan]

PeenyPoke, on 25 July 2013 - 11:56 PM, said:

So what you're saying is you deserve to lose if:
You play an assault or heavy.
You like fighting the enemy.
Your team stays together.
You don't leave combat to walk for a minute, then stand inside a square, or perhaps be killed by lights.

If you do these things wrong. Yes you deserve to lose.

If you are all Heavy and Assaults Your opponent should cap if they are to light to stand up and fight.

If you like fighting your enemy to the exclusion of better tactics, Yes.

If your team stays together to far away from your base to protect it. Yes. Your looking to engage your enemy somewhere that is better for you than for him. So either close enough to your base to protect it, or close enough to his to take it. To many people here think to rigidly. Battle is fluid and should never be won the same way twice if possible. That leads to predictable and that is a loss on the field. I can win by killing you or by taking your stuff. However I achieve the victory... I still beat you.

[Jestun]

To win the match.

Do we really need a 10 page thread to discuss the point of fulfilling one of the potential victory conditions of the match?

[Master Q]

One Medic Army, on 26 July 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Possible solution:
When both teams have players present in the other team's cap zone, all capping ceases.

That'd put an end to both teams missing each-other and going straight for a basecap.

Not a bad thought. Especially since I've been in more than a few matches that boiled down to 4+ players in each score zone, match going to whoever could afford to put in Capture Accelerators in their premade group.

Jestun, on 26 July 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

To win the match.

Do we really need a 10 page thread to discuss the point of fulfilling one of the potential victory conditions of the match?

Actually, since the "win condition" results in low XP, low c-bills, and a general feeling on the part of the majority of players that it simply wasn't a fun way to play... yes. We do.

[Jestun]

Master Q, on 26 July 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

Not a bad thought. Especially since I've been in more than a few matches that boiled down to 4+ players in each score zone, match going to whoever could afford to put in Capture Accelerators in their premade group.

Or if you look at it in another way it means the team that actually realises that their base needs to be defended will beat the team that thinks it's a team deathmatch.

[arghmace]

Even a cap win means salvage bonus for the winner.

But most importantly a win is a win, regardless of the rewards.

[Jestun]

Master Q, on 26 July 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

Not a bad thought. Especially since I've been in more than a few matches that boiled down to 4+ players in each score zone, match going to whoever could afford to put in Capture Accelerators in their premade group.



Actually, since the "win condition" results in low XP, low c-bills, and a general feeling on the part of the majority of players that it simply wasn't a fun way to play... yes. We do.

"majority"?

Either back that up or stop expecting to be taken seriously.

I suspect a fairly high percentage of the playerbase have the mechs they want and stacks of unsused xp & cbills.

If you want a team deathmatch mode (A.K.A hunt-the-last-powered-down-light-mech mode) then ask for it. Don't ask for the existing (already simple) game modes to be dumbed down.

[Zerberus]

Lord Perversor, on 26 July 2013 - 02:10 AM, said:

Whats the point of capping you ask??

A: A win is a win that's what mattera
B: it makes some players like the Op rage.

Those 2 reason alone make it worthwhile for a large large part of the playerbase.

THIS

Even if I couldn`t win by capping, I`d still do it just to **** off people like the OP that seem to think their way to play is the only way... just like I like to carry LRM 5 launchers just to **** easily annoyed people off with an "incoming missile "warning every 2 seconds.

Psychological warfare is also warfare, and if you start to think "Stupid basecappers" as soon as you hear "base is being captured", then I`ve already won the battle of wits, and will usually a break off the cap (depending on whether my team is outgunned or not) and go over to troll the heavies and assaults more directly just becasue I can.

That usually leads to a battle win instead, which is just so much more delicious because I WAS fighting the way my opponent wantred me to, uup close and personal... just not right from the start

On the other hand if I read "Stupid basecappers" or similar in chat, then I WILL finish the cap, just because I know for a fact that I`m massively annoying at least one enemy, clouding their judgement and rendering them combat ineffective for the tiome that they`re flaming me instead of shooting my team, and will likely be so pissed off that if I meet them in the next match all I have to do is type "hi" to raise their blood pressure again and guarantee my team another win.

If you`re tired of getting trolled by cappers and other people that understand the game mechanics, you need to start acting intelligently, and not just whine on the forums or in /all... because whining doesn`t stop us, intelligent players do

PS: Whinethreads like this actuall tells us we`re doing our job well and need to keep it up, because it`s ******* people off that don`t want to understand the game and /or the rules.

It`s like playing doubles tennis with 2 people at the baseline playing actual tennis and 2 kids playing catch at the net.... Just because the kids at the net ("the Blob") think the`re playing tennis doesn`t make it true, and their actions usually are in no way influential to the outcome of the game as a result. but they still throw hissy fits like this thread when their side loses, which for most light and medium pilots is just a barrel of laughs and tears that taste like a good wine.

Edited by Zerberus, 26 July 2013 - 07:57 AM.

[JingleHell]

I think, if anything, we need MORE alternate wincons, rather than fewer. If we're never going to have the weapons all balanced ideally for playing big stompy robot meat grinder, maybe some of them will find niche value when there's more variables in individual games.

Frankly, playing big stompy robot meat grinder exclusively kind of kills a lot of the fun potential of a game with so much diverse stuff available to it.

[Sprouticus]

Last night I dropped into a PUG match on Alpine. We were quite slow as a group (assaults and slow heavies).

Early in the match we noticed 2 lights trying to flank us. We ended up falling back to the ridge near our base and played defense. We still lost (crappy coordination and aim from most of our players), but it was 8-4 or 8-5 and our tactics prevented them from capping.

It IS possible to play the game with a brain, and still end up fighting.
It IS possible to play defense.
It IS possible to have situational awareness, and realize that if you move forward you will be capped.


If you are unable to accomplish these tasks, it is your own fault. Don't blame 'captards'.


Side note: It was one of the more interesting matches last night, even compared to the group matches I played later (which obviously have tactical elements to them.

Edited by Sprouticus, 26 July 2013 - 08:20 AM.

[hammerreborn]

Jman5, on 23 July 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

You guys can debate about whether it's fun, or fair, or efficient all day, but the bottom line is this:

I will continue base capturing as I see fit. You can either adapt, or continue losing. It's your choice. When the enemy gives me a free win, I will take it and no amount of temper tantrums will get me off that base.

Lol its funny, because the temper tantrums are what gets me staying on the cap rather than waiting for one person to break off and fighting.

[MustrumRidcully]

Tyler Durden, on 20 July 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

I think you ask the wrong question. It isn't so much "why do you do it" as "why don't we get more space bucks for winning by cap?"

Because it leads to less fights for quicker games and a quick buck.

I think Capturing should be important, because it's the only thing that can stop everyone from moving in a blob. But if capping is very rewarding, you risk it becoming the strategy of C-Bill farmers. 25,000 C-Bills for a 2 minute cap-fight is not worth it it if you can make 125,000 with an 8 minute fight.

And don't believe that it won't happen, because people aren't like that. They are. Just think back to R&R and AFK farmers and trial mech suicide farmers. And you don't need many of them to ruin a game. Just 1 out of 16 players that prefers the quick buck can turn a potentially exciting match into a disappointment. Either he ends the match early with a cap wictory, or he loses your team the match because he's not where he was needed and good intercepted quickly. And it's probably more than 1 out of 16.


I don't have an answer on how to do make things better. Maybe capping is the wrong mechanic in the first place, maybe capping as it is done here is badly implemented.

[Zerberus]

hammerreborn, on 26 July 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

Lol its funny, because the temper tantrums are what gets me staying on the cap rather than waiting for one person to break off and fighting.

One of the best answers to a "******* useless cappers" statement I ever read was "I WAS going to just tag it a bit to annoy you... but now I`ll finish it becasue I KNOW it ****** you off. Thanks "

Edited by Zerberus, 26 July 2013 - 08:55 AM.

[Wildstreak]

Complaint #427 on the same subject since I started and I haven't been here a year yet.