Jump to content

Timidity Is A Great Tactic!


75 replies to this topic

#21 Icedman

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 42 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 05:31 PM

I can understand and even agree with this a bit but I would say something more along the lines of "don't rush your rush".

What I mean is many people are in a hurry to go out in a blaze of glory or something. Currently, there are lots of LRMs and PPC/Gauss going around... let some armor get knocked off before you decide you need to "PUSH THAT HILL!". Not saying poptarting is great or sitting behind a rock while your team dies is the way to play.... just saying you will have a better chance of doing meaningful damage and scoring meaningful kills if you give it a few minutes for your team to strip some armor first.

I see people charge into 5 fresh mechs, then wonder why they died without a kill. If you run short to medium ranged weapons, there is nothing wrong with supporting your boats and snipers for a bit, pegging lights that come your way, until you see some of the enemy mechs get cored or stripped.

Oh... target (red box, hit "R") your target! Glance at the paper doll and see where your target IS weak. Then shoot there. When I started, I just aimed CT all the time and ignored that "target information" part. Once I really learned to use it, my effectiveness and usefulness to any team went way up. You will never get used to specific spot targeting until you see the Target Information paper doll a lot, and you will never see THAT if you don't get in the habit of red boxing everything.

#22 Hauser

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 976 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 06:24 PM

Timidity is bad in the face of LRM boats.

I just had a game in which people in open terrain were collectively backing away from a single Kintaro with LRMS. Imagine that, three heavy mechs backing away from a medium. I charged the Kintaro, shouting at those three guys to close the range. Didn't help of course, the selfish cowards just kept backing away. Killed the Kintaro myself without taking to much damage by torso twisting, but by god, I shouldn't even have to do that.

Edited by Hauser, 01 September 2013 - 06:26 PM.


#23 Felio

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,721 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 07:24 PM

There are a couple of ways matches are decided.

One of the most painful to watch is when one team has a group out in the open, and the other team is behind cover. One guy pops his head out and gets it blown off. Then another guy. Then another guy...

In that case, your only chance is to tell your team what's gonna happen if they keep it up, then try to lead the charge.

#24 CrashieJ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,435 posts
  • LocationGalatea (Mercenary's Star)

Posted 01 September 2013 - 07:39 PM

If you are in an Atlas of a Jenner... your role is to "Soak" and "Flank" respectively.

in certain maps there are points that pushing is the only viable tactic (Terra Therma is the biggest one).

standing and playing "sniper duel" with other snipers is BAD, Mechs with Long Ranged Weapons have horrible tracking for a reason.

"Go on, Hump their face"

#25 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 01 September 2013 - 08:16 PM

View PostRoyalewithcheese, on 01 September 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:


Personally my favorite sort of teammate is a Highlander or 3D who obliterates everything from range and doesn't zerg. My favorite sort of opponent is someone who decides it's a good idea to take a peek over Coward's Ridge.

So you'd rather have others fight for you while you hang back? That won't earn you many C-bills and as your Elo raises from the wins your skill will remain static.

Maybe that's why people find themselves in elo hell? They let others carry the team and provide minimal work towards victory which leads to players with moderate elo scores who contribute nothing to the team being matched with folk who are expected to carry the team by themselves.

#26 WVAnonymous

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 1,691 posts
  • LocationEvery world has a South Bay. That's where I am.

Posted 01 September 2013 - 09:12 PM

There's a lot to be said for letting the other team provide the first charge over the ridge / through the dropship / around the bend so your team can blast the poor sucker with zero communications. I frequently seem to be on teams with zero communications.

I highly recommend timidity when the entire chat traffic for the match is "gl hf", 8 minutes of combat and then "gg"...

#27 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 01 September 2013 - 10:24 PM

A lot of good replies here. I'll address the main issues in replying to Troggy first.

View PostTroggy, on 01 September 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

If your goal is to have the highest point total when your team loses, on your team only, or if you believe that you are an insufficiently good player to consistently help control the flow of the match, this is probably true. However, this will almost certainly result in a ho-hum W/L stat. It will also often result in sub-optimal matches in the games where your team rolls the other team.

The W/L stat doesn't really matter to me. First of all, I tend to focus more on getting kills than getting W's, because I don't find the game modes very fun at all. If I'm playing Hostage Rescue in CS:S, then the victory is all that matters. If I'm playing "Stand on the Square" in MW:O, then I don't care too much about victory or defeat.
Second, a W doesn't necessarily pay more than a L. You'll see a lot of cap victories, both in Assault and Conquest, where the surviving players, the guys that actually won the battle, come out of the match with a score of 25, and an appropriately low C-bill and XP reward. Whereas the guys who just engaged in a mindless brawl, perhaps with no strategic sense, end up getting a few kills, 500 damage and a score of 75, earning more C-bills and more XP.

You could argue that poor teamwork will often lead to a poor team performance, which leads to poor individual performances and poor rewards. But it's not necessarily the case.

View PostTroggy, on 01 September 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

This is probably true in virtually all cases, however, attacking in sync with other is mutually beneficial as fire spread over multiple targets is much less effective than focused fire. This alone would be sufficient to explain the effectiveness of even groups as small as 4 people. If there are co-ordinated players in your game (you will notice when there are), it is almost always better to "follow their lead" so to speak. This gives you the opportunity to influence the match, and be aggressive, while offering much of the security of being timid.

Not sure what point you're making here. Letting other go first doesn't mean I'm not following their lead. It just means that I let the other guys walk into the line of fire five or ten seconds before I follow. And if I do follow, I make sure that we have the advantage of superior numbers, otherwise I pull back. Trying to help your teammates who are walking into a deathtrap rarely helps anyone, so you want to make sure other people are on the right track before you follow them.

View PostTroggy, on 01 September 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

My philosophy of playing is that in a properly run match (even PUG) it should not come down to someone taking a beating. Find a group (in game, just look around), follow them, try to isolate enemy mechs who do something foolish, gain an early mech advantage, then join the slaughter. Play with your team, not against them. And don't be timid. The goal is to deal big damage by increasing both your survival time (by grouping) and contact time (by actually shooting the enemy), rather than just your survival time by hiding.

I'm tempted to say that you're making a false dichotomy, because it sounds cool and makes me feel smart. But instead, I'll just say that letting others get shot at first, doesn't mean that you can't work with your team. Indeed, in order to be timid and successful, you want to feed off the synergy of effective groups in your team, and especially join in the focus fire, because that means people are less likely to shoot at you.

So I'm not sure if you were disagreeing with me here, but it seems we're in agreement. My point was simply "don't go in first". The best thing is to wait for the enemy to do something foolish first, but in a PUG, it's close to a 50-50 chance that your own team will make the first mistake.

View PostTroggy, on 01 September 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

Here, the advice breaks down pretty heavy for a couple reasons. 1) Dying early, quitting and dropping another mech is the way to make boatloads of c-bills. If you've admitted that you are unlikely to greatly influence the match, take a mech with huge DPS and try to corner a couple fools early. Earn your money, die in a flame of glory and move on. Being last left alive in a match that takes 12.5 minutes and in which your team ate lead the whole time is the worst possible way to make money.
Either you want to win, in which case you need to focus on strengthening the team organization, i.e. making a difference. Or you are more interested in your paycheck, in which case you wanna wreck stuff ASAP, then get out. Frankly, timidity gets you neither.

But it's the best compromise. And that's what a lot of people are looking for.

Whether or not it pays well to do suicide runs is irrelevant to me, because the frustration of being killed repeatedly with no feeling of achievement is not worth the money. When you start to farm in a game, it's usually a sign that you've grown bored with it, and the only thing keeping you interested is the hollow promise of better gear, which in the end is not enough to keep you interested anyway. That's my take on farming, anyway.

And as I said above, a lot of players have more fun when they're killing and doing damage. Some people really like the game modes, so they enjoy the strategy involved in trying to rush bases, defend bases, etc. But a lot of people find that the actual fighting is the most entertaining aspect of this game, so when the enemy is capping their base in Assault, or when they realize they're losing by cap in Conquest, they just go "Meh" and they continue shooting at the enemy, instead of rushing to defend their base or cap.

If your goal is to earn the maximum amount of C-bills as quickly as possible, then I agree suicide runs are the best option.
If your goal is to win matches, then I agree that teamwork and even sacrifice is often necessary to ensure victory.
If, however, you just want to kick *** and earn loads of money, I think my compromise is the best approach. And when I'm playing devil's advocate, it's because I've observed this behavior in so many other players.

I've lost count of all the times when I've led a full lance of mechs against 2 or 3 enemy mechs, only to find that my 3 lance mates pulled back out of timidity, and left me outnumbered and doomed. It's tempting to complain, but they often do end up winning the match, or at least getting top score, and they don't tend to see things my way when I point out that my death was unnecessary and even detrimental to the team.

A lot of people waste their energy complaining in team chat when their team screws up. "Why did you leave me to die?" "Why did no one help me defend base?" I expect nothing from my PUG teammates, and I'm never disappointed.

Well, that's not true. I often forget myself and start expecting others to play smart, and that often leads to disappointment

#28 Royalewithcheese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 10:40 PM

View PostRaso, on 01 September 2013 - 08:16 PM, said:

So you'd rather have others fight for you while you hang back? That won't earn you many C-bills and as your Elo raises from the wins your skill will remain static.


I'd rather have good teammates for my shotgun DDC. (Or whatever I'm running at the time - pretty much exclusively brawlers.) That is in the form of other brawlers who know how to kill robots and not zerg, competent sniping from something in the HGN/CTF/STK family, and scouts who are good at scouting/killing/surviving.

When I see a 732 or 3D at the back of the pack racking up kills, that's a good thing. It helps us win, and it helps protect me from things that my guns are not equipped to handle. If I see someone charging out into no-robot's-land, getting focus-fired down in seconds, and raging about it in chat, that's a bad thing - they might as well have disconnected.

#29 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 01 September 2013 - 11:07 PM

View Postaniviron, on 01 September 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

While I don't advocate for timidity, I wonder how many of the people here who are arguing against hanging back are the same people who say "Mediums don't suck, you just have to follow your atlas and let him take the damage." Because that's what OP is suggesting, essentially.

Could you expand on this point? Are you saying that you don't agree with my point, but that many of the people disagreeing me are potentially hypocrites? I'm not sure if I understood you correctly.

View PostArrachtas, on 01 September 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Timidity is not admirable, and ultimately amounts to the primary goal being self-preservation at the cost of the team, and often at the cost of victory. This is a team strategy game, with more in common with chess than the average FPS.
When both teams sit behind rocks and only occasionally peek out to shoot (as often happens), nobody controls the game, they end up dragging out and being dull, and a win or loss can almost be chalked up to an accident as opposed to something intentional.
Playing with the average (note: average) pick-up player is an exercise in frustration. Many don't want to (or simply won't) listen to somebody trying to give directions, and so the 'every man for himself' attitude continues to prevail - timidity, as you call it. I fully understand that nobody wants to die, but that's a selfish attitude to have in a team game. Nobody is suggesting being reckless, but being assertive is both more engaging and more profitable when done properly. Playing 'hide behind the rock' provides no control over anything, and certainly does not make for compelling game play.

Well, maybe your experience differs from mine. When I play, 80% of matches go something like this.
Phase 1: Both teams move into position and watch each other for a little while.
Phase 2: A few light mechs probe for openings while both team adjust their positions relative to the enemy positions
Phase 3: One or two players emerge from cover, either by mistake or by design, and get shot up by their enemies.
Phase 4: As a few mechs have been killed or crippled, their enemies feel confident and start advancing. Usually, the side that makes the first 2 or 3 kills end up winning the match.

It's very rare indeed that the whole match is just people hiding behind cover, and it's also relatively rare (less than 25% of matches, I think) to see an even fight with a score like 12-10 or 12-11.

View PostAppogee, on 01 September 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

In my current level of Elo hell, timidity leaves me one of the only guys on my team still alive, after all the noobs on my team have got themselves killed cheaply and quickly.
Unfortunately, I then have to face a half dozen or more enemies by myself, and usually die soon after that. So, for me, timidity is not a profitable tactic.
Generally speaking, in PUG matches, if your team can be bold together (and isn't half stacked with noobs, who the matchmaker thinks you can compensate for as it averages your Elo) then you will win.

It just depends on when you face those enemies. If you do it too early, you'll be the first casualty. If you do it too late, you'll die alone. If you pick the right moment, when the fighting is starting to reach its climax, you'll do well.

Some people prefer to wait even longer, and just try to finish crippled enemy mechs after losing many of their own teammates. That's tricky, and as you say, not always profitable.

View PostRaso, on 01 September 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

You sound like all of the little punks who never follow through with kills on enemies with an exposed CT because their armor is yellow. You sound like those scared, little runts who would rather die lumped together along a ridge rather than run along side a small detachment to try to smoke the enemy out.
In short, you sound like a terrible team mate.

You sound like one of those people who get too emotionally invested in video games, and who perhaps even judge others players' relative success or failure as an accurate measure of their character in real life, in order to justify using derogatory terms like "punks" or "scared, little runts" about strangers whom you've never met, and probably would never think to call such names to their face. You sound like one of those players who think that their success in a video game is a great accomplishment, and let this sense of achievement swell their ego as if they'd actually accomplishmed something meaningful and valuable.

So maybe we're both coming off as a couple of idiots. We should give each other the benefit of the doubt, I suppose, and perhaps enjoy this light-hearted discussion for what it is, without making assumptions about each other. Treat it more as an intellectual exercise rather than a testimony of each other's character or even our value as teammates. :)

View PostRaso, on 01 September 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

Maybe if it were a free for all your tactics would have merit but this isn't so they really don't. If you don't expose yourself to enemy fire (smartly, and carefully mind you) than you can not return fire. If you spend half the game behind a ridge than you're mech and all of it's firepower are just wasted tonnage. If you pilot an assault or a heavy and you don't advance on an enemy position with your team AND you hang back and block the egress of retreating mediums or heavies you are not only a coward but a threat to your team.
Timidness is not a tactic nor is it synonymous with caution or acting defensively. If you refuse to let your mech get a few dinks in it's armor just so you can live to the end of the match you're doing it wrong and your entire team will suffer for it.

This game is only a team game if you want it to be. Indeed, the whole premise of the game is that every player decides if he wants to be a loyal soldier fighting for a noble house, or a mercenary allied with other mercenaries for mutual profit, or even a lone wolf, with no master other than him- or herself. Demanding that every other player should treat this game as a team sport, like a game of basketball, where the team is far more important than the individual is not only detrimental to the immersion and complexity of the game, but it's also selfish because you're telling other people how to play the game, as if their opinion is irrelevant.

This doesn't mean I don't ask teammates for help, it doesn't mean I don't try to help my teammates. I do sometimes strive for teamwork and victory, and I sometimes focus more on what I personally want to get out of the game. But regardless of what my feelings are, I do remain aware that there are a lot of players out there who truly adhere to the idea that "Timidity is a great tactic". By acknowledging that, I avoid a lot of disappointments.

#30 Magnakanus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 715 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 02 September 2013 - 01:13 AM

The topic here needs to separate two very distinct forms of timidity: Prudent timidity and selfish timidity. Prudent timidity will win you everything, selfish timidity will win you nothing.

I think Sun Tzu said it best with "The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself." AND "Opportunities multiply as they are siezed".

For me this means that the more team mates that survive for as long as they can AND contribute in some meaningful manner when the opportunity arises, the better chance you have at winning. Every action can provide an opportunity: the Zerg rush will usually tempt enemy mechs to expose themselves, the sniper will peel off armor any encourage "kill opportunits" to attack, etc.

In some battles that means everybody keeping their heads down to deny bands of snipers the advantages of their build. There is no point in rushing in when they are set up in a firing line waiting to core your mech with Gaus/PPC. Wait them out, let them get impantient and come to you. This may be viewed as "timid", but is really only prudent patience. The same goes for battles with excessive LRM use. Grouping together and letting your AMS decimate the enemy ammunition is also a prudent tactic. Near the end of the battle you then have empty LRM boats ripe for the picking. Waiting a bit in the beginning also has the advantage when you have those pesky lights that rush in the middle of the group to provide targets for LRM boats. With enough AMS on board LRMs are less of a threat and the Lights dancing through your ranks often underestimate the danger they are in and end up getting fragged.

These same tactics do not work at all well when you have a brawler team rusing your position. At such times if your team members bolt in all directions it makes it easier to single out and destroy individual mechs. These battles are usually decided by those that can focus fire and kill the fastest, eliminating enemy firepower.

You may need to be a different warrior in every fight. Taking the time to observe and uncover which warrior you need to be is prudent. There are enough people out there in the PUG world that have only one mode of operation and it is up to those who are able to adapt to do so and provide the balancing factor that may win the fight.

#31 Latorque

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 292 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 02:27 AM

Yeah. It works great. Especially Assaults decked in sniper gear; letting the heavies / mediums take the brunt of the enemy fire up front and then tottering backwards like a drunken hillbilly when the enemy team closes in on them after beating the 5-6 poor sods up front to a pulp. There are few things that grind my gears like spectating a Stalker bristling with pure firepower and armor that only shoots its LRMs - maybe he hasn't unwrapped the PPCs / LLas / Gauss yet and wants to keep them in mint condition?

Of course; witnessing this is only possible after my heavy / light died up front. Admittedly; there are of course situations when i charged in too fast and get shot to pieces naturally.

One often neglected factor is area denial - at least to my experience, turtling only works on the landing pad / fortress of doom in River City Assault. On every other map; you pretty much leave it to the enemy where he wants to kick your *ss from; and normally end up surrounded and defeated.

If the fight in Terra Therma takes place in the central Volcano - watch the minimap: The team that bottlenecks in the slopes has pretty much lost from the start: No way up anymore; and by then it normally doesn't take more than 3 minutes for the enemy to smarten up attack the rear too.

If it's Caustic Valley: you yield the volcano; you lose. Nothing worse than a team bungling about on "their" side of the mountain without grasping the simple idea to flank left or right (right in both cases) and pop up where the enemy doesn't expect them. In this case it's painful.

And last... Forest Colony. Contrary to popular belief; losing the lake is pretty much always a sure way to a crushing defeat. Especially with the current focus on sniping warfare, you leave the enemy a completely flat field of fire with some prime cover; and as soon as the snipers have their positions the fast mechs can circle around and pulverize by tackling them from behind in the hills. I have no idea how often i sprinted back from the freighter after spotting 6 mechs coming in (and no chance of stopping them since the rest of the team had dispersed hiking in the pastoral scenery) while furiously teamchatting about the incoming flanking. Rarely helps.

All those defeats stem from avoiding damage at all costs; hoping that your team keeps the enemy distracted while you snipe away and a vain hope that they soften them up so you can take them out.

Taking your position, throwing most of your firepower at the enemy and taking your part of the damage dealt to your team is essential. Sitting back, cackling and muttering "gullible fools..." while your teammates are shipped back to you in body bags only results in a sinking feeling in your tummy once the radar shows 6 enemy contacts at once closing in. It's the B-movie-villains approach to fighting; send one man after the other in a straight queue toward the enemy and hope their ammunition runs out.

#32 Earl White

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 210 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:25 AM

You could wait for someone else to go first, or you could try to move at exactly the same time, after all it is generally a simple exercise of having the most firepower hitting on the weakest part of the enemy formation that provides victory. Admittedly there are some mechs that don't really need to move as much (LRM boats) but even then, it's still likely they will get a better firing arc if they do move.

Being timid is one thing, but being passive and waiting for some intel before moving out can be useful, although it is a tradeoff still, if the enemy team is moving when you are not, they could well get into a much better firing position. It's a tug of war of fighting over advantageous positions on the map, so mobility is important but avoiding "killzones" is also crucial.

Timid suggests more reliance on team mates, and less reliance on your own abilities, if that is so, it is a risky stance to take. The idea is poison itself as I have pointed out, because you need people to spot enemy movements and positions and you need to be mobile to get the best firing positions and create an arc of mechs that can fire on new targets.

#33 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:08 AM

View PostRoyalewithcheese, on 01 September 2013 - 10:40 PM, said:


I'd rather have good teammates for my shotgun DDC. (Or whatever I'm running at the time - pretty much exclusively brawlers.) That is in the form of other brawlers who know how to kill robots and not zerg, competent sniping from something in the HGN/CTF/STK family, and scouts who are good at scouting/killing/surviving.

When I see a 732 or 3D at the back of the pack racking up kills, that's a good thing. It helps us win, and it helps protect me from things that my guns are not equipped to handle. If I see someone charging out into no-robot's-land, getting focus-fired down in seconds, and raging about it in chat, that's a bad thing - they might as well have disconnected.


It's understandable that when you are playing a close range build to have others fill in the gaps which you do not preform well in. After all that is the whole point of squad based or role warfare, different mechs specialize at different tasks and depending on your group make up you play the match differently.

What you describe there is not timidness but intelligence. You do not go running into the arms of the enemy and death among a hail of sniper fire and LRM barrages, you wait for your moment to strike and you strike when that moment arises. That's not being timid that's being smart.

Being timid would be if you wait for the rest of your team to be slowly picked apart while in cover, while no one returned fired because they kept taking fire, with no one advancing or flanking out of fear of running into the enemy then it's just you and your brawler standing among the charred husks of your fallen comrades.

#34 Royalewithcheese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:10 AM

View PostRaso, on 02 September 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Being timid would be if you wait for the rest of your team to be slowly picked apart while in cover, while no one returned fired because they kept taking fire, with no one advancing or flanking out of fear of running into the enemy then it's just you and your brawler standing among the charred husks of your fallen comrades.


That's not actually what ppl in this thread are talking about haha.

#35 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:37 AM

"Who dares, wins"

SAS can´t be wrong.

#36 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:38 AM

View PostRoyalewithcheese, on 02 September 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:


That's not actually what ppl in this thread are talking about haha.

It sort of is and it sort of isn't.

Many people here seem to be of the "let some one else do the dangerous work" mindset which is not the same as role warfare or unit specialization. When enough people on the same team have this mindset and no one is willing to take charge or others are unwilling to follow said charge out of fear of damaging their mechs what I described above will almost always be the outcome of the fight.

Every member on your team should have the cunning to know when to charge and when to hold and every member of your team should be daring enough to follow that charge if it is time. I can't begin to tell you how many times my team has been slowly picked apart by sniper fire while staying in cover. At some point during this process the enemy team will simply rush us after whittling our armor away by exposing themselves long enough to take shots even if it means sustaining return fire.

What I'm saying is that this mindset is flawed in that you assume others on your team will do the dirty work. There is no guarantee your team will have it's champion. If every member of your team were willing to BECOME that champion rather than hoping that someone else would become it than your team will achieve victory. If every member of your team is waiting for someone else to do all of the heavy hitting than your team has already lost because when your entire team relinquishes control of it's own fate to each other the only people left on the battlefield to assume control of your fate is the enemy.

#37 arghmace

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 845 posts
  • LocationFinland

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:41 AM

The last thing we need is more wussies on the field so I wouldn't give advice like this.

Sure, you don't wanna charge in stupid. But more often that not the battle is lost because people aren't pushing when they should be. Just being timid behind some rock while their friends die. That's just a way to lose. Who cares if you get one more kill this way if you lose? Better to win with one kill less.

Also giving the enemy ground especially in conquest is bad. So hit full speed right at the start and take control of territory. Nothing is worse than people circling around at the start, wondering what to do, where to go, giving the enemy upper hand before one shot is fired.

Also if everyone takes the "be timid" -advice, nothing would ever happen. Bah, fortune favors the bold and the team that takes the initiative, I say. Just waiting on the enemy and letting them meet you how they want is not good. Force a difficult situation on them by taking the initiative yourself.

Edited by arghmace, 02 September 2013 - 07:48 AM.


#38 Royalewithcheese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:55 AM

View PostRad Hanzo, on 02 September 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

"Who dares, wins"

SAS can´t be wrong.


Is it standard SAS procedure to run into enemy fire and try to facetank it?

#39 Royalewithcheese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 08:04 AM

View PostRaso, on 02 September 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:


What I'm saying is that this mindset is flawed in that you assume others on your team will do the dirty work. There is no guarantee your team will have it's champion. If every member of your team were willing to BECOME that champion rather than hoping that someone else would become it than your team will achieve victory.


Here's the thing: I'd rather have brawler teammates who decide they want to play smart than brawler teammates who decide they want to be a "champion." The latter (or at least I'm assuming those hunchback pilots who type "push!" in chat and then zerg into enemy fire alone qualify as being part of the latter) has an alarming tendency to disconnect-by-focus-fire.

I guess what I'm saying is that while in theory a coordinated push with a coordinated team on comms has a role, in practice puggies can almost never execute this and instead should try to play smart and conservatively.

Edited by Royalewithcheese, 02 September 2013 - 08:06 AM.


#40 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 02 September 2013 - 08:08 AM

Royale ?
What has daring to do with facetanking ?

Your proposed line of action isn´t quite what I intended to hint at, although it can be easily abused to troll a tad.

Next try please ...





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users