254 replies to this topic

[Muckaday]

I have only played a couple K games now, and all I can really say is that the 'Cap Rush' only works if the other team was doing it as well. Full stop. So, please no qq about Cap rushes.

Capping out when you could be hunting, well, if you're running after Mr. 'I'll shut down on top of a spire/under a ditch' Spider. by all means do so. It doesn't deserve the honour of the hunt. Shutting down as the last player should be punishable by a kick in the nut sack. Just me though.

Situations very, times change. Cap Weiners will be Cap Weiniers, but if you win by it. meh, it just means I can queue again.

Pass me the drama llama.

Edited by Muckaday, 17 September 2013 - 05:51 AM.

[TheNose]

Euphor Kell, on 17 September 2013 - 05:41 AM, said:

i don't get what all the rage is about, honestly...
everybody has a choice, if you want to win assault, you gotta defend your base or attack the enemies, simple.
if you overextend your team, then you put yourself in a position to be picked apart one by one,
if you stay in a tight group you are just asking to be flanked and capped.

damnit, most zerg games can be turned around with a little team communication and scouting.

capping is in BECAUSE you have different skill levels of players, you have to think about your strategy if you want to WIN, survey your opposition, their mechs and their weapons if you have time.

for all those who want to meet in the middle of the map and slug it out, go join the clans and their Zellbrigen, we're inner sphere warriors here, and will do what is necessary to WIN.

Exact!

Lose by a cap on a small map like river city, no reason to insult the winning team, maybe consider glasses, but the fault is by the team, that had been capped.

The larger maps? Alpine? Nice to overlook and have a good fight at the same time.

Even Tourmaline, just don't wait at Theta point, then most mechs will never make it back in time. And besides, When you see just 8 enemys, that could be a hint what the rest is doing.

And you say it.
If someone can't lose to a cap, he just needs to defend his base. Set up a trap, or is that to much tactic?

It's a warsimulator, why not use a ruse and cap a little bit, just to see iff they split.

And sometimes, capping is just fun, because peoples rage, I believe, that is a military tactic too.


And sometimes, hitdetection just sucks, why not cap?


Drop on Alpine? With short range weapons? Lower side? Cap!


For those that complain, read some Clausewitz, famous general, wrote a good book.


If I would react to every single player, that has a problem with my tactics, weapon choice, mech, ping, and as the newest addition, intelligence (btw OldOrgandonor I would never join Mensa, hidden intelligence is better, smart people know that^^) I just couldn't play.
For some players, every weapon that kills them is a cheesy choice. And so on.

Get over it.

I won't tell you l2p, cause I don't dislike easy wins when I farm CB.


But show some manners.
Behave like an adult.

It's not so hard.

[greyz0r]

The Boz, on 14 September 2013 - 05:13 AM, said:

Yeah.
These guys.
Lost my three games in a row because of ******* like these.
How do you convince people that Assault is not team deathmatch? That you're critical, out of ammo, and would rather cap than fight because you can't fight any more? That we are at a disadvantage in combat because our Stalker disconnected? That it's smarter to cap if we're 100m away from it, then spend the next ten minutes searching around the map for the two Jenners, while risking them capping us?
I blame the humongously ******** Cbill reward system for this. Because tagging enemies with machine guns helps the team more than starting to capture the enemy base and causing half their mechs to turn around and get disorganized.
A win is a win is a win.
...Morons.

I've had a lot of encounters with this very mindset, where people complained to stop capping, and I've been fired upon by team mates to attempt to get me to stop capping. Since capping is part of the game, these idiots should petition the devs to have game modes where capping isn't part of the objectives. As far as I see it, capping has its uses, and can be used as an effective tactic to draw a few enemy back to defend. I've never just went for the cap, but I've been in a massive firefight where an Atlas and Victor just ran off to cap the enemy base, and let the rest of us get destroyed.

[Unnatural Growth]

TheNose, on 17 September 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

But show some manners.
Behave like an adult.

It's not so hard.

Then follow your own example genius.

TheNose, on 16 September 2013 - 07:54 PM, said:

If a player, at any given time in a match complains about cap, it is just a statement, that says, that player isn't intellectual able to come up with the idea of defending his base.

Quite simple. Or is anyone suprised, that stupid people too play MWO?


Pro tipp. Learn the points of no return and don't pass through them, before you are sure, you will cap faster.



And as long, as MWO is "the thinking mans shooter" (which is, considering its progress, very questionable (I laugh about founders here :-p )) a simple deathmatch mode doesn't fit the game.


Edit: The one above me seems to be a good example. xD

Or does this not ring a bell?

Are you being an adult yet?

TheNose, on 16 September 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

And one thing, when a team caps very early, it will stretch, like a bunch of "lemmings".

If you can't compete with lemmings, or aren't able to recognize that, maybe, stupidity is your major problem.

How about here, are you being an adult here?

Didn't think so.

Spare me the theatrics.

[Scruffyrogue]

OldOrgandonor, on 17 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

Then follow your own example genius.

Quotes are OP! Please nerf!

[MortVent]

I've helped win a 1 to 10 match by sitting my catapult on their base.. I'll cap at will in an atlas if I feel the need.

I've led a cap rush with one lance on terra just to get the game over with and onto a new map.

I've also had people complain about caps in conquest, wanting to kill the other team rather than play the game.

If we kill the other team, it's a win
If we capture the other base without a shot, it's a win
If we mix it up and cap the base, it's a win
If we get killed by the other team, it's a loss
If we have our base capped without a shot fired, it's a loss
If we mix it up and they cap our base, it's a loss

It's a win or loss, regardless. There are 2 victory conditions in assault - Capture the base, or defeat enemy team

Completion of either is a win

[Fuerchtegott]

OldOrgandonor, on 17 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

Then follow your own example genius.

Or does this not ring a bell?

Are you being an adult yet?

How about here, are you being an adult here?

Didn't think so.

Spare me the theatrics.

Remarkable mature.
Convincing arguments. :-)

[Ensaine]

It baffles me that so many people still defend a cap rush as a 'win' ... yeah, you get an extra cookie in your win column... wheeeeeee.........

I'm fine with a toe tap for upsetting the enemy tactics......and I'm fine with the end-of-match-only-me-left cap.........

What most people are talking about is those who immediately rush to the enemy base, and just sit there. You won NOTHING.

The defenders of this miserable playstyle say a win is a win, it's the dev's fault, and similar ..... .well, it IS the dev's fault that this mechanic is in, without so much as say a 1 minute buffer before a cap can commence....

Yes, it's the design..... so, you twinks are going to exploit this? Because it's there?

WHY in hell did you download this game then? Did you download 3 gigs, install it, only to run to a box? Facebook has this kind of ***** playstyle in about 200 apps.

Did you REALLY download this game to run to a box??? Well, LOL to you then, if that's what you want. But if you're defending this, then you're an *****, plain and simple.

Though it infuriates me to no end, to see such loser mentality and waste, I have realized now, that these tools actually downloaded this game to run to a box and sit there.

That, my friends, is pitiful. I don't pity them, but perhaps, someone, somewhere, should???

So, you have proven to be weak minded. Fine. But remember, 23 other people have most likely hit Launch to do what this game is really about, which is fighting against other Mechs. The dev's have seen fit to leave this broken mechanic in the game.

You base rush cappers are clearly the type that wouldn't pee on someone if they were on fire. It's clear you literally don't care about other people. So who should care about you?

Just think back to WHY you downloaded this game.... were you thinking about fighting in/against big stompy robots, or running to a box?

Pretty sad that you base rush cappers have elected to disregard the real game here, instead, seeking to exploit a game design weakness.

[RiggsIron]

Urdnot Mau, on 14 September 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

I usually don't complain about winning, but when my team mates start a cap at 3 minutes of game, yeah i don't think it's cool.
In capwarrior matches nobody wins cBills. NOBODY. It's plain waste of time and i don't like to waste my time. I don't play the game to stand on a square, because that's no fun. I don't use mechs made to stand in a square, i usually use mediums or heavies and i equip them for combat, not for cap.

Now... If my team is losing (let's say 10 x 5 or worse), then i agree that capping is probably the only solution. PLUS, if you're that hurt and you're the only one capping and the match is still in the beggining or going well for your team, your probably better off capping about 90% and then leaving the cap alone, since your team mates have a better chance of getting more xp and cBills fighting than completing the cap.

Indeed. What is the point of playing a mech battle game to rush forward every 3rd game to stand in a square with an ECM mech and 'win'? It is not fun, it is a waste of time for everyone that actually wants to fight.

'A win is a win' - huh? so racking up a number on a digital board is more fun than shooting things? Maybe games like Candy Crush are more up to these people's speed.

1. Bases should not be able to be capped until halfway through the match.
2. Bases should have sensors and counter jamming so if there are mechs on the base all team members can see the numbers and target them - if a base is important enough that it causes you to win or lose - it should have a sensor at least?

Those two changes would ensure that people cannot just cheese run 6 mechs to the base (say like I see happen a lot in the Canyon), and the team just assumes its a single fast mech and only 1-2 people go back - to get torn apart by 6 heavies with an ECM Atlas and no one can even see the targets on the minimap and the game is over before anyone really gets to fight. Also it would force fighting by only being allowed to cap after 7 minutes - but still give the option to cap if a lone mech is just running around hiding - or the lone mech can make it to enemy cap and still sneak in a win.

More fun, less cheese. Win/win.

Edited by RiggsIron, 20 September 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[Heinreich]

Ensaine, on 20 September 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

It baffles me that so many people still defend a cap rush as a 'win' ... yeah, you get an extra cookie in your win column... wheeeeeee.........

I'm fine with a toe tap for upsetting the enemy tactics......and I'm fine with the end-of-match-only-me-left cap.........

What most people are talking about is those who immediately rush to the enemy base, and just sit there. You won NOTHING.

The defenders of this miserable playstyle say a win is a win, it's the dev's fault, and similar ..... .well, it IS the dev's fault that this mechanic is in, without so much as say a 1 minute buffer before a cap can commence....

Yes, it's the design..... so, you twinks are going to exploit this? Because it's there?

WHY in hell did you download this game then? Did you download 3 gigs, install it, only to run to a box? Facebook has this kind of ***** playstyle in about 200 apps.

Did you REALLY download this game to run to a box??? Well, LOL to you then, if that's what you want. But if you're defending this, then you're an *****, plain and simple.

Though it infuriates me to no end, to see such loser mentality and waste, I have realized now, that these tools actually downloaded this game to run to a box and sit there.

That, my friends, is pitiful. I don't pity them, but perhaps, someone, somewhere, should???

So, you have proven to be weak minded. Fine. But remember, 23 other people have most likely hit Launch to do what this game is really about, which is fighting against other Mechs. The dev's have seen fit to leave this broken mechanic in the game.

You base rush cappers are clearly the type that wouldn't pee on someone if they were on fire. It's clear you literally don't care about other people. So who should care about you?

Just think back to WHY you downloaded this game.... were you thinking about fighting in/against big stompy robots, or running to a box?

Pretty sad that you base rush cappers have elected to disregard the real game here, instead, seeking to exploit a game design weakness.

If you get capped, its not a design weakness. Its a team weakness. Either nobody scouted where the main enemy body was going, nobody listened to the scout warning an incoming caprush, or nobody bothered to return to defend.

As a fast hunch pilot I keep an eye out for backcappers and other sneaks and I call out when there are several going for cap. When people listen we usually stop the cap. When people don't I end up getting pecked to death by several lights.

If you're going to lecture people "how to play this game" then you'd better teach defense too. There is more to this game than trudging to the middle of the map looking to play smashy robots then QQing when the other team doesn't show up because they're a bunch of "cowards" capping.

[Mao of DC]

RiggsIron, on 20 September 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

1. Bases should not be able to be capped until halfway through the match.
2. Bases should have sensors and counter jamming so if there are mechs on the base all team members can see the numbers and target them - if a base is important enough that it causes you to win or lose - it should have a sensor at least?

I have some small points to make about your suggestions.

For #1: A lot of matches don't last 7 minutes and I am not counting the "cap rush" matches here.

For # 2: We all call it a base when it is really a Germanium extractor. Germanium is the fuel for the FTL drives of the Jump Ships. So basically "base" is really an advanced space oil rig. I am fairly sure oil rigs don't come with expensive sensor suites. I can see oil platforms in an ocean having some kind of weather radar but nothing that would help in warfare. Oil rigs on land have absolutely no need for them at all.

Now some of you out there are thinking, "But Mao if this mineral is so important why not have some sort of defenses for it?" Simply put there are defenses for them, they are called Battlemechs, and 12 of them in one place is a lot of firepower. Also 99% of these rigs are owned and operated by corporations. How many corporations do you know of are willing to spend more money than they have to to get a job done. It kind of cuts into the profits don't you think? I do and so do most business men.

[Gremlich Johns]

Actually, because of PGI's poor use of grammar, their implementaion of WIN in Assault is incorrect and this is allowing the base cap to be randomly successful:

When the game is loading up, on the two load screens are displayed "win conditions" (check it if you don't believe me) and "rules" (respectively)

they are:

Capture the enemy Base
Destroy all enemy mechs

it does not say:

Win Options:
Capture the enemy Base, or
Destroy all enemy mechs

again, the requirements are stated as

win conditions:
Capture the enemy Base
Destroy all enemy mechs

Knowing what I do of English Grammar, this leads me to read the requirements as both conditions are needed to win. All of us know that currently, one or the other is a win condition for Assault.

Soooo, should this instead be written as either two options in order to win and not both options needing to be met in order to win?

It does not state (which would be correct in reflecting current gameplay for assault)

win options:
Either capture the enemy base,
Or, destroy all enemy mechs

Frankly, I think both conditions should be met, as they are currently stated in the loading screens, for a win on an Assault map. That would make that mode more palpable and people won't be bitching about base capture.

And what do you do when some light mech goes and hides and shuts down? The other team wins by default if he shuts down for 5-7 seconds more that the time it takes to shed heat from an alpha heat shutdown.

[theblackdeath]

The Boz, on 14 September 2013 - 05:13 AM, said:

Yeah.
These guys.
Lost my three games in a row because of ******* like these.
How do you convince people that Assault is not team deathmatch? That you're critical, out of ammo, and would rather cap than fight because you can't fight any more? That we are at a disadvantage in combat because our Stalker disconnected? That it's smarter to cap if we're 100m away from it, then spend the next ten minutes searching around the map for the two Jenners, while risking them capping us?
I blame the humongously ******** Cbill reward system for this. Because tagging enemies with machine guns helps the team more than starting to capture the enemy base and causing half their mechs to turn around and get disorganized.
A win is a win is a win.
...Morons.

Statements such as these make me want to light lance cap all weekend long now.

'Mechs is a thinking mans game. It sadly isn't COD or Counter-Strike.

Once people get over the fact that this game isn't about 'run to the center with super Assaults' and blow each other up, they will realize that the current steamrolled teams will stop. The same people moaning about the 12v12 are the same moaning about cap on Assault mode. As I've stated, If you played with some brains, you wouldn't ever a 3 minute cap game.

This same "vocal minority" is the reason we can only play with 4-or-less or straight-up 12-man teams right now. Precious solo time would get ruined by "pub-stomps" and that's not "fair". This community is already filling with trolls, keep on capping and ignore'em.

[Mao of DC]

Gremlich Johns, on 20 September 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

And what do you do when some light mech goes and hides and shuts down? The other team wins by default if he shuts down for 5-7 seconds more that the time it takes to shed heat from an alpha heat shutdown.

I agree with most of your post I do disagree on one point though. As a light mech pilot I sometime shutdown and use my Mark-1 Eyeball to scout. Usually when I am in a mech without ECM. I may end up being in one spot for more than 5-7 seconds so that would hurt anyone who uses this tactic.

[TychoTheItinerant]

This is yet another reason why this model of multiplayer falls flat for MW. No respawns, no repair bays, just CoD holdovers who want to shoot things and whine

[TygerLily]

Fighting and capping aren't exactly mutually exclusive. Usually you end up doing both...after reading the battle you can decide which will produce a win.

I think what most people hate is the immediate cap within minute of the game. It doesn't bother me, personally, but I can see why it drives people crazy.

[fluffypinkbunny]

Anybody who claims it's a waste of time, needs to understand what waste is. The match is over faster, and you get to use the same mech again FASTER, I don't understand how you think this is a waste.

one match lets say 7 minutes long, total xp 1k

3 matches, 2 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes, (same time) 300, 400, 400, xp, =1.1k xp

Capping is better in the long run.

[TychoTheItinerant]

PGI willfully nurtures this moronic behavior. They want to turn their game into a brawly-duely-TDM.

[Joe Kid]

John Buford, on 14 September 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

If you re capping it all depends on the situation at the moment. As a Light I deserve the right to Cap any time I want, but be aware I will not stay there for the win. I am doing it to pull other Mechs off the line of battle to give my team an advantage. Note to the Heavys and Assualts this can be a good time to push. Sometimes I will wait a bit to start the process so they think its a bigger mech that is trying to Cap instead of a light. If you are any type of mech and mostly dead, or out of Ammo but are still mobile go for, gives them something worry about.

When you shouldn't Cap. You are the Atlas who went Tunnel to avoid combat and are now sitting on the Base. You are that group of heavys on one of the smaller maps that also avoided combat. Now to both of these you do know there is more than enough time for the Red team to beat down the rest of us and kill you since you stationary in a small little square.

As another light pilot, I agree. However, when you start to cap it usually initiates their desire to cap and then becomes a cap war. I would suggest staying on cap until engaged by more than one, or at 95%! You may be the only team member left at some point and may need a cap win and you can never win when 11 on are on your base with their cap at full strength.

[Euphor Kell]

Heinreich, on 20 September 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

If you're going to lecture people "how to play this game" then you'd better teach defense too. There is more to this game than trudging to the middle of the map looking to play smashy robots then QQing when the other team doesn't show up because they're a bunch of "cowards" capping.

QFT

its the reason we can design mechs with weaknesses, you may be all splatty, hulking monstrosity thats near invincible, but if you aint got the speed to respond to the enemy threat in your backfield, then its your loss.

there's no reason AT ALL you NEED to get in a slow mech, an my damned victor (assault mech) can get up to 80-odd KPH, and there's no reason most other assaults can't get past 60 if you really want them to.

in short, you play slow mech, then be damned well aware that your team isn't invincible even if you are