30 replies to this topic

[IllCaesar]

If the team splits up into three differents groups of three or more mechs, its a lost cause. Never seen a victory when my team did that. 5-5-2 maybe with the two being light mechs, but 4-4-4 means whichever lance runs into the mass of the enemy is probably going to be annihilated, putting you around 1-4 or 2-4. 3-3-3-3? You are ******. One mass of the enemy will be larger than two of those groups combined, so as soon as they run into it, the first one to turn the corner will be at least put into a critical state, if not outright killed.

Edited by MarsAtlas, 09 October 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Fuerchtegott]

These are bad tips in my humble opinion.

[Fuerchtegott]

MarsAtlas, on 09 October 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

If the team splits up into three differents groups of three or more mechs, its a lost cause. Never seen a victory when my team did that. 5-5-2 maybe with the two being light mechs, but 4-4-4 means whichever lance runs into the mass of the enemy is probably going to be annihilated, putting you around 1-4 or 2-4. 3-3-3-3? You are ******. One mass of the enemy will be larger than two of those groups combined, so as soon as they run into it, the first one to turn the corner will be at least put into a critical state, if not outright killed.

Didn,t read it initially, but that's kinda my point too.
Depends on the size of the map how long the "first part" of a conquest map is, but in generall it's deathmatch.
It is just easier to outcap an enemy team, that has a few mechs less than the own team.
The timer is not that fast, that speed really kills guns in conquest.

[Fut]

Kjudoon, on 07 October 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

B- If you don't have the lights to counteract this immediately and capture at least 4 caps, you are going to lose. You will not be able to catch up unless all resources are devoted to reversing capture. The more mechs you are down, the more impossible it will be.

Hmm.. So if you're only down 1 Mech, then it's only slightly impossible?
Got it.

[Devil Fox]

For Conquest all you do is simply march to theta area, flank and wipe the enemy team. Once all they have are cappers left you can split the 9-12 mechs of yours still alive to cap out the game and hunt the enemy survivors... there is no capping needed until it's required for victory...

[Kjudoon]

Apostal, on 10 October 2013 - 05:33 AM, said:

For Conquest all you do is simply march to theta area, flank and wipe the enemy team. Once all they have are cappers left you can split the 9-12 mechs of yours still alive to cap out the game and hunt the enemy survivors... there is no capping needed until it's required for victory...

Formula for almost every loss I've ever been in... and that's a lot of them. Maybe it works for pre-mades, but not for PuGs.

Also, the thread title is "Conquest: You're PROBABLY going to lose when..." Probably. Qualifier. Aka, more often than not. Just to be sure you get the point that this is a trend indicator, not an absolute, or pointer on how to reverse the trend as some might mistakenly think.

That is all.

[Devil Fox]

Kjudoon, on 10 October 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

Formula for almost every loss I've ever been in... and that's a lot of them. Maybe it works for pre-mades, but not for PuGs.

Also, the thread title is "Conquest: You're PROBABLY going to lose when..." Probably. Qualifier. Aka, more often than not. Just to be sure you get the point that this is a trend indicator, not an absolute, or pointer on how to reverse the trend as some might mistakenly think.

That is all.

It's the only strat that works... you have to wipe out the majority of the enemy then you have time to spread, cap and hunt... you know you will LOSE if you have heaps of light mechs just running around capping, or your team splits up to cap. Because with the increased captimes and the fact of 12 enemy machines you leave your other team mates to die whilst not even ensuring you win by cap. That leave the 9-12 enemy mechs up still to just spread out and hunt down the one or two teammates who thought capping meant something.

Conquest is a longer form of assault, that is all. Now if they kept the old cap speeds then it might be viable to win by cap (particularly on the smaller maps).

[Kjudoon]

Apostal, on 10 October 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

Conquest is a longer form of assault, that is all. Now if they kept the old cap speeds then it might be viable to win by cap (particularly on the smaller maps).

This is true, and it's a rather significant flaw. Conquest needs to be modified to make it different, AND to make it more of a tactics/teamwork game that reflects the real concepts of combat. Not trying to create 'real' combat but at least be more accurate to something that has to happen in real life to conquer an area.

1. No team starts with a home base.
2. Capping only happens as long as a base has a mech standing on it.
3. You don't win by hitting a resource total, you win by having the most cap points by the end of the timer. (simulating reinforcements)
4. Only those who cap get Cbills for it, the same way damage works.
Another option would be the team that is sitting on the most caps when the timer runs out. If it's equal, both sides lose.

THAT is how you make Conquest more realistic, more team demanding and tactically sensitive.

[Hammerhai]

First off. Cap times were already extended to keep the Big Blob of Death crowd happy. So lay off turning Conquest into a complete clone of Assault, please. Stop qq ing, all win conditions are allowed and built into the game with a purpose. Feeling cheated of winning by leftclick pause rightclick pause mouse 3 is just as mindless as a pure cap race.

Second: You can get by with 3 faster mechs securing a cap advantage in the beginning, provided you avoid the enemy. If he dedicates a whole lance to hunting you, your team is actually up one mech in the main engagement. Since you have the same numbers on each team, what you want to do is achieve local superiority of numbers and firepower. That is the best you can hope for.
This strategy is aimed at preventing the fairly common occurrence of 2 lights capping, with the rest brawling. It gives you a better chance of dislodging the enemy from your chosen cap, and is the enemy trying to do to you in the main fight what you hope to do in capping. Local superiority of fire power. It also drastically reduces the time needed to cap a point, which is a bonus.
Remember you are focusing your resources and trading time for numbers in the main brawl. the less time you spend capping, the easier it is to shift your team to another hotspot quickly
Additionally you want to hopefully be able to use your fire team to tip the balance by acting as reinforcements in the main fight unexpectedly, when 3 mechs have a better chance of making a difference. So always be aware how much time you can spend fighting the other lights away from the main brawl.

Third: The tipping point is generally 2 mechs down, with 8 mans this was a given. 2 mechs down was a loss. With 12 mans we now have a bit of leeway.

[bayoucowboy]

I second Hammerhai - it's the local numbers (2v1, 3v2) or mech firepower superiority (ie lights running into light hunters) that wins the match.

[Infrasound]

• Alpine Conq
  
• Atlas wins it
  
• 9 of my team dead in first 8 minutes
  
• last man standing
  
• Cap enemy base
  
• Derp enemy team bypasses our base to go for kappa.... and lose.
  
• Win by 2 points
  
• Conquest is HARD easy
  
• Conquest is NOT Assault.
  
• Derp team mates fighting NEAR a cap point not ON it...and dying.

PGI for the love of bacon, put in $$ rewards for capping in Conq per point turned. There is no motivation in your game to cap and not make money because you never see bad guys on some larger maps.

Edited by Infrasound, 18 October 2013 - 05:51 AM.