252 replies to this topic

[OneEyed Jack]

Dude, seek help. Honestly.

You're sitting there arguing with stuff no one said. The voices in your head, maybe?

And no, you still can't buy c-bills for cash. No matter what the voices in your head are telling you "all us guys" are doing.

[RichAC]

OneEyed Jack, on 16 December 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Dude, seek help. Honestly.

You're sitting there arguing with stuff no one said. The voices in your head, maybe?

And no, you still can't buy c-bills for cash. No matter what the voices in your head are telling you "all us guys" are doing.

Your the one trolling me bud. umad?

And I guess your right. You would have to buy a mech with MC and sell it for cbills. or just buy the mech you want with MC instead of grinding for cbills is what I meant.

Playing in any way except to win is unsportlike, period. No matter what you tell yourself in your head. Its selfish, and makes for an unpopular game.

Edited by RichAC, 16 December 2013 - 04:18 PM.

[MechWarrior071507]

im going to make a full speed full armor light mech to cap points and generally just troll my own team by win-by-cap griefing.

[Pezzer]

Honestly didn't read the posts in here, sorry for that, but I just wanted to mention that people don't play Conquest and tell you to get off the cap because EVERYONE earns greater rewards that way. Trust me when I say other people aren't so stupid as to tell you to do something contradictory unless it was for a reason.

I partially advocate capping for the win, but only when we're losing terribly. Capping simply isn't worth it, otherwise. It literally isn't worth the players' time to cap right off the bat because you make almost 0 off of it.

Reason? A lack of Role Warfare of course!

If they just added a million rewards for doing a million different things like in CoD, this game would be much for addicting. Got 2 modules in the same laser burst? Here, take this bonus! Capped in 30 seconds flat? I'll wag my finger, but here's a bonus for capping! Did over 500 damage? Bonus! Most assists? Medal and bonus!

^The lack of this is why I've gotten bored of the game to be honest, it feels like a bother to grind instead of a rewarding experience. Especially when people CapWarrior 30 seconds into the game in this economy.

[DeadlyFred]

Sandpit, on 15 December 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

How about blame dbags who grief players about a win condition that only comes into play 15% of the time in all games played. that means 15 out of 100 or 150 out of 1000. It's not that big of a deal.

We won't even go into the strategies involved by tapping on the enemy base in order to force them to split their forces. We also won't go into how it's a great strategy to use if you have 3-4 heavier mechs flank and draw in 1-2 lighter mechs thinking it's a light on base for a couple of quick and easy kills. Nor will we discuss the strategy that involves touching on the base in order to make them think you're capping so that the defending mechs get tied up for several minutes trying to take down that pesky spider instead of beinging that firepower to the main battle.

Just stop already. Play DM or skirmish when it comes out. Play conquest instead for now. Stop giving players who do more than run straight at your team and shoot as strategy

You missed the point entirely. I never said I had anything against objective-based gameplay... I said MWO rewards TDM more than it rewards objective play, period. I haven't played MWO THAT long but I've played it long enough to know that no matter how many bases or points I cap, unless I'm out also getting assits, spots, desructions and the odd kill... I ain't getting any damn C-bills or XP at the end of it. And again: in a game where you HAVE TO GRIND for so much {Scrap}, people might tend to gravitate towards whatever gets it for them. So, again... blame the design of the gamemodes, not the players. Yanno, Battlefield is a game about teamwork and objectives and guess what style of play nets you the most points in THAT game? Yup, playing objectives, NOT playing TDM.

[RichAC]

DeadlyFred, on 16 December 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

You missed the point entirely. I never said I had anything against objective-based gameplay... I said MWO rewards TDM more than it rewards objective play, period. I haven't played MWO THAT long but I've played it long enough to know that no matter how many bases or points I cap, unless I'm out also getting assits, spots, desructions and the odd kill... I ain't getting any damn C-bills or XP at the end of it. And again: in a game where you HAVE TO GRIND for so much {Scrap}, people might tend to gravitate towards whatever gets it for them. So, again... blame the design of the gamemodes, not the players. Yanno, Battlefield is a game about teamwork and objectives and guess what style of play nets you the most points in THAT game? Yup, playing objectives, NOT playing TDM.

Well I have to say, I think thats a myth. I'd love to see someone with a graph of their wins vs losses over a certain time frame to compare the net incomes. I just don't buy this BS that you have to have long drawn out matches to get more cbills and xp no matter if you win or not....

Kills and dmg come naturally regardless. If you played three matches that ended in 5 mins and you got 250 dmg and 1 kill in each match and won. It does not give you less xp then if you played one match for 15 mins doing 750 dmg and 3 kills and losing......in fact it gives you more. I don't even believe the excuse people are just doing it for cbills anymore. I think people just want to brag about their damage on the scoreboard whether they win or lose.

Or maybe for some reason people have to jerk off for 10 mins between every match? I always say if you don't die without a kill, re-run the same mech until you do, or until you lose.

The beauty of caps for me is it makes the game more then just about who has the best aim, loadout and armor. It gives a goal and makes it more interesting for me. It puts brains in the equation, which is also a deterrent for unsportlike players, and also means I don't have to chase a spider around the whole map, or wait for someone else to, wasting time and money (imaginary cbills of course)

I myself prefer assault mechs, and rarely play a light, but that does not mean i'm gonna be mad if the lights on my team like to go for the cap, and the match ends quickly because we won. It gives them purpose since most likely that spider is not going to out dmg anybody. And I don't know what world you live in, but Its actually not that easy most of the time, especially on some of the small maps.

Edited by RichAC, 16 December 2013 - 10:44 PM.

[RichAC]

Khorek, on 16 December 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

im going to make a full speed full armor light mech to cap points and generally just troll my own team by win-by-cap griefing.

ya i've tried with a bunch of guys, its not as easy as you think....

Today there was one match though, ended in like 5 mins, i was my usual slow atlas in the middle and not much help. Both teams were very close in caps. I mean like maybe one or two seconds apart. Most of the server was mad it ended quick, but I thought it was pretty epic. I did a 150 dmg and 1 kill, but was disapointed we lost.

Matches like that are pretty rare imo. So I don't know why people complain about it.

Edited by RichAC, 16 December 2013 - 10:51 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khorek, on 16 December 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

im going to make a full speed full armor light mech to cap points and generally just troll my own team by win-by-cap griefing.

Win by Cap cannot be grieving, as it is one of the two accepted victory requirements. It is the fist one listed in fact.

[Roland]

TDM has infinitely more strategy involved than running into a red square.

It's just that the strategy involved centers around actual tactical maneuvering.

Turns out, this is the basis for most armor warfare games.

[Galenit]

Roland, on 17 December 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

TDM has infinitely more strategy involved than running into a red square.

It's just that the strategy involved centers around actual tactical maneuvering.

Turns out, this is the basis for most armor warfare games.

Building a line and marching to each other until one side is dead is the basis, as you said.
It was state of the art a few 100 years ago and is what tdm reflects.

From this new strategys were evolved, like splitting forces, cutting supplielines, ...

Edited by Galenit, 17 December 2013 - 11:29 AM.

[Sandpit]

I'm glad this thread can finally die. Now all you complaining about cap can go play skirmish and QQ about something in THAT mode you don't like

[Roland]

Galenit, on 17 December 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

Building a line and marching to each other until one side is dead is the basis, as you said.
It was state of the art a few 100 years ago and is what tdm reflects.

From this new strategys were evolved, like splitting forces, cutting supplielines, ...

Yeah, turns out that even without red squares, with the only purpose for a battle being destruction of the enemy force, you don't actually just form two lines and march at the enemy.

In reality, that wasn't actually EVER the way war was fought. That's how people who don't actually know anything about warfare perceive it being fought, because they see one tiny portion of the battlefield in a movie, with individuals in battle lines.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

I've got a feeling I'll be playing conquest a lot in the future ... I really don't like the idea of running around Alpine looking for a powered down spider griefing or trying to preserve his precious Kill-Death ratio.

Also, once a team gets significantly up in kills, why not just ball up in an easily defensible area and hold that position? Once you're up in the score, there's no reason to push the fight.

It might be the best game mode ever, in an arena or other confined area, but I have a feeling that after the first engagement, it's going to be even more boring than capping on assault.

[Roland]

All the skirmish matches I've played thus far have been pretty awesome, with combat taking place in areas that rarely saw a focus in prior game modes.

I've not seen any matches end with some guy shut down hiding.

[RichAC]

turrets on the base on assault?  That works for LoL when its the only way to win, but in MWO?  noone caps as it is,  we really are going to have two TDM modes lol.   might as well just get rid of assault. and have only conquest and skirmish if thats the case...

Edited by RichAC, 17 December 2013 - 03:32 PM.

[Galenit]

Roland, on 17 December 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

Yeah, turns out that even without red squares, with the only purpose for a battle being destruction of the enemy force, you don't actually just form two lines and march at the enemy.

In reality, that wasn't actually EVER the way war was fought. That's how people who don't actually know anything about warfare perceive it being fought, because they see one tiny portion of the battlefield in a movie, with individuals in battle lines.

Do you think 4 mechs are more then "indivuduals battle lines"?
A company can make a battleline, thats about 12 mechs or 10/12 tanks in 3 lances or platoons.

Quote

Company

A company consists of three lances and normally some ancillary units, usually scout, armor, or artillery. A company commander is normally either a major or captain (or equivalent). The company commander is usually the leader of the command lance of a company and is directly involved in combat operations. Companies are more self-sufficient than lances and consist of the combat troops and support personnel, including medical, technician, and planetary transport vehicles (DropShips). Companies may also provide reconnaissance and artillery support lances under its command.
[color=#000000]In addition to twelve 'Mech pilots and the eighteen support personnel, there are usually additional support or specialist personnel, making a company roughly sixty individuals. Three companies comprise a battalion. Mercenary units commonly do not exceed the size of a company. [/color]http://www.sarna.net...alion#Battalion

Quote

Tank company[edit]

[color=#000000]Prior to the late 1980s a [/color]Soviet[color=#000000][/color]tank[color=#000000] company consisted of a company headquarters and three tank platoons with [/color]T-64[color=#000000], [/color]T-72[color=#000000] or [/color]T-80[color=#000000] tanks for a total of 35 personnel and 13 tanks; companies using the older [/color]T-54[color=#000000], [/color]T-55[color=#000000] or [/color]T-62s[color=#000000] tanks had 10 or 13 additional enlisted personnel. However forces in Eastern Europe began to standardize tank companies at 10 tanks, with three tanks in each platoon instead of four. [/color]http://en.wikipedia...._(military_unit)

Edited by Galenit, 17 December 2013 - 04:29 PM.

[Roland]

Quote

Do you think 4 mechs are more then "indivuduals battle lines"?
A company can make a battleline, thats about 12 mechs or 10/12 tanks in 3 lances or platoons.

Armored warfare, effectively an evolution of heavy cavalry, hinges upon maneuvering. It's not about standing in a line and shooting. That isn't the most effective way to kill the enemy.

That's why even when your only goal is to kill the enemy, you don't just make a line and advance.. because it's not a good way to win.

You will be more effective at killing the enemy if you maneuver to use position to gain an advantage.

And now that you do not have to worry about staying between your enemy and a red square, you are free to maneuver freely to gain positional advantage.

But honestly, if you don't like it, then don't play the mode.. but I can tell you from playing tonight (and for a decade in Mechwarrior 4 NR leagues) that it never plays out as you seem to imagine. The only games which played out in a single line of engagement were the respawn leagues, because the respawning on a base preventing any kind of effective flanking maneuver.

[Galenit]

Roland, on 17 December 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

Armored warfare, effectively an evolution of heavy cavalry, hinges upon maneuvering. It's not about standing in a line and shooting. That isn't the most effective way to kill the enemy.

That's why even when your only goal is to kill the enemy, you don't just make a line and advance.. because it's not a good way to win.

You will be more effective at killing the enemy if you maneuver to use position to gain an advantage.

You are right, most wins i see were forming a blob not a line ...

[jttm80]

loupgaroupoilu, on 11 December 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:

I don't like most of sports because you can't "attack" the players. That's why IMHO soccer is a *** sport. Even in Rugby (call a rugby player a *** at your own risk =), you can't smash people who don't carry the ball... Maybe American Football is ok, but i don't know the rules.

Anyway.

Winning in MWO is what ?

- little cbills & exp amount
- going up in ELO

IMHO, i already have all that i want. I don't play the pokemech game since all mechs are the same (more or less). I don't need any Cbills or Xp.

Fact: winning isn't a goal since the reward isn't attractive.

ELO in MWO is what ?

- winning => game harder
- loosing => game easier

Fact: in a MMO you grind stuff to be stronger. Being stronger = game easier. So the "real" reward is when you loose a game.

I'm serious.

My optimum game is what ?

-> having fun in combat, wich lead to a high kill/damage score
-> ending a game in something like 8-10 for the blue, meaning the red have fought well
-> still loosing because of some ennemy lights playing on caps. No problem with that since i prefer loosing than winning if i have the choice =)

I often stop playing when there is nothing left to kill and the game turn on "hide and seek". I'm on my desk, i'm still in game, not really AFK, reading a book, keeping an eye on the screen (we never know, balls can grow up on light pilots at any time =) waiting for the end of the cap minigame =)

Think out of the implicit rules.

I presume you are trying to type "losing" and "lose".
Because the words you are using just don't make sense.

[Ryvucz]

Whew, thanks for the insight from a 3 month old account point of view.