252 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

I defend bases everyday. You get more action with patience in this game then you do rushing to die early. You usually have to fight for a base, its really not as easy as people think.

Usually if its just two lights, we only send one medium or heavy back to defend, from the midpoint, which is good enough to chase them off or down them. Sometimes the team needs to go. Have to know what to do in certain situations. Knowing where the enemy at all times is the most important.

Today i was capping a base by myself in my assault mech. I roasted some marshmellows waited like 3 mins, as my whole team was flanking the enemy a head of me and while a lance of ours got murdered..Then i finally spotted an enemy lance coming from the other side to me, 3 jagers and a griffin. The rest of my lance in lights and mediums swarmed back to assist me, we downed them all at their base and i got 3 kills 130k cbills and about 1k xp and it was a very quick match. I love when that happens. It was also the only cap win in assault i saw today. No i wasn't gonna stepf off the base after that. NEXT.

a couple guys on the server made comments that it was a boring match. sure as hell wasn't boring for me.

On another note, I just noticed that in a match I just lost, i got the most cbills and xp for the LOSS. why do I even get any xp for a loss at all? I think thats crazy. I never noticed this lol . The fact you get the most cbills and xp, by far, out of a match you lost just for losing, its no wonder noone cares about winning.

PS: some guys still don't know the difference between tactics and strategy. Tactics are always needed for fighting skill sets period, in any situation at all times. Strategy is how you plan to win. Objectives require more strategy its just a fact.

http://en.wikipedia....ic_%28method%29
"tactics are the actual means used to gain an objective, while strategy is the overall campaign plan, which may involve complex operational patterns, activity, and decision-making that lead to tactical execution"

Strategy is what you want to do, tactics is how you do it.

So were you in a premade? Given that your whole team stuck to an objective. You also seem to enjoy just hanging out for a while. What about when you sit there for 7 minutes, match ends, nobody made it back to your base?

In Skirmish I'm generally making well over 150k for wins and only end up with under 1K for a loss for XP. Skirmish pays really, really well on a win or a loss given that most matches end up with 8 kills on the losing side and 12 on the winning. On a good match I'll go over 2k XP and around 225k cbills. I had a match the other day with my 2x first victory bonus that ended over 300k cbills and over 4K XP. Shawk with SRMS and LBX, got 7 kills - stolen from the hard work of my team. Obviously an exception though but a good example of how well Skirmish pays. More assists, more kills, more component destruction.

Capture is not an 'additional win objective' in Assault. It's the easiest, most reliable win method and dictates all other tactics in a match. You also win when the other team is wiped out but the overriding tactic of the game is camping or capping. This eliminates the value of any other tactics. To equate standing on a square for 60 seconds or less with being as complex or rewarding as flanking and breaking up an enemy formation, winning an actual battle.... well, I guess it's a matter of taste. If you consider standing at your base for the whole match just in case someone goes to cap to be as complex and rewarding a tactic as pulling off a pincer movement or closing with an enemy LRM boat to kill him before his allies come to his aid, well, great.

Standing in a box, yours or theirs, can be considered a tactic. In fact it could be said to be the superior tactic. Especially when the best strategy in Assault is capping. That's the whole gist of the problem. If you play MW:O to stand around and see if anyone happens to show up where you're standing that's awesome. You've got a game mode custom made for you. For the rest of us I want to actually out-maneuver and out-fight my opponents, applying overlapping fields of fire, flanking for position, setting or spoiling ambushes and other battlefield tactics.

Capping eliminates most of the value of any other tactics in Assault. Again, that's the basic issue here. Why bother coordinating - you're either capping, or you're fighting and hoping nobody else is capping. If you want more out of MW:O than playing Role A: Try to stand in other teams box or Role B: stand in own box so they can't stand in it then you're absolutely better off in Skirmish.

Ghogiel, on 28 December 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Skirmish = depending on map/spawn location, dumb charlie lance, with their mix of mediums and heavies, will go right into the hot zone and try to engage 2 heavier enemy lances while alpha lance is making ground/maneuvering to strong position.

Capture = Small maps, one team will have ~4 mechs who try to cap, even though small maps nearly always end on kills and not resources, leaving one team severally out gunned in the inevitable fire fight that nearly always decides the round.

Assault = same problem as skirmish with a more obvious rally point, that is seemingly avoided by more than half the players like the plague as soon as red triangle appears on the screen (as long as the red triangle is no where near the base it's like a moth to flame).

Hey, I'm normally in Charlie lance and I never do that.

I thought you normally dropped premade anyway Ghogiel? I almost never see you pugging, when I see you at all.

[Ghogiel]

MischiefSC, on 28 December 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

Hey, I'm normally in Charlie lance and I never do that.

I thought you normally dropped premade anyway Ghogiel? I almost never see you pugging, when I see you at all.

I solo more than I premade. Good guess is if I am in an assault I am probably solo. though the last week or so I end up in an assault in a premade because I got 50 failed to find matches in a day and every team I faced was stacked all to hell.

[MischiefSC]

Ghogiel, on 28 December 2013 - 04:59 PM, said:

I solo more than I premade. Good guess is if I am in an assault I am probably solo. though the last week or so I end up in an assault in a premade because I got 50 failed to find matches in a day and every team I faced was stacked all to hell.

50? Was that 12mans? I'm finding it's consistently 2 minutes to find a match pugging anymore. Hence all my forum posting - as we speak I'm waiting to find a match.

I just lost my 5th straight match. Watching two teammates. One in a 4xAC2 Jag with arm lock on (armlock.... on a jag? I.... why? They only go up and down. All you're doing is reducing how high or low you can aim....) and only enough HS for about 6 shots. Six. Then whur, whur. whur *silence*. Overheat. Next was a jag with 3xUAC5s playing in 3PV the whole match. Not only does that put arm lock on but it's almost impossible to stay on target. I think he was landing about 1 round in 6.

Do I just suck that bad that this is where I end up or is the MM having trouble finding people lately? Not trying to get all gloom and doom here but getting a match has been a struggle lately and the diversity in player ability has been.... inconsistent.

Just drop Skirmish. I end up with more matches and better players and I'm pugging in Tbolts, Bmasters and Locusts. Can't be that bad, right?

[Ghogiel]

MischiefSC, on 28 December 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

50? Was that 12mans? I'm finding it's consistently 2 minutes to find a match pugging anymore. Hence all my forum posting - as we speak I'm waiting to find a match.

I just lost my 5th straight match. Watching two teammates. One in a 4xAC2 Jag with arm lock on (armlock.... on a jag? I.... why? They only go up and down. All you're doing is reducing how high or low you can aim....) and only enough HS for about 6 shots. Six. Then whur, whur. whur *silence*. Overheat. Next was a jag with 3xUAC5s playing in 3PV the whole match. Not only does that put arm lock on but it's almost impossible to stay on target. I think he was landing about 1 round in 6.

Do I just suck that bad that this is where I end up or is the MM having trouble finding people lately? Not trying to get all gloom and doom here but getting a match has been a struggle lately and the diversity in player ability has been.... inconsistent.

Just drop Skirmish. I end up with more matches and better players and I'm pugging in Tbolts, Bmasters and Locusts. Can't be that bad, right?

While solo.

It's just the holidays when numbers are down I think. xmas eve and boxing day were virtually no go for solo play in assaults for me.

[MischiefSC]

Ghogiel, on 28 December 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

While solo.

It's just the holidays when numbers are down I think. xmas eve and boxing day were virtually no go for solo play in assaults for me.

********. I find matches, it's just slow. Shoot me an invite next time we're on, we'll group up and I'll sandbag your Elo You'll get plenty of matches.

[RichAC]

MischiefSC, on 28 December 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

Strategy is what you want to do, tactics is how you do it.

No, Strategy is the plan for getting what you want, tactics are the means used to do it.

Your loadout and mech and fighting maneuvers, used in every game mode, are your tactics. For example the plan is cap epsi and kappa, then converge in the middle on theta, defending all three bases and sending forces to support the other two when needed, would be the "strategy".

The fights, or the "skirmishes" we get into on the way there, and during the match, require "tactics" to accomplish that mission.
.

Quote

So were you in a premade? Given that your whole team stuck to an objective. You also seem to enjoy just hanging out for a while. What about when you sit there for 7 minutes, match ends, nobody made it back to your base?

I never get to join in on a 12 man unfortunately. I'm usually with 2 or 3 others though in a premade 4 man.

Quote

In Skirmish I'm generally making well over 150k for wins and only end up with under 1K for a loss for XP. Skirmish pays really, really well on a win or a loss given that most matches end up with 8 kills on the losing side and 12 on the winning. On a good match I'll go over 2k XP and around 225k cbills. I had a match the other day with my 2x first victory bonus that ended over 300k cbills and over 4K XP. Shawk with SRMS and LBX, got 7 kills - stolen from the hard work of my team. Obviously an exception though but a good example of how well Skirmish pays. More assists, more kills, more component destruction.

First who cares about imaginary cbills, I'm pretending my team is going to split 12,000 US dollars if we win haha. I got 40 million cbills right now and 5 empty mechbay slots, I'm more worried about GXP.

How long do your matches last though? If i get a win, instead of a loss in half the time of yours, there really is no difference. And if not, well then I'm making the same as you anyways....no big deal. I find a win more gratifying, but to imply your getting more money over time dragging out a match not caring if you win, because your are doing more damage in that particular match is not true. I just don't believe it matters in the end, especially if you are a good player like you seem to be with those numbers.

250 dmg in 5 mins, or 750 dmg in 15 mins, is no different in the end. The diff is the win bonus. Accepting a loss, to simply keep the damage going in a match regardless of winning, is something I can never be down with. And if its mid battle or 6v6 kill score, why take a chance for cbills? Buy your mech with MC lol.

Quote

Capture is not an 'additional win objective' in Assault. It's the easiest, most reliable win method and dictates all other tactics in a match. You also win when the other team is wiped out but the overriding tactic of the game is camping or capping. This eliminates the value of any other tactics. To equate standing on a square for 60 seconds or less with being as complex or rewarding as flanking and breaking up an enemy formation, winning an actual battle.... well, I guess it's a matter of taste. If you consider standing at your base for the whole match just in case someone goes to cap to be as complex and rewarding a tactic as pulling off a pincer movement or closing with an enemy LRM boat to kill him before his allies come to his aid, well, great.

3 ways to win versus only 2 makes things more complicated. Its crazy to try and dispute this dude.

I'd like to see you try when in an assault match when you verse me. Good luck with that. My premade lance is not going to ignore the base, neither will most players on my random pug team. Easy my ***. I've actually tried running with 4 spiders and cap accelrators, trying to troll people with some of the young guys on my hub. We failed almost every time. Actually, what was amazing is that we almost always got it down to seconds left before we got swarmed and pummeled by heavies. PGI really tested the time it takes to cap well it seems.

Quote

Standing in a box, yours or theirs, can be considered a tactic. In fact it could be said to be the superior tactic. Especially when the best strategy in Assault is capping. That's the whole gist of the problem. If you play MW:O to stand around and see if anyone happens to show up where you're standing that's awesome. You've got a game mode custom made for you. For the rest of us I want to actually out-maneuver and out-fight my opponents, applying overlapping fields of fire, flanking for position, setting or spoiling ambushes and other battlefield tactics.

You contradicted yourself here. Standing in the box is a tactic, but the best strategy in assault is capping? Theres no difference there, You still don't understand there is a difference between tactics and strategy.

You haven't played with me, if you think all I do is stand on a base the whole match lol. That being said mwo definitely does reward patience and teamwork. I had to learn that the hard way when I first started.

Tactics = your movement. yes. but is also your fighting set. And again, in every game mode we move and fight... but that only wins battles not wars. Its only the basics. Strategy is the plan that leads to tactical executions.

Quote

Capping eliminates most of the value of any other tactics in Assault. Again, that's the basic issue here. Why bother coordinating - you're either capping, or you're fighting and hoping nobody else is capping. If you want more out of MW:O than playing Role A: Try to stand in other teams box or Role B: stand in own box so they can't stand in it then you're absolutely better off in Skirmish.

IT actually increases its value, because it will win you objectives, which will aid in the greater goal of or provide extra insurance to win the match. Why bother coordinating in assault of conquest? Thats a real question? but coordinate in skirmish when your are never even fighting for any specific objectives? I understand it is much easier to coordinate on skirmish because there isn't much strategy to go by, so besides following primes a guy dropping solo doesn't have to follow or be clued on to much strategy. But that only makes it more dumb'd down not the opposite. I have more faith in my pugs in conquest or assault i guess, is the real issue here.

umm... You also go on to say here If I want more then playing a role? I should what? I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you now also saying that different mechs have more roles to play in skirmish then assault or conquest? I totally disagree.

Its true I probably stand in boxes more then others, because I am willing to sacrifice my dmg score for a win, This game has taught me patience. I'm used to fast paced twitch shooters, like quake and counterstrike, but using that playstyle in MWO only gets you killed or a loss. Thats one of the beauties of this game. But you definitely have not played with me if you think thats all I do.

Edited by RichAC, 28 December 2013 - 11:32 PM.

[MischiefSC]

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

No, Strategy is the plan for getting what you want, tactics are the means used to do it.

Your loadout and mech and fighting maneuvers, used in every game mode, are your tactics. For example the plan is cap epsi and kappa, then converge in the middle on theta, defending all three bases and sending forces to support the other two when needed, would be the "strategy".

The fights, or the "skirmishes" we get into on the way there, and during the match, require "tactics" to accomplish that mission.

The strategy would be, for example, to keep and kill the enemy at range. The tactics would be poptarting, LRMs and the like. I get the difference, we're repeating the same points here.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

I never get to join in on a 12 man unfortunately. I'm usually with 2 or 3 others though in a premade 4 man.

Anymore I pug almost exclusively but that's more time constraints. If you've got a few people in your friends list you can put a 12man together. Most of them will know a few others. It's fun for a lark now and again, it's not that hard. Unfortunately it's also not that rewarding IMO.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

First who cares about imaginary cbills, I'm pretending my team is going to split 12,000 US dollars if we win haha. I got 40 million cbills right now and 5 empty mechbay slots, I'm more worried about GXP.

Some people are. I've got almost 100k GXP and plenty of money - I still like to feel rewarded for my efforts, though what value people play on different rewards may vary.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

How long do your matches last though? If i get a win, instead of a loss in half the time of yours, there really is no difference. And if not, well then I'm making the same as you anyways....no big deal. I find a win more gratifying, but to imply your getting more money over time dragging out a match not caring if you win, because your are doing more damage in that particular match is not true. I just don't believe it matters in the end, especially if you are a good player like you seem to be with those numbers.

250 dmg in 5 mins, or 750 dmg in 15 mins, is no different in the end. The diff is the win bonus. Accepting a loss, to simply keep the damage going in a match regardless of winning, is something I can never be down with. And if its mid battle or 6v6 kill score, why take a chance for cbills? Buy your mech with MC lol.

I'm not that good, sometimes I just play with good people though.

My matches in Skirmish are rarely under 10 minutes. I like that though - that's what I want. It's what I play for. I remember vividly before Elo and the matchmaker running in a 4man with some really good people. We'd win 80 to 85% of matches, easily. Steamroll after steamroll, until we met a better premade. 16 out of 20 matches were a win. In the current stats system that would be a win rate over 5.0. It was not exciting or challenging, it did not make me better at the game, didn't help me improve. I want the longer, harder fought matches. I suspect my stats in Skirmish are just under 1.0, that means around a 40 to 45% win/loss rate and I love it. I don't mind losing in an 11/12 match at 12 minutes, I really enjoy it. I don't like winning 12/2 in 5 minutes. It took me 2 minutes to get the match and I play for 5? I'm only playing 50% of the time at that rate.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

3 ways to win versus only 2 makes things more complicated. Its crazy to try and dispute this dude.

I'd like to see you try when in an assault match when you verse me. Good luck with that. My premade lance is not going to ignore the base, neither will most players on my random pug team. Easy my ***. I've actually tried running with 4 spiders and cap accelrators, trying to troll people with some of the young guys on my hub. We failed almost every time. Actually, what was amazing is that we almost always got it down to seconds left before we got swarmed and pummeled by heavies. PGI really tested the time it takes to cap well it seems.

It's not crazy, it's why I use the training wheels analogy. The presence of base caps are there to reduce the need for battlefield tactics. It reduces the viable locations for battles, it requires your tactics to be based around only 2 principles, two strategies: Go cap the other base or defend yours, generally a bit of a mix of the two. it allows you to easily predict the position and tactics of the other team, they are tied by the same limitations you are. It's why poptarts are an issue. I don't see poptarts dominating in Skirmish, or any other build for that matter. More mobility means more flexibility in engagement ranges. Because capping supercedes all other tactics it overshadows all other behavior in a match. In Skirmish you don't know, before it even starts, where everyone is going or which of 3 options you'll play (camp base/go to middle of map/circle left/right to cap). You need to coordinate with your team and set up a strategy and deploy the tactics to achieve it or you're likely to get rolled. Pincer, out-flank, ambush, fortify a position, hit and run, those aren't things you're doing while waiting for a cap. You've got to pull them off to win.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

You contradicted yourself here. Standing in the box is a tactic, but the best strategy in assault is capping? Theres no difference there, You still don't understand there is a difference between tactics and strategy.

There is a considerable difference and I do understand. If your personal strategy is to win by capping (every player has a strategy and tactics in addition to team strategy and team tactics) then your tactic is to circle left/right to stand in the square after both teams are engaged in the middle of the map. If your strategy is to win by fighting then your tactic might be to do the same but run away when/if any of the other team come back to base. Both of these tactics however, by dint of the nature of cap victories, are absurdly more effective than, say, flanking. You can't guarantee a victory if the other team doesn't respond to your attempts to draw them into a flanking ambush. You're not able to force the other team to respond to your maneuver. You've got to play it and sell it, winning on your skill and not the mechanics of a victory condition that can award you a win without ever seeing another player.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

You haven't played with me, if you think all I do is stand on a base the whole match lol. That being said mwo definitely does reward patience and teamwork. I had to learn that the hard way when I first started.

Tactics = your movement. yes. but is also your fighting set. And again, in every game mode we move and fight... but that only wins battles not wars. Its only the basics. Strategy is the plan that leads to tactical executions.

I get the difference. I don't want to sound like a broken record though so I won't repeat myself here.

RichAC, on 28 December 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:

IT actually increases its value, because it will win you objectives, which will aid in the greater goal of or provide extra insurance to win the match. Why bother coordinating in assault of conquest? Thats a real question? but coordinate in skirmish when your are never even fighting for any specific objectives? I understand it is much easier to coordinate on skirmish because there isn't much strategy to go by, so besides following primes a guy dropping solo doesn't have to follow or be clued on to much strategy. But that only makes it more dumb'd down not the opposite. I have more faith in my pugs in conquest or assault i guess, is the real issue here.

Most people don't coordinate in Conquest or Assault, there's no need. They just have to go stand in the same position they always stand in on this map. The other team will go to their corresponding place. One of you will flank a little left or right and you'll advance, sniping. If one team or the other manages to get some lights around to cap you'll have to split your team or they will. Either team may or may not exploit that opportunity. That's it. That's every Assault match pretty much ever played.

In Skirmish you have no reason to expect the other team to do anything specific. You can try to play reactionary - see which way they go and try to set up an ambush, flank or the like. Watch for stragglers, poptarts and LRM boats that will likely get slowly left behind. You might take a pro-active approach and communicate a plan with your team (hey, how about Beta goes wide left and flank from C4 while we snipe at them from here. They'll be exposed to you. If they charge at you we'll advance down the D-line while you back up. If they charge at us you advance on the 4line. If they back up we both move in. Good?) or just keep flanking right because you're all pretty fast and eventually the other teams stragglers will get gobbled up by your blob. It could go anywhere, any way. As there is no clearly dominant tactic then what matters is how well you apply the tactics you choose. It allows for more variety and the tendency for matches to end up in 10/12 or 11/12 results means your performance is even more significant.

At this point I feel like I've said my piece - repeatedly in fact. You like Assault? Awesome, knock yourself out. It's still there! Certainly less people there who dislike capping, they're in Skirmish.

The difference in complexity? Assault is 'Tell me which Terry Pratchett book you like best', Skirmish is 'tell me which book you like best'. The second gives a wider range of options. The inclusion of 'Terry Pratchett' does not add complexity, it removes it.

[RichAC]

MischiefSC, on 29 December 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

The strategy would be, for example, to keep and kill the enemy at range. The tactics would be poptarting, LRMs and the like. I get the difference, we're repeating the same points here.

True, and yes your repeating my point now. The thing is in the other game modes...there is more strategic options then just kill the enemy at range. I actually find that more boring, but to each his own.

Quote

Anymore I pug almost exclusively but that's more time constraints. If you've got a few people in your friends list you can put a 12man together. Most of them will know a few others. It's fun for a lark now and again, it's not that hard. Unfortunately it's also not that rewarding IMO.

Noone likes to 12 man because they get smashed. Its not hard eh? Your a pro. Everyone just sync drops in skirmish instead, no matter how many players they have. I have mastered atlas and poptart cataphract, maybe you can invite me to a 12 man one day.

Quote

Some people are. I've got almost 100k GXP and plenty of money - I still like to feel rewarded for my efforts, though what value people play on different rewards may vary.

Well I guess when i unlock everything GXp will matter less. I don't think they should give extra rewards for a loss. Or actuallyt he most rewards in a match for a loss. I don't think they should give any rewards for a loss stat, just for everything else, like dmg kills assists defends, caps, spot assists, etc anything they can fit in there. but nothing for a loss. Maybe that is why people dont' care if they win or not.

Quote

My matches in Skirmish are rarely under 10 minutes. I like that though - that's what I want. It's what I play for. I remember vividly before Elo and the matchmaker running in a 4man with some really good people. We'd win 80 to 85% of matches, easily. Steamroll after steamroll, until we met a better premade. 16 out of 20 matches were a win. In the current stats system that would be a win rate over 5.0. It was not exciting or challenging, it did not make me better at the game, didn't help me improve. I want the longer, harder fought matches. I suspect my stats in Skirmish are just under 1.0, that means around a 40 to 45% win/loss rate and I love it. I don't mind losing in an 11/12 match at 12 minutes, I really enjoy it. I don't like winning 12/2 in 5 minutes. It took me 2 minutes to get the match and I play for 5? I'm only playing 50% of the time at that rate.

Well, not much has changed man. The reason why you have a higher win ratio in conquest and assault, and I'm assuming in practice mode as well, I mean skirmish. Is because you are a good player in a premade. Even one player can make all the difference sometimes in the other game modes. Which is not true in skirmish. Your more team dependent in skirmish, even though less coordination is required, and contrary to popular belief about the other game modes.

i still think you get more cbills by winning more matches, not by how long you drag a match out. Everything adds up in the end.

Quote

It's not crazy, it's why I use the training wheels analogy. The presence of base caps are there to reduce the need for battlefield tactics. It reduces the viable locations for battles, it requires your tactics to be based around only 2 principles, two strategies: Go cap the other base or defend yours, generally a bit of a mix of the two. it allows you to easily predict the position and tactics of the other team, they are tied by the same limitations you are. It's why poptarts are an issue. I don't see poptarts dominating in Skirmish, or any other build for that matter. More mobility means more flexibility in engagement ranges. Because capping supercedes all other tactics it overshadows all other behavior in a match. In Skirmish you don't know, before it even starts, where everyone is going or which of 3 options you'll play (camp base/go to middle of map/circle left/right to cap). You need to coordinate with your team and set up a strategy and deploy the tactics to achieve it or you're likely to get rolled. Pincer, out-flank, ambush, fortify a position, hit and run, those aren't things you're doing while waiting for a cap. You've got to pull them off to win.

You use the same tactics in every match. Poparting is not an issue? You just said thats the main tactic you would use in your first statement of this post lol

I actually feel the opposite, I think you have to be more mobile in the other game modes, because standing still means you are going to be capped on. Camping in a big huddle in al ogn standoff waiting for the other enemy to make move is actually more boring to me then conquest. to each his own.

Quote

There is a considerable difference and I do understand. If your personal strategy is to win by capping (every player has a strategy and tactics in addition to team strategy and team tactics) then your tactic is to circle left/right to stand in the square after both teams are engaged in the middle of the map. If your strategy is to win by fighting then your tactic might be to do the same but run away when/if any of the other team come back to base. Both of these tactics however, by dint of the nature of cap victories, are absurdly more effective than, say, flanking. You can't guarantee a victory if the other team doesn't respond to your attempts to draw them into a flanking ambush. You're not able to force the other team to respond to your maneuver. You've got to play it and sell it, winning on your skill and not the mechanics of a victory condition that can award you a win without ever seeing another player.

Strategies change with maps and team makeups. Sometimes they change by adapting during the match. Any move you make can force your opponents hand or they lose, like its chess, whether there are bases or not. You are really just knitpicking the ways you want to be able to win. Which is basically only one way. That is what is limiting people, not bases. That is what forces your hand, forces you to brawl, forces you to run an assault or heavy mech, and which is forcing PGI to use weight limits soon.

But I had an exciting match last night with a lance of mine. We had a 4 spider lance on our team that was going straight for their base. Turns out the other team capped our base way faster then they did! A shadowhawk buddy of mine rushed back to step on the base, right after airstriking them all, and stopped the timer just before they won! .lol.. and it wasn't no lights either...they ran through pass on crimson straights and their whole team hauled *** to our base. I followed eventually in my atlas to step on base and had a couple guys behind me. We brawled for about a min or two....and the spiders on our team finally outcapped them for the win. The enemy team literally had one second to go...it was so close you could barely see the blue bar anymore. It was very fun and gratifying. A single teamate was the reason we won that, because of his amazing defense. And the only cap win of the day, because it rarely works that easy. Definitely the most memorable match of the week. NEXT!~ TRY AGAIN!

Quote

Most people don't coordinate in Conquest or Assault, there's no need. They just have to go stand in the same position they always stand in on this map. The other team will go to their corresponding place. One of you will flank a little left or right and you'll advance, sniping. If one team or the other manages to get some lights around to cap you'll have to split your team or they will. Either team may or may not exploit that opportunity. That's it. That's every Assault match pretty much ever played.

And contrary to what you believe, there are many ways to go, there is no single entry point in any of these maps. NO bottlenecks at all, so I applaud PGI's map design. I mean even if that was true, it definitelyl should not be an "easy" win as you keep calling it then...lol

But In skirmish it doesn't matter, you can go camp in a single location and wait for the enemy team to make a move and then just hope to cricle around on them.

in the other game modes You actually have to divide your forces up more across the map. For example who cares about sending a lance to guard pass on crimson straits in skirmish. Its not like you have to worry about anyone rushing through there to cap win. Best strategy in skirmish is just keep everyone together. This is what usually happens, as you said in your first sentence, "a long range stand off" for a while, which is what I actually find more boring.

Or For example, everyone just camping on that middle mountain peak on Alpine peaks. Thats not a smart move in assault or conquest, because the enemy will cap around you while you sit there making marshmellows in the middle of the map too far to hit anyone.

Capping is boring to you I get it, to me skirmish is more boring, but don't try to say that game mode takes more planning or skills. This is not true, in fact its the opposite. The only thing that would make that true possibly, if its because it has more premades. But there is more strategy involved in the other game modes for obvious reasons, and even requires more tactics and skill at times, because there is more a chance you are going to be outnumbered and have to put those skills to the test. That is, if you are actually trying to win and not farm.

Quote

In Skirmish you have no reason to expect the other team to do anything specific. You can try to play reactionary - see which way they go and try to set up an ambush, flank or the like. Watch for stragglers, poptarts and LRM boats that will likely get slowly left behind. You might take a pro-active approach and communicate a plan with your team (hey, how about Beta goes wide left and flank from C4 while we snipe at them from here. They'll be exposed to you. If they charge at you we'll advance down the D-line while you back up. If they charge at us you advance on the 4line. If they back up we both move in. Good?) or just keep flanking right because you're all pretty fast and eventually the other teams stragglers will get gobbled up by your blob. It could go anywhere, any way. As there is no clearly dominant tactic then what matters is how well you apply the tactics you choose. It allows for more variety and the tendency for matches to end up in 10/12 or 11/12 results means your performance is even more significant.

Eactly, there is nothing specific to do. I don't find that limiting, I find it less complicated and boring.

Quote

At this point I feel like I've said my piece - repeatedly in fact. You like Assault? Awesome, knock yourself out. It's still there! Certainly less people there who dislike capping, they're in Skirmish.

The difference in complexity? Assault is 'Tell me which Terry Pratchett book you like best', Skirmish is 'tell me which book you like best'. The second gives a wider range of options. The inclusion of 'Terry Pratchett' does not add complexity, it removes it.

Skirmish is assault without the option to cap win.

You call it easy, I call it easy for me, harder for you. Stick to practice mode where the only thing that matters is your aim, not your brain.

Edited by RichAC, 30 December 2013 - 12:21 AM.

[RichAC]

Man, apparently skirmish did not stop any of the whining in assault mode.

Alot of people must be in the new years spirit though today cause my first two matches were close cap wars.

The first match on caustic valley, me and 3 other guys went to go cap their base right at the very beginning. I got called alot of names like wussy and this game is lame, to use some nicer words. Saying we were afraid to fight blah blah.

Whats ironic though is the other team was capping with more people then us, because they were catching up to us....yet these same cry babies were not going to defend our base, where they would of got lots of action! It baffles my mind, I wonder who was really scared to fight? IMO, if your not capping or defending the base but standing around wondering where the fight is, your in the wrong game mode.

Anyways, Turns out we won the match! IT was so close you couldn't even tell who won if it wasn't for the music!! both bars were down to nothing. S there was no way to tell who won, but I heard the music and knew we did.

Second match I solo randomly rolled on assault again but this time on river city night. Too small a map to rush cap on there, so both teams fought until the death score was about 6-6. Then my guys went to go cap(, then the other side capped seconds later. This time noone whined and we actually had fellas go back to our base to defend, as I was screaming "step on it, get in the box!"" not as close, but another close one and another victory. 580 dmg in my new shadowhawk and my first medium. I tell ya mediums are not easy to play, but they sure feel like moving with a purpose in assault and conquest.

It actually felt like a different game mode from Skirmish today though, assault being played like its supposed to. Matches like this actually make skirmish worthwhile, not because they are bad, but because it makes it truly a change of pace and different strategy. Same for conquest it actually felt like a 3rd game mode. If more people actually played to win, matches would be more dynamic and interesting, instead of so repetitive.

Edited by RichAC, 31 December 2013 - 06:04 AM.

[RichAC]

so far 3 matches in a row, nothing but people whining about caps.

First couple games I won on cap wins in assault, whole server was upset about it each time. 3rd game was conquest, I told my team before it started to try and cap bases and not play like it skirmish so we have insurance. So they didn't cap a single base. and we lost quickly on points after enemy team got every single base(except the one i capped and I still got most kills)...hahah

I'm constantly asking people why they still have gamemode on any, if they can't stand capping bases? The crying and whining about assaults on bases or losing to caps is worse then before skirmish mode came out.

IMO, its because this is a community dead set against this game. They are so bitter because they are bad sore losers, and not normally fps players and or resent the fact this game is not true to canon or rpg enough for them, so they want to sabatoge it. That can be the only explanation.

Why play a game mode you dont' like, after PGI gave you one that you asked for? They just want to ruin it for others is the answer. Its why they are becoming the only people left in the game.

I feel bad for PGI. I really do Unlike Team Fortress 2, I actually like this game. Its not only f2p, but it has great mechanics, and And it has a matchmaker! the only thing disappointing about this game, is its sync dropping, macro using, sore loser lamer community. That have soe false sense of entitlement cause they read the books or played past games, and selfishly turn people off because they resent its direction.

Edited by RichAC, 28 January 2014 - 02:32 PM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

just ignore the nubs that cry about capping. honestly dont even respond when they start QQ about it.

i do tell my team to kill instead of cap but ONLY when we have already won and are basically just chasing down the last 1-2 lights.

[Mycrus]

When someone complains about cap in assault...

I whip out my one word macro...

#playskirmish

[Spawnsalot]

As a supporter of mech on mech violence over standing in boxes I can only add...

...that people shouldn't be complaining about base caps in Assault when they have the option to play Skirmish.

[Curccu]

Lost a game of Assault - Mordor Yesterday because my buggies were like "No capping is gay, let's fight" and enemy out capped us within 2 minutes.

[DAYLEET]

RichAC is the most dedicated, self entitled troll ive ever seen in a game/forum and ive been playing multiplayer games since doom on my 2400.

He's still worth reading though for little gems like "Unlike Team Fortress 2, I actually like this game." I don't know what kind of drugs you use for inspiration but by all means share and pass it around.

[Red squirrel]

It is indeed odd, why some players keep dropping in Assault or even Conquest.
It's fine if you dislike capping - But it's not fine if you are too stupid to check the box saying "Skirmish only".
Why do some players get so involved with this? As a peaceful squirrel I don't understand you humans. But if I absolutely hated the game mechanics of Assault I would just not bother playing it instead of writing endless discussions in the chat and forum.


PS: I like all game modes

Edited by Red squirrel, 29 January 2014 - 03:50 PM.

[Solis Obscuri]

It's really weird how the whole logic behind this thread is that playing against people of a roughly equivalent skill level is a punishment.

[RichAC]

DAYLEET, on 29 January 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

RichAC is the most dedicated, self entitled troll ive ever seen in a game/forum and ive been playing multiplayer games since doom on my 2400.

He's still worth reading though for little gems like "Unlike Team Fortress 2, I actually like this game." I don't know what kind of drugs you use for inspiration but by all means share and pass it around.

I have legendary troll status on the internet.

But ya I don't like tf2 at all, don't like the game mechanics don't like the cartoony graphics. don't like most of the game modes.

Sorry you don't like MWO, but I love this game. Its great.

Edited by RichAC, 29 January 2014 - 07:05 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Ghogiel, on 28 December 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Skirmish = depending on map/spawn location, dumb charlie lance, with their mix of mediums and heavies, will go right into the hot zone and try to engage 2 heavier enemy lances while alpha lance is making ground/maneuvering to strong position.

Capture = Small maps, one team will have ~4 mechs who try to cap, even though small maps nearly always end on kills and not resources, leaving one team severally out gunned in the inevitable fire fight that nearly always decides the round.

Assault = same problem as skirmish with a more obvious rally point, that is seemingly avoided by more than half the players like the plague as soon as red triangle appears on the screen (as long as the red triangle is no where near the base it's like a moth to flame).

small maps used to be concentrate, kill and the team that went 6v3 up would cap and win or get the game on killing the other team, now caps on small maps at the start can't be ingnored because turning them takes so much time


skirmish doesn't all ways go as you say as often both sides end up 4v8 and the team with the worse shots fails as the survivors of one 8 join there survivors of their team.


PGI's war map is I think sadly going to fail as half the community go into private matches when CW comes on line. The other half on open matches leave as the Match maker fails over and over. then pgi close MWO is my prediction of what will happen later this year

[John Cosmo]

sigh