39 replies to this topic

[Munin Ravensong]

A lot of the times, the sub 100 damage guy is still sub 100 because, like you said, he's not in the group combat mind. This normally comes from the fact that the majority of new players left their mind reading ability in their other pants. If you don't say anything, don't expect anything - especially from the newer guys. Instead of being a jackass and cussing out that guy in his trial mech when he causes the team to wipe (it's gotta be the "noob" right? after all, none of the experienced guys make mistakes..... ever, right?) friend him, talk with him, drop with him, and for gods sake TEACH HIM!! if even 1/2 the experienced guys would do this instead of play the blame game (if it was his fault, be gentle, and start by explaining how to do better), then a LOT of the headaches the more experienced players have when paired up with a full team of idiots... err.... newbros would go away.

Edited by Munin Ravensong, 28 April 2014 - 03:12 AM.

[SethAbercromby]

Magnakanus, on 28 April 2014 - 02:50 AM, said:

This man has it pegged down. The majority of the people I see calling the team a bunch of bad players are the sub 100 damage types that are themselves at best a questionable asset to the team. They often lack the focus necessary to take advantage of the "group combat mind" and express that lack in the best way they can, ranting.

Well, sub 100 performaces can be caused by a lot of things. Hitting the wrong spot at the wrong time*, a lucky shot that did you in and maybe not using a build that is intended to deal a lot of direct damage. The ranting however, is a pretty good givaway what kind of player that person is.

*You know the chasm in Frozen City? The one that leads to Theta during Conquest. Yes, THAT spot! I ran into 8 enemies hiding there with my Misery. It took them long enough with 6+ players for me to deal at least 100 (spot on) total damage to some of them before I went down. The intel I provided was one of the deciding factors for our team though, because with them all clustered up in that death-hole (and having been too busy shooting at me rather than moving to a less disadvantageous position), it quickly turned into a bloodbath.

[Magna Canus]

SethAbercromby, on 28 April 2014 - 03:18 AM, said:

Well, sub 100 performaces can be caused by a lot of things. Hitting the wrong spot at the wrong time*, a lucky shot that did you in and maybe not using a build that is intended to deal a lot of direct damage. The ranting however, is a pretty good givaway what kind of player that person is.

*You know the chasm in Frozen City? The one that leads to Theta during Conquest. Yes, THAT spot! I ran into 8 enemies hiding there with my Misery. It took them long enough with 6+ players for me to deal at least 100 (spot on) total damage to some of them before I went down. The intel I provided was one of the deciding factors for our team though, because with them all clustered up in that death-hole (and having been too busy shooting at me rather than moving to a less disadvantageous position), it quickly turned into a bloodbath.

Well, I am not saying that every time you get below 100 you are "that guy", only that you often see the ranters going off and are below that mark. I got headshot in my Raven by a 3xGaus Iya once. Stupid me for letting him do it. LOL

Luckily you managed to turn a bad situation into an advantage. I make mistakes like anybody else, often ones I know I should not have made in the first place, but that's on me and I don't need to rant about it.

[Dracol]

Jherek C, on 24 April 2014 - 01:01 AM, said:

... In fact, the matchmaker, as I understand it, should find the matches to your playstyle and skill level. If you are the worst player, you should also get into a match with other bad players, while the mech wizards only should meet other wizards of their level....

Just wanted to clarify something... the MM does not take into account your play style, just your overall success. I felt compelled to mention this because sometime when dropping solo, my mech build does not jive with the rest of the team.

Examples: I drop in a dedicated scout, and we have no missile boats
I drop in a brawler, and I'm on a team of missile boats
I take a long range mech, and the team is all brawlers

I've favored more general builds for pugging for this particular reason.

[IraqiWalker]

CyberHawks, on 28 April 2014 - 01:40 AM, said:

@ IragiWalker Thank you, there is no need to apologize. I see it as 1% of the people who get 90% of the attention type of scenario. It was the same thing when I sold computers in retail, 99% of my customers were cool and asked questions or listened to advice. 1% of my customers had little patience, and screamed when things didn't work the way they wanted, usually over the smallest of details. Sometime ask me about the guy who thought he could shave some pins off of a new CPU to get it to fit in a different motherboard!

I've seen you in que a few times I think. I would love to do a lance deployment when I get a good headset to use teamspeak. Just remember that I've never done this before and I'll be terrible at it at first.

Yup, nothing like retail to make you grow a tough skin, worked floor sales for about 5 years, that was fun. One of the main reasons I want to drop with you is because you're relatively new. It's one of my favorite things, to help people find a solid footing with group drops and have fun. I'm not much for competitive play, I like the game, and I like having fun, but I don't have the time to compete with a team, I also like running non-meta mechs, and flat out stupid fun builds every now and then XD.

As for the headset with Teamspeak: Hearing communication from you would be very helpful, but at the very least, you'd be able to hear us, and that can make all the difference in the world. Regardless, I look forward to dropping with you soon (My laptop just finally got fixed and I returned to the holy land of Windows, after being exiled to the Isles of Ubuntu Linux)

[SethAbercromby]

IraqiWalker, on 28 April 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

As for the headset with Teamspeak: Hearing communication from you would be very helpful, but at the very least, you'd be able to hear us, and that can make all the difference in the world. Regardless, I look forward to dropping with you soon (My laptop just finally got fixed and I returned to the holy land of Windows, after being exiled to the Isles of Ubuntu Linux)

Besides, which server are you using? I have yet to see yon on Comstar, but maybe we are just active to different times.

[IraqiWalker]

SethAbercromby, on 28 April 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Besides, which server are you using? I have yet to see yon on Comstar, but maybe we are just active to different times.

I'm mostly on House Davion, I haven't been to the Comstar server in 3 months or so, now.

[SethAbercromby]

Okay, so I've been playing a few more matches the last days and I found another thing that might benefit some people.

In combat, there is something very akin to momentum. Often, in a stomp, the dominating team just keeps pressing forward, steamrolling any force that tries to stop them by presenting a clear advantage in both numbers and firepower, overwhelming enemies quickly one by one. This is a case of the team gaining a massive forward momentum, either by the opposing team being unable to stop them or by actively pulling back, fueling their push.

Here are a few examples of how builds can alternate the flow of momentum and later some more specific examples. This list is not all-encompassing and additions can be made when reminding me I forgot to mention something.

Specialized builds:
Brawlers:
The embodiment of forward momentum. In the offense, they generate more momentum the further they advance. A striking force lead by a brawler can become immensely dangerous when presenting enough numbers or in engaging the enemy force to prepare a flanking maneuver.
In the defense, they can secure bottleneck positions, stopping enemy teams in their advance, draining them of their momentum until the opportunity to push back presents itself.
Two equal-weighted brawlers engaged with each other basically push their momentum against each other until either of them yields or dies. The first to back out allows the other to drain their momentum or force them into reverse. From that point on, they can dictate the engagement, which provides a severe advantage.

Snipers:
Snipers provide counter-momentum to stop the enemy team. Their accurate long-range barrages can slow down their enemies' forward momentum, allowing their own team to increase the pressure. A well-coordinated sniper-squad can act as a dead stop at key positions, grinding enemy advances to a halt and possibly forcing them into a retreat. Important for a sniper is to know where their hard hitting shots are needed most and relocate appropriately. In the offense, the task of snipers in to keep the tip of the spear from breaking, eliminating priority targets that are engaged with the lead (likely a brawler). However, try to not exclusively shoot the target the lead is directly engaged with. Fire at targets that try to exploit their weaker sides or rear to keep them from crippling the 'Mech.

LRM Boats:
LRMs, in essence, provide a denial of area against enemy targets. Any 'Mech that does not move for cover when being hit by a hailstorm of missiles will suffer the consequences. This in turn can force enemies to stop their advance, draining them of momentum. When hitting an enemy 'Mech, the spread damage will move some of it away from the CT, but the overall armor damage will further weaken weak spots in the armor, making crippling easier. LRM boats always move with the momentum of the team, advancing when they push and retreating when they fall back. They don't operate much differently during offense or defense.


Non-Specialized Builds:
Skirmishers:
Skirmishers always move with the momentum, as their comparatively weak armor will not allow them to move too far from the allied teammates. Their fast speed and mobility allows them to use quick hit-and-run skirmishing tactics to hunt down isolated targets or to redirect the momentum of the enemy team. They carry enough firepower to deal a notable amount of damage in a short time, but retain the mobility that allows them to relocate quickly to strike from cover or behind heavier teammates (or enemies if you are daring enough).

Fire Support:
Fire support 'Mechs do not necessarily fill the traditional role of killing quickly. They usually move in the second line, providing additional fire against any targets the lead is engaging or fending off small targets that want to tear open the back armor while it is engaged.
Some 'Mechs can effectively load a variety of weapons to engage targets at any range, however most specialize either into mid to long range or mid to short range support.
Whenever possible, AMS and BAP should always be equipped when using a front line fire-supporter. The ECM breaking capabilities of the BAP and at least somewhat damage-reducing effects of AMS can provide a huge benefit to the advancing group.
Fire supporters generally reinforce the momentum of their team.

Striker:
The Striker is a (usually) Heavy 'Mech that carries an arsenal of weapons designed to kill a target in as short time as possible. The increased mobility allows them to strike from cover more efficiently and use the bullet-attracting effects of the spearhead to quickly kill priority targets. Similar to a brawler, they are intended to create a lot of forward momentum, they are however somewhat less specialized to allow for a bit more flexibility on the field.

As always, I'm always open to corrections and criticism toward the listed points (and any mentioned in my original post as well). Nobody is perfect, after all.

[DarkonFullPower]

SethAbercromby, on 05 May 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

-snip-

The only critique I have is that all of the "Non-Specialized Builds" ARE Specialized Builds. In this day and age, even a Jack-of-all-trades build IS a specialization, especially in this game.

The most important thing for both newcomers and veterans alike to know when buliding a mech is that MWO's definition of "Meta" is "The most successful mech build without strategy." Tactics do NOT equal strategy, they are uncomparable.

If you are buliding a mech to be the best it can be alone, then make a "Meta" build. If you are making a mech fit into a strategy, then you may fine, like I did, that a non-meta build will outright crush any meta counterpart in it's category.

[SethAbercromby]

DarkonFullPower, on 05 May 2014 - 05:37 PM, said:

The only critique I have is that all of the "Non-Specialized Builds" ARE Specialized Builds. In this day and age, even a Jack-of-all-trades build IS a specialization, especially in this game.

I won't argue with you that using a balanced build can be a specialization in its own right, but when referring to a Jack-of-all-trades, you are referring to a build that can do anything well, but doesn't perform exceptionally well in any field. That is because they trade specialization towards a specific task to instead be able to fulfill any task well. That is what I was referring to with "Non-Specialization". If you feel like I was calling those builds bad, I apologize as that was not my intention at all.

[Appogee]

Bulletsponge0, on 26 April 2014 - 05:46 AM, said:

I'll spectate various teammates, if I see one who is obviously new, I'll give them some advice as they are playing to help them out...

That is a great idea.

[Barkem Squirrel]

I like the summaries and concur with them.

Remember if the square peg does not fit in the round hole, get a bigger hammer.

I think the hardest part is the situational awareness and using that to gain the initiative. Sunday night in a drop 4 of us were in a group and two mechs descended out of the caldera to flank the remaining mechs on the enemy team, and as soon as we saw the red arrows start to change direction on the map we charged. Me in a Jagermech A, charging with two MG's one ML and TAG. The Misery did not stand a chance due to the LRMs opening it up before. Why did I charge first into the area that 5 mechs were covering? They had two mechs to the rear, an assault and a heavy were coming right behind me, and machine guns install fear late in a match when everyone is opened up.

Why did this work, well the two flankers distracted all of them. My charge scared the living daylights out of them due to the damage that they had and put the misery down within seconds. By not controlling the opening from the caldera and keeping us penned up we created a cross fire zone with nowhere to hide. It did help that I was limiting my exposure to damage through the match so that when I charged I could take the damage. One thing LRM boats are good for after using up all the LRMs (I was out of LRMs) . Late in a match even one ML or one MG can make the difference, but the fresh armor is a great item to have to let the other team to shoot at, while your team is focusing on them.


What can be learned from this:

Know when to be bait.

Know when to be a meat shield.

Know when to charge into their guns.

Know when to flank a superior position.

[whiskey tango foxtrot]

CyberHawks, on 26 April 2014 - 01:08 AM, said:

One of the most encouraging remarks I have heard after a match that we were stomped in was "I'd drop with this team anytime!", made by a fellow teammate. This comment came after a series of negative comments that came from a self imposed leader of our team.

This was my 5th or 6th Pug game in a row where my team was stomped pretty badly, and I was quietly getting disheartened. I've stopped saying anything in game to anyone because I usually get a lot of negative comments. I realize that some of it is role playing, and taunting to psychologically get an enemy to make an error in game. But coming from a teammate that we "are the worst team ever" is destructive, and can actually affect how people play future games. So I stay quiet unless it is to let my teammates know an enemy is doing something, or that it would be tactically better to return to base. But that one statement "I'd drop with this team anytime!" made my entire evening enjoyable, even though we lost quite often.

I've played several thousand pug games over the last six months. I've mastered the Atlas, Highlander, Cataphract, Jagermech, Shadowhawk, Jenner, and the Raven. I do well sometimes, and blunder other times. Each game teaches me something, mostly in positional awareness to where my team is and where the enemy is. The most enjoyable games I play have to do less with whether my mech lives or dies, but really with how close the match was. Watching the last few mechs alive strategically try to get the upper hand, while the dead teammates try to give advice makes a brotherhood of us all. And that is why I play.

I'm just starting to get good at this game...I have a long way to go!

o7

Great Post....I logged on just to say so....

[SethAbercromby]

Barkem Squirrel, on 06 May 2014 - 07:44 AM, said:

What can be learned from this:

Know when to be bait.

Know when to be a meat shield.

Know when to charge into their guns.

Know when to flank a superior position.

A well-played match indeed. This is what I try to explain with this "guide". Knowing all the little things that can make or break a game makes you more aware of the mistakes you, your teammates and your enemies do and helps you improve.

This is not to be treated as a "how to play" but rather as a "how to learn playing the game" that tries to explain the dynamics that influence how a match progresses so people can use that knowledge to learn how to directly influence the battlefield with their decisions. While tackling some advanced topics, I hope that this also helps newer players.

[KapitanJewFro]

after 100+ games this greenhorn still has a few things to learn so thanks for the guide its given me a few thing to ponder and try thank you

[SethAbercromby]

I'm very glad that this is comprehensive enough for new players and I'm very glad you're seeing valuable information in it. If you have any feedback to throw my way, I'm listening

Speaking of which, I'll add a segment for VOIP, since that has been a thing for a while now.

[KapitanJewFro]

i have noticed that in most of my drops im the only one on VOIP it kind of auto-installs me a the defacto leader a role im still grasping

[SethAbercromby]

KapitanJewFro, on 23 March 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

i have noticed that in most of my drops im the only one on VOIP it kind of auto-installs me a the defacto leader a role im still grasping

It's always unfortunate if nobody uses the feature, but i personally think it's always a good way to kickstart a conversation with "okay guys, what's the plan?". A lot of people tend to be quiet until someone else speaks, so that might be a good way to break the ice.

There's also the factor of overall awareness. When you're at the front and under enemy fire, you tend to focus on what's right in front of you to survive, but flexible 'Mechs designed for a fire support role that tend to stick to the second line can have a much better overview on the battlefield. Zeus and Battlemaster for example are pretty good to fill in for such a role thanks to their well-rounded hardpoints and good mobility.

I'd reccomend starting easy with VOIP, calling specific situations as they arise
"Enemies spotted at 4-line"
"UAV at C3/D3"
"5 at Epsilon"
"Direwolf moving in from H6"
(I'm writing in letters here, but using words from the the Phonic Alphabet to help with communication)

Later you can move up to calling targets of opportunity or give easy commands
"Focus fire on Hotel, Timberwolf, aim for the legs"
"Don't chase the squirrels, stay in formation"

And as you become more confident in your ability to call out such situations, you'll find yourself gradually become more confident in using VOIP in general. Just don't feel like anyone is pushing you to suddely call all the shots just for using VOIP. Take your time and build your confidence as you progress.

[Skarlock]

Jherek C, on 24 April 2014 - 01:01 AM, said:

Besides of that almost all advises you give are certainly not wrong, I can't agree on the conclusion, that the matchmaker wouldn't be the problem. In fact, the matchmaker, as I understand it, should find the matches to your playstyle and skill level. If you are the worst player, you should also get into a match with other bad players, while the mech wizards only should meet other wizards of their level.
So, if bad players get send into games with well skilled pilots and not only for 1 or 3 games but for a clear majority of matches over days, there is something wrong with match making.
The result is, that this game can get pretty frustrating for players, that are not able to cope with the learning curve and get beaten to chunks as soon as they start their mech. Besides all advices that can and should be given to noobs to make matches more interesting and less fad, the matchmaker should keep leagues appart and not mix the various skill levels up.

The matchmaker doesn't have all night to find you a game. There is a very limited pool of people playing in the queue at any time, and it does what it has to in order to start a game quickly. Very typically this will result in a few high elo players on each side, a lot of average elo players on each side, and a few low elo players per side, but it will NOT be perfectly balanced, sometimes not even close. For example, let's say there's 3 high elo players in queue. One side has to get two of them and the other only one... If people were willing to wait for 30 minutes to an hour in between games I'm sure match maker could do a much better job, but what's the lesser evil here? Wait that long for a game to start up, or get into some games that are inherently imbalanced to one degree or another?

The quality of matchmaker in making even teams is directly proportional to the number of people playing and inversely proportional to the amount of time people are willing to wait for a game. Ironically, I'm sure if you increase the wait time, you will decrease the number of people playing... We either need a bigger player base or a much much longer wait time to fix it. I don't see any other real, feasible solution to be honest.

[SethAbercromby]

Skarlock, on 24 March 2015 - 11:17 AM, said:

The matchmaker doesn't have all night to find you a game. There is a very limited pool of people playing in the queue at any time, and it does what it has to in order to start a game quickly. Very typically this will result in a few high elo players on each side, a lot of average elo players on each side, and a few low elo players per side, but it will NOT be perfectly balanced, sometimes not even close. For example, let's say there's 3 high elo players in queue. One side has to get two of them and the other only one... If people were willing to wait for 30 minutes to an hour in between games I'm sure match maker could do a much better job, but what's the lesser evil here? Wait that long for a game to start up, or get into some games that are inherently imbalanced to one degree or another?

The quality of matchmaker in making even teams is directly proportional to the number of people playing and inversely proportional to the amount of time people are willing to wait for a game. Ironically, I'm sure if you increase the wait time, you will decrease the number of people playing... We either need a bigger player base or a much much longer wait time to fix it. I don't see any other real, feasible solution to be honest.

The other thing is not even connected to the matchmaker, but the very nature of the game itself. Just for fun, I wrote 2 basic codes that would simulate a match under ideal conditions. Every 'Mech had an assumed durability of 15 and every' Mech would do 5 damage to a target each turn. When everyone selected a random target each turn, the results were actually fairly close.

Once I added basic cohesion in remaining focused on a target until it was dead, the results suddenly jumped to one team often having a decisive advantage of 6 or more 'Mechs surviving. Again, the calculations used a perfectly even field of every one person using the exact same tactic (choosing a random target and sticking to it), no cover, no coordination, identical specs. Yet when the dice rolled, one team made a decisive victory. Add to that the nature of the human element and technical differences between 'Mech and you get hundreds of variables that simply cannot be accounted for.