83 replies to this topic

[Juice-Box Hero]

I can only assume this is your first shooter type game. Maybe I can help.

In any type of shooter game it's common sense and in your best interest to find cover and use it. I'm a former Marine and to me that's just basic warfare tactics. I will often be in a game and watch someone stand there and eat lrms in the face. That being said, if I were to start a forum topic complaining about something, my topic would read "Why DON'T people take cover and take their time".

First of all, I am seeing a lot of people complain (In pugs) about others not moving up or not "Helping". In my opinion, many players move up too quickly and die off before the match has even reached the 11 minute mark. If you are one of these people and you are raging because you have not received any help, it's because you are not taking your time. I do not understand what the rush is all about. Many games are over at the 8-9 minute mark. This means to me that everyone just rushed in and hoped for the best, not even knowing what the other team was packing.

I encourage everyone to take their time, and try to use their heads instead of going in loaded with Obama's hope in your guns.

"Welp, here I go! I hope there isn't an ac40 Jagger over this hill!"

[Khobai]

Quote

In any type of shooter game it's common sense and in your best interest to find cover and use it.

And none of those shooters are fun. Nobody wants to play a shooter where everyone hides behind cover with their sniper rifles that kill you no matter what part of your body they hit you in.

The FPS games that are the most fun are the ones where most players use shotguns or assault rifles at short to medium range and you dont have to hide in cover perpetually in fear of sniper rifles.

[Mystere]

Jelloshot, on 19 May 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

In my opinion, many players move up too quickly and die off before the match has even reached the 11 minute mark.

Of course people want short games. They want to maximize their c-bill earnings per hour. That's what farmers do.

Edited by Mystere, 19 May 2014 - 03:41 PM.

[SirLANsalot]

"There had to be something PGI can do to help stop the peekaboo games"

Ya its called everyone can stop being ****** and ACTUALLY PUSH AROUND that corner.


You would be amazed at what happens when someone takes the initiative and pushed around in an assault (like a Battlemaster or a Highlander) and you get 2 other people to follow you around. The game starts devolving into a Brawl! Its fun, and more often then not, the person doing the pushing LIVES.

[Merrick]

"There has to be something PGI can do to help stop the peekaboo games" ... Make it like the Hunger games?

[Deathlike]

Mcgral18, on 19 May 2014 - 03:05 PM, said:

With a 20-30 ping, I can attest this is a lie. 65% hitreg is a good day with SRMs.


As for the OP, as long as there is FLD there will be optimal poptarting and hillhumping weapons. It's superior to spread and DoT weapons in just about every sense, and with equal cooldowns there is no reason to bring the inferior or short range weapons.

Lasers can be boated to inflict more damage where you want, but the heat system prevents them from being the best choice. Hitscan and low weight, they can be a good choice but still can't compare to the heavy FLD weapons.

I can only think the consistency is really due in part of PGI's own netcode/HSR and it affects everyone differently. While a change may or may not affect me, I'm almost always assured someone else is affected.

[Jun Watarase]

There is way less camping on conquest for obvious reasons.

Unfortunately sometimes you end up on a brain dead team that camps....when they are behind on points...and you lose because they refuse to attack.

The whole camping thing is a huge problem in the TT and it boils down to having no incentive to attack. Tabletop games on a competitive level tends to degenerate into two sides hiding in cover and refusing to move unless there are rules in place to prevent that.

Edited by Jun Watarase, 19 May 2014 - 06:15 PM.

[El Bandito]

Felio, on 19 May 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:

Like Koniving said in his tactical guide, engage the enemy on your terms, not theirs. If you don't like your position, don't stay there. But people do. Until they are dead. And most will never, ever learn. At least not enough that this phenomenon is going to go away by itself. Normally I would suggest something like artillery strikes to quickly vacate an area as a deterrent, but we already have that. It neither has a lasting effect nor is something players seem to want to see more of.

The situation is easy to resolve. Simply change Artillery Strike to to have warning on ally and enemy. Get rid of the smoke signal so they will not know the exact location of the strike. Increase the arrival time to 8 seconds.

For example, when you or your teammate launches a strike on B3 Bitching Betty will say:

"ALLIED ARTILLERY STRIKE AT SECTOR B3".

Your enemies will hear:

"ENEMY ARTILLERY STRIKE AT SECTOR B3".

See if they do not instinctively GTF away from their hiding place after that. You mates might even rush forward because they know the enemy will be disoriented. Either way, something will happen.


The question is, will PGI ever give this a thought?

Edited by El Bandito, 19 May 2014 - 08:41 PM.

[Sephlock]

El Bandito, on 19 May 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

The situation is easy to resolve. Simply change Artillery Strike to to have warning on ally and enemy.

For example, when you or your teammate launches a strike on B3 Bitching Betty will say:

"ALLIED ARTILLERY STRIKE AT SECTOR B3".

Your enemies will hear:

"ENEMY ARTILLERY STRIKE AT SECTOR B3".

See if they do not instinctively GTF away from their hiding place after that. You mates might even rush forward because they know the enemy will be disoriented. Either way, something will happen.


The question is, will PGI ever give this a thought?

They will likely give the latter a thought, since it would serve to neuter a fun and balancing aspect of the game. Not sure about the former.

[AssaultPig]

because of how deliberate aiming is in this game, combat heavily favors the mech that can get set up in a good position and be the first to fire. This is exacerbated by the current state of pinpoint damage; take one wrong step and you've lost most of the armor on your torso, or taken severe damage. Plus, limited battlefield intel means that you frequently don't know whether you're about to step around the corner into one enemy or three (or four or five.)

I don't know if MWO can properly be called the thinking man's shooter, but it certainly is the patient man's shooter.

this will probably always be a 'slow' game that puts a lot of emphasis on positioning properly and ultimately, on waiting for the other team to make a mistake. The problem could be alleviated somewhat by toning down pinpoint damage in some way, which would give people feel like it's a bit less risky to play aggressively.

[Zoid]

What the OP is talking about is this:


Skip to about 30 seconds.

Or this:


But what we mostly do is this:



We don't see massive battles, we see both teams setting up a camping/firing line and the team with the fewest noobs wins. Sniping is a very important part of the game, but most games are just both teams sniping at each other until one team gets a few kills ahead, then they just charge and wipe out the other team. It can get very boring in games where everyone is actually good at sniping.

[AC]

Felio, on 19 May 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:

It happens a lot. You know, people sneak up, fire a shot or two, get hit three or four times, then back up around the corner or down from the ridge. Or not, if a teammate is right behind them.

It's gotten really dull, tedious and annoying. And you can suggest your team move, but they won't. You can try to start the conga line, but they won't follow. Bloodlust loses more games than anything else.

Like Koniving said in his tactical guide, engage the enemy on your terms, not theirs. If you don't like your position, don't stay there. But people do. Until they are dead. And most will never, ever learn. At least not enough that this phenomenon is going to go away by itself.

Normally I would suggest something like artillery strikes to quickly vacate an area as a deterrent, but we already have that. It neither has a lasting effect nor is something players seem to want to see more of. It can also be difficult to place perfectly without having chunks of armor blown off.

So... orbital strikes that automatically to blast any stationary mob to smithereens? Lengthen the time it takes to reverse direction? I can't really think of any solutions that wouldn't be terrible.

Give us more important objectives to run to? But then we may end up doing the same thing at the objectives themselves. Not to mention this would not improve the existing game modes of Skirmish, Skirmish With Turrets and Run For Two Minutes, Then Skirmish.

You do know this is because of the indirect fire LRM's right? Spent more than a few seconds in line of sight of the enemy and the sky rains 400 LRM's.

I agree that the game play is getting old, but it won't change until indirect fire LRM's changes. (And just so we are clear, I am fine with indirect fire when the enemy actually uses some sort of a skill to relay the target. Narc, TAG, is fine. This silly "I see you!" and the sky rains is killing this game right now.)

[Jun Watarase]

AC, on 19 May 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

You do know this is because of the indirect fire LRM's right? Spent more than a few seconds in line of sight of the enemy and the sky rains 400 LRM's.

I agree that the game play is getting old, but it won't change until indirect fire LRM's changes. (And just so we are clear, I am fine with indirect fire when the enemy actually uses some sort of a skill to relay the target. Narc, TAG, is fine. This silly "I see you!" and the sky rains is killing this game right now.)

Uh no, people were camping BEFORE lrms were good. The game is heavily biased towards popping out to do instant 30-40 damage pinpoint alphas across the map. There is no reason whatsoever to move unless you have short range weapons (which tend to be underpowered) or need to cap on conquest.

[AC]

Yes, but now it is 100x worse. I have been in clean stalkers that melt into goo within 5 seconds from LRM's falling from the sky. And don't say AMS... AMS is worthless against 6 LRM boats unloading.

[DaZur]

Khobai, on 19 May 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

Nobody wants to play a shooter where everyone hides behind cover with their sniper rifles that kill you no matter what part of your body they hit you in.

Says 50% of our player base...

The other 50% would sooner disembowel themselves on a post auger than participate in some grand close quarter melee where the victor ultimately is the one who manages to emerge from a 10 minute circle of death with a single remaining hit-point.

While I get your point... the two parties need to meet in the middle somewhere. There has to be a point where both entities have equal and ample opportunity to "have their day".

The reality is this is only solved through branching mission design with real / consequential mission goals and destined terms of engagement.

The problem stems from the fact that we have MW: Deathmatch right now... Once (if) we get real / viable missions, much of this discussion will be rendered mute IMHO...

[El Bandito]

AC, on 19 May 2014 - 07:40 PM, said:

Yes, but now it is 100x worse. I have been in clean stalkers that melt into goo within 5 seconds from LRM's falling from the sky. And don't say AMS... AMS is worthless against 6 LRM boats unloading.

Mostly because people are too selfish to mount AMS. If the whole team has AMS then LRMs are even more laughable.

Technically, you don't even need AMS once you get to certain skill level.

Edited by El Bandito, 19 May 2014 - 08:43 PM.

[Captain Stiffy]

Cover is half of BattleTech. That's the game.

Try playing CS it's 1000x 'worse'.

[HBizzle]

Newbie crying about combat tactics. LOL

[Mordin Ashe]

Three steps to balanced game:
1) PPC charging mechanics
2) AC recoil
3) 3/3/3/3

With those three things, the game would be close to perfect. Well, far from perfect to those 6-9 poptarts I see in games lately, but the rest would have a glorious times ahead.

[HBizzle]

Basically the OP wants this

but with mechs, which doesnt represent mechanized combat for the last 50 years at all.