72 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Wintersdark, on 21 September 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

Absolutely. I'd say almost all my PUG losses are due to that.

That's not because they're bad or refuse to listen, though. In almost every case, nobody has said anything at all. So you've got people following 2-3 different strategies for the map, rather than just one.

Indeed.

Veteran players are just as bad for this as newer players, though. I watch vets run off abandoning "random pug bads" all the freaking time to get the best score they possibly can.

I see vets being overly cautious (and even cowardly) every bit as much - and I've been around long enough to know who's who.

Oh make no mistake, the "it's all about me mentality" that several posters on this thread have prompted.... does every bit, contribute to the general PUG queue issues. Maybe the issue is my Elo is just high enough to regularly get these guys, and they absolutely are only there for their personal match score.

I'm there to win the match. And I know that me getting 4+ kill or high damage is no guarantee of that. In fact, my being a solo rambo can actually be the cause of the loss.

But I can't count the number of times, I have asked for a plan, and or proposed one (I see "better" players than me, I usually ask, I am no General Kerensky) only to get the "you can't tell me what to do" response in multiple formats, or no reply at all, as the "team" scatters to the 4 winds (usually one lance heading to whatever convenient derp ring to die, one lance off in the back somewhere waiting to scavenge and boost their stats and one lance wandering around aimlessly).

Mind you, I have about a dead even W/L ratio, but I would say that 2/3 of my win are in various group formats. Part of that may be on me. If I am testing new builds, I PUG. I also make no claims to be Sun Tzu or Alexander the great. Of course, to win in MWO, outside of the top tier Comp levels (where you basically just need to maximize your meta and twitch skills, for 90% of matches....because the opposition will crumble, except when they actually face off against another top tier...and even those matches rarely dazzle me tactically speaking... because our maps don't really promote deep tactics and strategy). what you need is coordination, and to grab the initiative. Of course, that doesn't always mean rush the enemy, it means, dictate the battlefield. Have won many matches playing defense, by picking the right site, and getting the team to be patient. Have lost as many or more, because one lance or a handful of 1337s "know better" and head out to do their own thing, no matter the amount of plans proposed, get killed off, then proceed to spend the matchtelling the rest they are BADS.

But sorry, in general, the PUG queue is not a bunch of guys looking to hold hands and sing kumbaya.

[MischiefSC]

A push is not always a rush. A push is constantly moving forward and dictating the engagement. A rush is everyone Grouping and charging the same spot.

That is playing aggressive and driving the win.

Conversely a cower is just finding some cover, leaning out and shooting sometimes and hoping the other team is as bad as you. A dumbass is splitting up and chasing squirrels while a fish-in-a-barrel is grouping up and milling around, waiting for the enemy to shoot each other.

Drive the mother ******* win. If you don't someone else will.

[Mark Brandhauber]

seeing passive teams in both queues, the end result is normally the more aggressive team wins.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 September 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

But I can't count the number of times, I have asked for a plan, and or proposed one (I see "better" players than me, I usually ask, I am no General Kerensky) only to get the "you can't tell me what to do" response in multiple formats, or no reply at all, as the "team" scatters to the 4 winds (usually one lance heading to whatever convenient derp ring to die, one lance off in the back somewhere waiting to scavenge and boost their stats and one lance wandering around aimlessly).

In thousands of pug matches, I could count on one hand the number of times I've seen someone say "you can't tell me what to do" type responses that weren't either just jokes (I've said that myself, why doing what was asked) or a response to someone being an as***le.

Seriously.

I'm not exaggerating this either. If you legitimately, honestly see people verbally refuse to work with teammates, I don't even know what to say. Because with complete honesty and no exaggeration whatsoever, I can't even remember the last time it's happened in one of my matches.

Obviously, I can't prove this. But, you know I respect you and your opinions, and I'm not taken to hyperbole. I'm not exaggerating this to Win At Internets. I seriously almost never see that happen. Well over 4000 solo drops, and in that time it's probably less than 10 times I've seen it happen.

Maybe I'm just lucky, maybe I'm sufficiently higher or lower in Elo that I don't see those people, I don't claim to know why. I've got a 1.1 WLR (and as the vast majority of my matches are solo, that's uninfluenced by group matches), so I don't claim to be particularly Super Awesome, but I know I'm not bad either.

But I do know that in at least 1:5 of my matches, people (sometimes several) ask for leadership. They come right out at the beginning of the match and ask. More will be like me, who welcome it. I'm not a leader, so I don't come out and suggest things - I absolutely detest leadership roles.

Quote

Of course, that doesn't always mean rush the enemy, it means, dictate the battlefield. Have won many matches playing defense, by picking the right site, and getting the team to be patient. Have lost as many or more, because one lance or a handful of 1337s "know better" and head out to do their own thing, no matter the amount of plans proposed, get killed off, then proceed to spend the matchtelling the rest they are BADS.

Sadly, this (people haring off on their own) happens, though it happens every bit as much in the group queue (with teams of smaller groups) as it does in the solo queue.

Defensive play can work extremely well in some matches. Skirmish, in particular, when you get a kill lead and hold a strong defensive position is an easy win *IF* you can get everyone to be patient. Patience is a virtue, though, and one not common amoungst gamers... and that's why "pug zapper" setups can work so well.

But Defensive play is very different than the play Mischief is railing against here. Strong defensive play involves everyone holding a line and being patient, not people playing peekaboo because they're afraid of being shot.

[Hardin4188]

I pug because it's all practice until community warfare anyway so none of this is serious. I find that if someone does try to cooridnate the team then it does help. People will tend to follow orders unless they just want to troll. And generally we are more successful if we coordinate.

I actually think I am too agressive and this is a problem for me in most games, not just mwo. So I actually try to sit back more then I have in the past. If you are too agressive or try going it alone then it can end up very bad for you if no one decides to follow you.

[Bishop Steiner]

Wintersdark, on 21 September 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

Defensive play can work extremely well in some matches. Skirmish, in particular, when you get a kill lead and hold a strong defensive position is an easy win *IF* you can get everyone to be patient. Patience is a virtue, though, and one not common amoungst gamers... and that's why "pug zapper" setups can work so well.

But Defensive play is very different than the play Mischief is railing against here. Strong defensive play involves everyone holding a line and being patient, not people playing peekaboo because they're afraid of being shot.

for the first part, all I can say is our experience have indeed, been very different.

On the second... I also find, situationally, that it can be great on Assault. Mind you, some maps....like River City....simply should not be in the Assault Rotation. Base placement is beyond bad. But even if they were better laid out (such as the one base being in b2) it is simply too small a map for decent Assault. Maybe the single base mode will work well on it.

But for instance, if I get the non g10 base on Alpine? It's a gem of a position to defend, if you are patient. Conversely, Terra Therma, I almost always end up playing aggressive and seeing if I can get one lance to push the base while the other two tie up the OpFor. Seems like a win 90% of the time.

IF people actually commit. Which I think, more than anything is what I see lacking, and leading to my perspective on PUG queue. I actually had to be retained in CGBI. Why? Because I played "metal gear style". Lots of maneuver, snipe, maneuver. Because when push comes to shove, almost invariably, when faced with heavy fire, I cannot get PUGs to actually commit. It seems more often then not, people start worrying about stats, etc.

Same with getting people to actually make the sacrifice to step on base, and stop the cap long enough for reinforcements to arrive. Can't count the number of times after the match the guy will say "but I would have died". Well guess what? We lost anyhow, so what difference does it make? But if I die and it allows my team to do what is needed to win? GOLDEN.

But I do not see people willing to commit like that. In CGBI? We do what the team needs to WIN. (Of course we still lose too, even when doing what it takes to win..... sometimes you just get outplayed. Or face better players, etc). But at least then, we walk away knowing we put 100% on the table. I can't say I like being the bait, or the Medium Mech to push into the Caldera first.... but if that is the order my Officers give me? Then I commit, and it.

If I could trust most PUGs to actually look to the win above their KDr, maybe I would have a different opinion. But in my own experience, most times, I cannot. When it does happen, I am very happily surprised.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 September 2014 - 12:03 PM, said:

for the first part, all I can say is our experience have indeed, been very different.

On the second... I also find, situationally, that it can be great on Assault. Mind you, some maps....like River City....simply should not be in the Assault Rotation. Base placement is beyond bad. But even if they were better laid out (such as the one base being in b2) it is simply too small a map for decent Assault. Maybe the single base mode will work well on it.

Oh, god. I absolutely loathe River City on assault. It's awful.

Quote

IF people actually commit. Which I think, more than anything is what I see lacking, and leading to my perspective on PUG queue. I actually had to be retained in CGBI. Why? Because I played "metal gear style". Lots of maneuver, snipe, maneuver. Because when push comes to shove, almost invariably, when faced with heavy fire, I cannot get PUGs to actually commit. It seems more often then not, people start worrying about stats, etc.

Same with getting people to actually make the sacrifice to step on base, and stop the cap long enough for reinforcements to arrive. Can't count the number of times after the match the guy will say "but I would have died". Well guess what? We lost anyhow, so what difference does it make? But if I die and it allows my team to do what is needed to win? GOLDEN.

But I do not see people willing to commit like that. In CGBI? We do what the team needs to WIN. (Of course we still lose too, even when doing what it takes to win..... sometimes you just get outplayed. Or face better players, etc). But at least then, we walk away knowing we put 100% on the table. I can't say I like being the bait, or the Medium Mech to push into the Caldera first.... but if that is the order my Officers give me? Then I commit, and it.

If I could trust most PUGs to actually look to the win above their KDr, maybe I would have a different opinion. But in my own experience, most times, I cannot. When it does happen, I am very happily surprised.

Well, this could be the issue.

I'm not counting instances where players fail to commit. That is, in fact, the whole point to this thread: It's not about rushing, it's about committing, pushing.

I've long found that players will move together as one when asked, but once the two sides engage, it really depends on the players. This isn't a group queue vs. pug queue issue, though (unless you're in 12 mans) - I routinely find the same thing happens in the group queues where a lance has a bunch of cowards more interested in padding stats than winning. Ultimately, this is what skill in MWO really is, in the vast majority of instances: Knowing when and how hard to push, and growing a pair and playing to win rather than just get big numbers. Not how great a shot you are (because hitting mechs is actually pretty easy, when all is said and done), or what a tactical genius you are (because the maps really aren't that complex, and advanced tactics have no place in the poor communication setup of solo queue matches), or how great your build is.

But, as you noted here, it's not that "bad players" won't, or "pugs" as if they are a different breed of players. They're the same players. It's perfectly good players too, who are reluctant to push for whatever reasons, be it their KDR, wanting to have a higher damage score as opposed to winning even if they don't realize what they are doing is hurting their team's chances of victory.

My objections throughout this thread can be boiled down very simply to: PUG players are not a different breed. They're the same people. What they lack is the bonds of shared understanding, friendship, and communication that you get within (but not between, usually) groups. It's the same people, in a different situation.

If you don't go into a match with heavily negative preconceived beliefs about your teammates, and treat them with respect, they're surprisingly willing to together... just like those people in units.

Edited by Wintersdark, 21 September 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[Moonlander]

SaltBeef, on 21 September 2014 - 02:17 AM, said:

I some what agree with the OP.......Find unit momentum , ( everyone moving in columns like a platoon ) If you locate the main enemy group Push and Brawl / Annhialate. Sneeky Snipey can get boring. I Love it when I get in a group that has momentum.

Hard to stop a freight train when your in circled wagons.

When I noticed the group moving as a unit, I'll usually play catch up and come steamroll with them. Did a 1400 dmg match last night because of this. We just blasted through everything on HPG.

[DAYLEET]

Id say those match dont happen often.

Lots of people have an irrational fear of dying in a video games, hence they would rather leave everyone else
take the first risk. Defending is safer in most fps, it sounds safer but more importantly it is less scary.

Then you have the snipers, who would rather stay back and just leech damage and kills from the front at a "safe" distance, maybe thats how he envision his build. And then, all those behavior will send some players into "i dont know what is going on and what to do" mode, that means you end up with a team that does not just stay back and defend/snipes but are just hanging around doing nothing, have no idea what to do, and they wont follow those few who moves up because they dont want to break from the pack.

And the bigger problem is sometimes you still win those matches because the enemy made every dumb decision possible and the people mentioned above think they did the right thing. A strat should never rely on the enemy being bad. Which is what defending is all about, hoping the enemy makes bad decision.

[Grayblue]

I have seen just as many matches lost because of stupid charge as ones lost because people just hung back.

Just admit that you like to charge in and want others to take the risk for your sake than pretending to offer wisdom.

Edited by Grayblue, 21 September 2014 - 02:57 PM.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

It's dangerous to go alone, here take this UAV and Strike. They are the only friends you can trust.

[Bishop Steiner]

DAYLEET, on 21 September 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Which is what intelligent defending is all about, forcing the enemy makes bad decision.

FTFY

[ImperialKnight]

one very point OP missed out is the fact that a lot of players like to use LRMs even though they are really weak. and some times you end up with a team of 3-4 LRM boats and they ALL love to hang back even though that is not the correct way to play LRM support.

fortune favours the bold. I play a mean SRM brawler and the correct counter to everything is charge in and punch everything's faces in.

enemy playing sniper? charge in and punch their face in. enemy sitting back LRMing? charge in and punch their face in. A brawl deck will beat any other kind of team composition in this game because they out DPS every other build

hang back and lose is easy to say, but until players learn that the W key is Win key, they'll continue to lose and continue to come in here and moan about their lousy team mates

[Grayblue]

"A strat should never rely on the enemy being bad."

Ha ha. ALL warfare relies on one side making more bad decisions than the other.

[Grayblue]

"fortune favours the bold."

No. It only appears that way because when they win, they win big. But, people easily forget about the numerous dead bodies of bolds who failed.

I snipe often, and number of bold pilots who though they can out DPS me at point blank, which they were actually correct about, were turned into smoldering pile of junk because one vs one DPS is not what it is all about.

Edited by Grayblue, 21 September 2014 - 03:15 PM.

[MischiefSC]

How about this - keep a tic sheet. Two columns. One side is "we pushed" other side is "they pushed". Effectively who was advancing and who was holding. Put a tic down for who won.

Or go play in group queue. Those 12 mans that stomp you. Did they rush or hold? Who was advancing on who?

There are always excuses on why someone is a bad or played bad. The winner doesn't have an excuse - he don't need one.

[Grayblue]

"There are always excuses on why someone is a bad or played bad. The winner doesn't have an excuse - he don't need one. "

There is a reason for winning and reason for losing.

Whether if you choose to call it a strategy or excuse, it does not change the fact that the outcome is a result of that reason. Military history examins all battle, won or lost.

[Comrademig]

I don't think it's any one thing. A lot of the maps (such as Terra Therma) do encourage this because of they are layed out and force this peek and shoot when one side has the better ground. I don't see this on maps like HPG as much though because it gives me options to close without getting focus fired as they can't watch all the angles. And frankly, no one wants to be that first mech over the trench. The easiest way to swing a pug match(at least for me) is to drop an enemy mech quick and early so that it forces the other team to play cautious.

Theres also something else that gets in the way of leading the pugs: the lack of knowledge of what weapons they brought. If it was easier to learn what kind of mechs (brawl/snipers/lrms) were on my team, it would be a lot easier to know where to lead them and how.

[Grayblue]

"Or go play in group queue. Those 12 mans that stomp you. Did they rush or hold? Who was advancing on who?"

It cannot be counted in that manner. What about cases where both sides charged? What about cases where winner defended first, then pushed only after the tide turned.

[Grayblue]

"Theres also something else that gets in the way of leading the pugs: the lack of knowledge of what weapons they brought. If it was easier to learn what kind of mechs (brawl/snipers/lrms) were on my team, it would be a lot easier to know where to lead them and how. "

I think the lobby menu should have a function to display each player's build for people on the same team.