72 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

Grayblue, on 21 September 2014 - 03:28 PM, said:

"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.

Bulk of matches had a clear aggressor, who generally wins. Attempting to over complicate is part of the problem with pug matches.

Stick together. Advance in force, don't run off ahead but start on the offense and stay there, when the enemy starts to buckle go stomp his face.

Anything more complex is prone to failure.

[Ghogiel]

MischiefSC, on 21 September 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

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.

So fair, the I carry box is being ticked more than either of those boxes. Especially in remidial queque.

[MischiefSC]

Maybe you wouldn't have to carry as hard if you pugbossed better :-P

[Sandpit]

It's a combination of a few things from what I've seen. The blob tactic has been the most common tactic since CB. Follow the biggest group on the mini-map. This helps lead to that.

You also have the "chaaaaaarge" where a few friendlies call for a push, wind up pushing by themselves, and going boom rather quickly. After that happens a few times those guys are now a lot more timid when deciding when to push.

Throw in a few new players still getting their feet wet and a couple of joe derps, and you have a recipe for caution.

I've found when someone is willing to step up and communicate a few suggestions on strategy that it's USUALLY met with open ears. Although sometimes there's just nothing you can do for the player who plays like "I'm here to get kills, I could care less what the rest of the team does and I don't care about my team".

[Wintersdark]

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

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.

True, but defending isn't always about hoping the enemy makes a bad decision.

A decision to defend typically happens after the enemy has made a poor choice or been unlucky and lost a mech in the early stages of the engagement.

This because, in Assault and Skirmish, once you have a kill lead the opposing team must assault your defended position. If you chose well, this puts them at a marked disadvantage before you even consider the numbers difference. Assaulting a defended position with fewer numbers is never a very fun thing to do.

Defending from the very start of the match is very dangerous - particularly for a PUG, as it does exactly what you say: it depends on the enemy making a mistake. It's particularly dangerous because you by necessity hand the initiative to your opponents at the same time. It can happen, and can work, but it's not a reliable winning strategy for PUG matches.

[Ghogiel]

MischiefSC, on 21 September 2014 - 04:20 PM, said:

Maybe you wouldn't have to carry as hard if you pugbossed better :-P

Hardly possible in most circumstances.

[Astrocanis]

Wintersdark, on 20 September 2014 - 10:57 PM, said:

To this in particular:
If "Nobody follows me!"?

1) Announce what you're doing. Don't demand they do something, and definitely don't expect someone else to lead the push. You announce, you go first into the breach. #1 cause of failed pushes in my experience is the guy calling for it not leading from the front. Always assume your PUGmates are cowards who need proper inspiration. "Pushing into D6; follow for victory!"

2) For gods' sake, know what's going on around you. Don't call for a push in one direction while half your team is fighting on another flank and expect them to come with you.

3) Accept that sometimes, people won't follow you. Sometimes, you've got a team of cowardly gits. This team has lost anyways, so at least you're going to be free to drop again quickly.

Don't call people out if they don't follow. Always assume some won't, and accept it. Don't be a ****. People will remember, and will be less likely to work with you in future drops... If you're an a**, they'll be more likely to remember you (and why you suck) than you will be to remember them.


But ultimately, aggression wins battles. Push, push hard, push long. 9 times out of 10, a pug team on the receiving end of a hard inexorable push will fall back, and in doing so will lose what cohesion it may have had, making the defenders act even more passively (reducing their damage output enormously). Any measure of success in a push really encourages your teammates too - PUGgies may be inherently cowardly, but there's a sleeper shark in every single one of them. As soon as they sense blood in the water during a push, they'll redouble their efforts to get their kills in.

Patience, ecm and LRMs win games. Headlong rushes into battle lose them.

Aggression must be tempered with flow - and you can't get flow if you're in the middle of a deathball. /disagree with that portion of your post. The rest (being a terrible tyrant) I agree with.

[Murcheson]

I guess it depends on what you mean by aggressive?

That in a nutshell characterizes the real problem, consider - without any meaningful communication or time for discussion - 12 strangers are dropped on a random map - and you expect everyone to magically understand what they are suppose to do to launch an attack?

Given the starting parameters, the logical approach is to in fact, play conservatively (stick together and find cover), at least until a plan develops. It has nothing to do with cowardice as much as trying to understand a situation.

A side topic I've been pondering is who should lead a push? That is what type of mech is best suited. The assaults and heavies can take the most punishment, but are heavily penalized for a mis-step because of their lack of speed (assault and heavy drivers can attest to that). Lights have the advantage of speed so as to extricate themselves from a bad position (ambush) - but they are vulnerable due to their lack of armour. Perhaps mediums - which have a combination of armour and speed - I don't know.

[Mystere]

Abivard, on 21 September 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

Is this how you see yourself in PUG's?

Well mostly, with the exception of the scenes from "Throne of Blood" and "Seven Samurai".

But this is much more my style:

Edited by Mystere, 21 September 2014 - 05:59 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Murcheson, on 21 September 2014 - 05:31 PM, said:

A side topic I've been pondering is who should lead a push? That is what type of mech is best suited. The assaults and heavies can take the most punishment, but are heavily penalized for a mis-step because of their lack of speed (assault and heavy drivers can attest to that). Lights have the advantage of speed so as to extricate themselves from a bad position (ambush) - but they are vulnerable due to their lack of armour. Perhaps mediums - which have a combination of armour and speed - I don't know.

This is a bit more off topic, but it's definitely my belief that pushes work best when they're not "led" by any specific sort of mech. And thoughts that they should be led by a specific sort of mech ends up being used as an excuse to not do it.

What happens is if only one or two mechs lead into a push, they get focussed and slaughtered fast, which is both counterproductive and demoralizing. This is particularly true when a push is led by assaults.

There's a common belief that Atlases should lead from the front. They're wrong. The Atlas's armor is worth spit when it's focused by 3+ mechs. It shouldn't be in the back, either, but rather everyone should advance together. Particularly in a PUG, target saturation wins - and it's also why really passive play is counterproductive. People playing peekaboo end up being focused one after another as they peek. A couple mechs leading an assault? Again, handy focus targets. But when 8 mechs crest a ridge together, pushing down towards you? Who do you fire at? The biggest threat? The biggest threat [i]to you[/]? The easiest kill? There are good, proper answers to these, of course, but in reality what happens is the defenders tend to quickly break, uncertainty disrupting whatever coordination they may have had. The constant pressure, then - not a rush, just unrelenting pressure - keeps them off balance, and they don't have time to organize. Then the push turns into a roll.

Afterwards, people in the match will cry that it was a matchmaker failure, that Elo was broken, but neither are related to what happened. The defenders may have been individually better players. But that constant pressure denies them the possibility to coordinate, the target saturation makes focus fire difficult, and as soon as the attackers start killing, the "blood in the water" effect keeps them going.

That, incidentally, is where colored kill text will help a lot (Brian Buckman had a screenshot of it, should be in game soon) and where a solid player pushing forward rather than staying to the back and using his teammates of meat shields makes a huge, huge difference. Getting an early kill or two in a push is critical to the psychological aspects of it.

[The Wakelord]

To be honest, I tend to enjoy PUG games a lot more than group matches. Group matches seem to have more rolls in them (combination of that random they-do-awesome-while-we-do-bad in addition to they-are-awesome-l33t-team), or more people with the ability to insta-kill you.

PUG matches can be aggravating due to inability to read the side text (we really need a sound effect when someone has posted a message), or PUG people not listening.

On topic: I agree the cowardice can be aggravating. I probably go 50/50 between offence and defence; sometimes we get a good location so it makes sense, other times we just need a decent push to break through their single LRM blocking us.

[Abivard]

Mystere, on 21 September 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

Well mostly, with the exception of the scenes from "Throne of Blood" and "Seven Samurai".

But this is much more my style:

Even those scenes remind me of pugs, trying to rally and lead the villagers is like herding pugs, the throne of blood (Macbeth samurai style) reminds me of the friendly fire from pugs and also all the chat flames lol.

And those downcast despondent scenes is where I realize that the rest of the team died to no avail and it doesn't matter how hard I carried lol. But the few good fights with worthy opponents or those moments when you cut through the enemy like a buzz saw because of PGI's MM fail.

Caution is for the weak of heart.

ps My video had a cooler soundtrack ;p

[Mystere]

Abivard, on 22 September 2014 - 12:04 PM, said:

ps My video had a cooler soundtrack ;p

But I own all those movies, and so much more.

Edited by Mystere, 22 September 2014 - 01:51 PM.