38 replies to this topic

[Prussian Havoc]

Johnny Slam, on 23 November 2014 - 05:26 PM, said:

Actually mate, pretty sure that you are just worried that it is the majority opinion. Lots of top guns scared about have the status quo shaken up. Very defensive and abusive stuff being posted about the match format. But even with the abuse threads of threatened Metaboys, there is still a more people posting about how much they are enjoying the match play then I have seen before...

...Yeah the survival aspect is brilliant and true to the games roots, while making people lift their game. For sub-par pilots who just use the same tactics all the time this has got to be a rude wake-up call. Hopefully you guys will lift your game and start playing mechwarrior in the challenging spirit that fits it best.

Consequences for losses, nice! having to be able to kill a opponent without throwing your unit's mechs away... brilliant!

I agree.

A great Challenge, that comes closer to the roots of BattleTech than ANY Challenge before it.

Consequences are an incomparable benefit to gameplay... keep it up PGI! (Plus, what are we really talking about as a consequence? Simply delaying a players instant gratification by withholding a single "Point" until they finally clear all four hurdles! No lost experience, no C-bills repair to the Mechs, no MC cost for resurrection, no need to buy/restock munitions... yeah, hold that "Point" until I earn it!)

Great Challenge!

[Johnny Slam]

R Razor, on 23 November 2014 - 05:52 PM, said:

How exactly does one "impose ones will" in a video game?

By getting a kill, helping a mate, and winning a match without being killed..... doh!

See you wanted to win and qualify, and the opponent wanted to win and qualify, by winning and qualifying your will has been imposed on the scenario.

Oh so funny when posters start pretending to be obtuse just to avoid the reality of a situation.

AntiCitizenJuan, on 23 November 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

Don't feed the troll, report and move on

Nah, he isn't a troll really man, just bummed he can't get his way.

No need for me to report him, but thanks for your concern.

[mogs01gt]

R Razor, on 23 November 2014 - 05:52 PM, said:

How exactly does one "impose ones will" in a video game?

This challenge promotes people that prefer to play from behind, dart in to score a quick kill (likely after a team mate has done most of the heavy lifting in terms of damage dealt) and then scooting off and hiding. That is a cowards way of playing. Note that I did not say you were a coward directly (though you seem awfully defensive about that term).

Perhaps if you can't communicate in a non-confrontational manner your internet time should be more closely monitored by someone in charge?

umm no. the challenge was based on your ability to win and survive. killing and assists were the easy part just like it is in normal play because no1 cares about winning. normally players focus on cbills because that is there reward for the risk.

[Zoid]

I feel like this is a game theory experiment. You need to get your kill and survive, which means you should hide as soon as you get the kill (assist is silly easy to get). But if you hide, you lower your team's chances of winning, since you need to win too.

So if half your team is dead and the other half each have a kill, it becomes not unlike the Prisoner's Dilemma. If you all hide, you're going to lose and nobody will get a point. If some of you take the brunt of the damage and die, the others can finish the enemy off and win. It's been kind of funny to see this play out.



This challenge would have been awesome if they put something in to make it so that people would have to play more aggressively AND survive, such as only the first 6 kills count. As it stands though it encourages camping far too much.

Edited by Zoid, 23 November 2014 - 06:07 PM.

[mogs01gt]

Zoid, on 23 November 2014 - 06:03 PM, said:

I feel like this is a game theory experiment. You need to get your kill and survive, which means you should hide as soon as you get the kill (assist is silly easy to get). But if you hide, you lower your team's chances of winning, since you need to win too.

So if half your team is dead and the other half each have a kill, it becomes not unlike the Prisoner's Dilemma. If you all hide, you're going to lose and nobody will get a point. If some of you take the brunt of the damage and die, the others can finish the enemy off and win. It's been kind of funny to see this play out.



This challenge would have been awesome if they put something in to make it so that people would have to play more aggressively AND survive, such as only the first 6 kills count. As it stands though it encourages camping far too much.

i put myself in a bad spot to get my last point. i had to get a lock for my lrm awesome fir the 10-9 win!

[F4T 4L]

Zoid, on 23 November 2014 - 06:03 PM, said:

I feel like this is a game theory experiment. You need to get your kill and survive, which means you should hide as soon as you get the kill (assist is silly easy to get). But if you hide, you lower your team's chances of winning, since you need to win too.

So if half your team is dead and the other half each have a kill, it becomes not unlike the Prisoner's Dilemma. If you all hide, you're going to lose and nobody will get a point. If some of you take the brunt of the damage and die, the others can finish the enemy off and win. It's been kind of funny to see this play out.



This challenge would have been awesome if they put something in to make it so that people would have to play more aggressively AND survive, such as only the first 6 kills count. As it stands though it encourages camping far too much.

Your idea is interesting, but should be tempered. -=100x team damage points would be a reasonable place to start.

[Johnny Slam]

F4T 4L, on 23 November 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

Your idea is interesting, but should be tempered. -=100x team damage points would be a reasonable place to start.

I would love to try that!

[Lynx7725]

At the end of the day the challenge had issues. If you enjoyed it, that's nice. I didn't, that happens. From discussions on the board, can't dispute that there are bad player behaviour that is (again) brought on by scoring criteria.

From that perspective it should be improved.

Frankly, on a normal day I play to survive and win, so this challenge is nothing new to my playstyle -- I'll do support fire, assist or kill things, move on to the next. Unfortunately, the criteria is new to a lot of players, who previously just wanted to pew pew people. Now they are more cautious, less willing to expose themselves to damage, and as a result less willing to work together to bring down prey.

I personally didn't witness any "kill-run-hide" behaviour, but it probably would happen. I had many more bad games than usual, because teams simply did not want to push. In my Orion LRM boat, that's fairly fatal because it allows the enemy teams to take up the initiative and push too close. In my YLW, I'll end up scoring the first kill or so (because I'm usually ranging the back to clear the tail or the flank, and catch a light making a flanking move.. AC20 to a Spider comes to mind), then the team rapidly retrogrades and falls into individual and defensive fighting.

It's not that the tournament criteria is a bad idea. It's that the target audience (i.e., us) isn't ready for that kind of thinking, because frankly, a lot of players aren't thinking to begin with. MWO rewards calculated aggression, mindless aggression, and passivity in that order, and when a team falls back into passivity, it's almost certainly game-over for that team.

[Prussian Havoc]

Lynx7725, on 23 November 2014 - 06:32 PM, said:

...It's not that the tournament criteria is a bad idea. It's that the target audience (i.e., us) isn't ready for that kind of thinking, because frankly, a lot of players aren't thinking to begin with. MWO rewards calculated aggression, mindless aggression, and passivity in that order, and when a team falls back into passivity, it's almost certainly game-over for that team.

Precisely!

I like the fact this weekend's Challenge pushed fellow gamers out of their comfort zone.

Initially I was frustrated to. Then I realized the source of that frustration was simply the introduction of "self-preservation" into the game. And that frankly immeasurably improves gameplay in my opinion. I actually felt anxious at times during this Challenge. It may have only been a "Point" I had earned (if only I could win and live) but it was a novel angle for MWO and "Survival" should be repeated for future Challenges.

[Sjorpha]

I like the survival requirement. Soldiers should feel worried about both dying and losing, creates a great feeling of tension that adds to the roleplay for me.

Especially considering I chose this tournament to buy and skill up 3 locust variants, totally nail biting experience.

On another note, the Pirate's bane is the most fun mech ever! And the other locusts are just incredibly awesome to drive as well, can't believe I waited so long to get them.

[RockmachinE]

TexAss, on 23 November 2014 - 05:29 PM, said:

to survive a war battle.

Its easy so long as you hide from the bullet bombs!

[Master Pain]

I did not enjoy anything about this challenge. I will not be participating in any future challenges that use this format.

[Lynx7725]

Prussian Havoc, on 23 November 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

Initially I was frustrated to. Then I realized the source of that frustration was simply the introduction of "self-preservation" into the game. And that frankly immeasurably improves gameplay in my opinion. I actually felt anxious at times during this Challenge. It may have only been a "Point" I had earned (if only I could win and live) but it was a novel angle for MWO and "Survival" should be repeated for future Challenges.

I understand what you are saying, but you have to understand that the anxiety you speak of is business as usual for me in the Solo queue -- I do that every game, every day, trying to stay alive while supporting the entire team. Had the teams played normally (including mindless aggression) during the weekend, because of the way we would normally end up supporting one another even in Solo Teams, we could have won more games at marginal costs (possible with 3~4 casualties only). The MWO game basically requires you to hang your shorts out there to be shot at in order to win (even with the LRM boats), and this tournament ended up encouraging the other spectrum of behaviour.

PGI's scoring criteria ended up encouraging too much caution for people who are not used to thinking and acting in self preservation. It may have a good effect in the long run, breeding better players, but I doubt so unless PGI makes it a recurrent requirement, which would drive up TTK -- which may by itself be undesirable.

Edited by Lynx7725, 23 November 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Kodyn]

Will a mod check into this Johnny guy, please? He's stating the same stuff over and over in multiple threads, pretty sure he's a troll, and wouldn't be surprised if he has multiple accounts to bolster his "argument".

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but anyone who sits here purposely trying to incite other players to anger while laughing is usually a troll...

And Johnny, if you aren't a troll, then please go read the posts I've made in the main, you know, actual thread on this topic, and if you can in fact understand ideas other than your own, you'll see that some of us are not just some elitist whiners who hate everything, but guys who legitimately enjoy and love this game, saw issues with this format of event, and want to see it improved for the future.

I'm 2 matches away from my VTR, and I'm probably a middle-of-the-road, average player. I'd never, ever call myself elite, and I'm not a comp guy, so please do not insult me or yourself by just lumping anyone with a negative view on these events together. Sound good?

Intelligent debate, I'll take that any day. Slamming those you don't understand out of fear or derision? Just makes you look like a tool, and an ignorant one at that.

[Bill Lumbar]

Here is my results for this event. Around 113 matches played is what it took me to Get the Victor and Mech bay. I really didn't change my play style from that of any other day. I played mostly Timbers because I am working mastering them. I have two, and 6 million saved for the third C. I didn't sit back once I got my kill and assist, and even though many times I risked dying with a cherry lit up mech, I would push to help get the win. If you look through my list.... you will see this happened a lot, and some times I was being a bit to aggressive but like any other day I play this game, I try to contribute to the team for the win. It cost me many games by doing so, and it did make the loss of points kinda frustrating at times. I broke the 1200+ damage club 3 matches in a row with my Prime timber, and at least 5-6 games this weekend. lol. Wasn't trying to KS, LOL.... just pushing and flanking in almost every game as a heavy and assault should try to do.

[Mystere]

Zoid, on 23 November 2014 - 06:03 PM, said:

This challenge would have been awesome if they put something in to make it so that people would have to play more aggressively AND survive, such as only the first 6 kills count. As it stands though it encourages camping far too much.

What's to stop someone who did not get one of the first 6 kills from just suiciding or disconnecting to move on to the next match, thus screwing his team in the process?

This is on the PUG queue and for small groups of course. I assume members of big groups are better than that. Or am I totally wrong and they also have the inclination to screw their mates?

Edited by Mystere, 23 November 2014 - 09:02 PM.

[Bhael Fire]

I like the formula. It's very challenging...but the 20-point requirement is a bit too extreme.

I simply don't have that kind of time to play this game on the weekend.

[Mystere]

Kodyn, on 23 November 2014 - 07:28 PM, said:

Intelligent debate, I'll take that any day. Slamming those you don't understand out of fear or derision? Just makes you look like a tool, and an ignorant one at that.

I can actually say exactly the same thing about those people who did not like the current scoring format. So why just direct the mods to JS?

[Johnny Slam]

I enjoyed this challenge so much, that I am jonesing for more already!

The last couple of matches I just played on the "go ahead and die" format lacked the spice I grew accustomed to over the weekend.

Such a great challenge weekend, going to be tough to beat.