Idk i was playing with 2 12 mans and they rolled through one of the gates and destroyed the base in like 7 minutes. ...
3
Attackers Can't Win
Started by Top Gun Killer, Dec 12 2014 05:21 PM
110 replies to this topic
#62
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,781 posts
Member
- LocationChicago, Il, USA
Posted 13 December 2014 - 06:21 AM
We went 4-2 last night
5 attacks
1 counterattack/defense
The 3 losses boiled down to poor tactics/loadouts. Once we adjusted we won our last 3( 2 easily, one nail biter)
Here is the thing guys:
Attackers have to use a LOT more tactics than defenders.
On defense you basically have to hold the choke points. That is something any PUG can get behind and is used to.
On offense, you have a bunch of tactical options (feints, rushes, sniping, etc). But a lot of those require more cohesive play. And even then the optimal tactics are still being flushed out.
My 2 cents:
Give it a week or two for the tactics to flush out.
I do think we to need to tweak some stuff, but until the tactics play out more, I dont know how much
Ideas:
1) increase the dropship time by 15 seconds.
2) nerf the turrets somewhat...not much though. They really are not that bad.
3) Change the approach of the dropships from across the base to 'in from the rear and out from to the rear.
5 attacks
1 counterattack/defense
The 3 losses boiled down to poor tactics/loadouts. Once we adjusted we won our last 3( 2 easily, one nail biter)
Here is the thing guys:
Attackers have to use a LOT more tactics than defenders.
On defense you basically have to hold the choke points. That is something any PUG can get behind and is used to.
On offense, you have a bunch of tactical options (feints, rushes, sniping, etc). But a lot of those require more cohesive play. And even then the optimal tactics are still being flushed out.
My 2 cents:
Give it a week or two for the tactics to flush out.
I do think we to need to tweak some stuff, but until the tactics play out more, I dont know how much
Ideas:
1) increase the dropship time by 15 seconds.
2) nerf the turrets somewhat...not much though. They really are not that bad.
3) Change the approach of the dropships from across the base to 'in from the rear and out from to the rear.
#63
-
-
- Knight Errant
- 234 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:04 AM
Defenders have all the advantages at least in the Alpine-copy-paste map. No mater what I do, whether if it is in solo or in a group I can't get no where near of winning. I mean seriously. IS mechs vs. turrets, dropships, open terrain and Clan mechs who don't have a reason to move far away from their best firing position.
Quirked IS vs Clans might be pretty 40/60 situation in assault, skirmish and conquest but in CW in that map... Plz at least let me play in some other map or in defence side for a change!
Quirked IS vs Clans might be pretty 40/60 situation in assault, skirmish and conquest but in CW in that map... Plz at least let me play in some other map or in defence side for a change!
#64
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 3,495 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:23 AM
I played on a defending team where the attackers won the match ... they lost way more mechs ... this was the strategy.
1) Break open all 3 gates
2) Probe a bit with some mechs at each gate to keep the defenders guessing and distributed ... take out turrets.
3) Rush through one of the gates with at least 10 mechs (ideally mostly high dps) ... ignoring defenders ... run to the gun firing on it. Everyone in that wave dies but the gun was under 1/2 health.
4) A couple more probes.
5) Repeat the rush and destroy the gun. Win the game as the attacker.
In the game I played the attackers lost about 30 mechs and the defenders lost 6. The attackers won the game at about the 22 minute mark. All it took was some coordination and a focus on firing on the gun and not the defenders.
This was clan attacking vs IS defending ... the high clan dps and fast speeds likely made a difference. It was difficult to focus fire on 6 or 8 timberwolves/stormcrows + others as they ran past between 90 and 110 kph. High dps IS mechs could not keep up ... the clan mechs reached the gun and were able to inflict a lot of damage before dying ... thus ultimately winning the game.
I'm not sure how to counter this type of win. The clans can probably mount at least 3 such rushes after opening the gates and softening the defenses ... and because the defenders have to spread out a bit to cover the appoaches ... they were both outnumbered and outgunned ... even focused fire will only reduce the rush by 2 to 4 mechs ... leaving 6 to 10 to inflict some damage on the gun before dying and with the high dps clan weapons against a stationary target ... it was difficult to prevent the loss.
I am not sure how this would work in an IS vs IS or clan vs clan match up since in those cases the mechs have matching speed and dps ranges.
1) Break open all 3 gates
2) Probe a bit with some mechs at each gate to keep the defenders guessing and distributed ... take out turrets.
3) Rush through one of the gates with at least 10 mechs (ideally mostly high dps) ... ignoring defenders ... run to the gun firing on it. Everyone in that wave dies but the gun was under 1/2 health.
4) A couple more probes.
5) Repeat the rush and destroy the gun. Win the game as the attacker.
In the game I played the attackers lost about 30 mechs and the defenders lost 6. The attackers won the game at about the 22 minute mark. All it took was some coordination and a focus on firing on the gun and not the defenders.
This was clan attacking vs IS defending ... the high clan dps and fast speeds likely made a difference. It was difficult to focus fire on 6 or 8 timberwolves/stormcrows + others as they ran past between 90 and 110 kph. High dps IS mechs could not keep up ... the clan mechs reached the gun and were able to inflict a lot of damage before dying ... thus ultimately winning the game.
I'm not sure how to counter this type of win. The clans can probably mount at least 3 such rushes after opening the gates and softening the defenses ... and because the defenders have to spread out a bit to cover the appoaches ... they were both outnumbered and outgunned ... even focused fire will only reduce the rush by 2 to 4 mechs ... leaving 6 to 10 to inflict some damage on the gun before dying and with the high dps clan weapons against a stationary target ... it was difficult to prevent the loss.
I am not sure how this would work in an IS vs IS or clan vs clan match up since in those cases the mechs have matching speed and dps ranges.
#65
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 7,087 posts
Member
- LocationCO
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:28 AM
knightsljx, on 12 December 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:
TheB33f disagrees
The one successful IS tactic and a bunch of people complain and say the game is broken
Good for them they found a way to win
#66
-
-
- Little Helper
- 3,856 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:35 AM
knightsljx, on 12 December 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:
TheB33f disagrees
- Sync Eject
- Drop in Streak boats/Mechs with high FLD alpha
- ???
- Profit
Edited by kapusta11, 13 December 2014 - 07:36 AM.
#67
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 3,495 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:36 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 13 December 2014 - 04:50 AM, said:
That isn't really a Major advantage when you consider the advantages the defenders have. Defenders have a decisive tonnage advantage in weapons thanks to the turrets and occasional dropship. Defenders have to come through one of 2-3 well defended bottlenecks.
Now understand I'm not complaining, I am pointing out your mistake thinking the attacker has an advantage. They don't and shouldn't. It should be hard to take a fortified defensive position.
Now understand I'm not complaining, I am pointing out your mistake thinking the attacker has an advantage. They don't and shouldn't. It should be hard to take a fortified defensive position.
The only advantage the attackers have ... and it is a big one ... is that they have 3 choices of approach which requires the defenders to split up or distribute at least a mech to watch each approach.
The first thing the attackers should do is to open all three gates.
Then try to keep the defender off balance with probes at all three gates ... killing anything that comes out to scout.
Then mass at least 10 mechs at one gate and push in with focused fire ... either rush the gun and kill it or destroy defenders if they look disorganized.
Seems like a workable simple strategy that could be coordinated reasonably well without voice coms.
Anyway, I need to play more matches to see how they go ... but it seemed quite difficult to stop a concerted rush by clan mechs to destroy the gun ... due to their speed and high dps.
#68
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 445 posts
Member
- LocationThe Motion Lounge
Posted 13 December 2014 - 07:55 AM
Top Gun Killer, on 12 December 2014 - 05:21 PM, said:
Well its fair to say that i will be taking the back seat to CW till some massive improvements...
just some really really big issues i have seen so far.
just some really really big issues i have seen so far.
Haven't played yet, but after watching some matches on You Tube a couple of questions
1. Are Light Mech really of much use so far? It appears they're not especially on offense.
2. Has anyone won on offense? Sorry have not read the whole thread yet, but it does appear defense has a definite advantage
Wasn't it Napoleon who said if you don't have a 3 to 1 advantage don't attack?
#69
-
-
- 719 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 09:01 AM
Mawai, on 13 December 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:
The only advantage the attackers have ... and it is a big one ... is that they have 3 choices of approach which requires the defenders to split up or distribute at least a mech to watch each approach.
The first thing the attackers should do is to open all three gates.
Then try to keep the defender off balance with probes at all three gates ... killing anything that comes out to scout.
Then mass at least 10 mechs at one gate and push in with focused fire ... either rush the gun and kill it or destroy defenders if they look disorganized.
Seems like a workable simple strategy that could be coordinated reasonably well without voice coms.
Anyway, I need to play more matches to see how they go ... but it seemed quite difficult to stop a concerted rush by clan mechs to destroy the gun ... due to their speed and high dps.
Play on Boreal. There's only two gates, and you can easily cover both of them from the same place, no need to spread out your forces. No advatage for attackers there.
#70
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 69 posts
Member
- LocationPA
Posted 13 December 2014 - 09:19 AM
The zerg rush is a good way to try and win but this is only if you have a team of 10-12 guys on coms working together and you can manage to push like 228 did and catch 3 people that are still DC'ed so right from the gate that defending team is down 3 mechs i didnt see a single ECM mech on the defending team no one went towards them to try and counter jam no Uavs no Eject buttons to bring in the dropship and no Strikes put down on the Group of lights really come to think of it i dont think they had one single mech by the Cannon lol ...... i think this zerg push is just an early jump in CW that caught some people off guard for it.
i would think that if you play VS a full 12 or even a 8-10 man that is ready for this and bring the right mechs with ECM, BAP , UAVs , Strikes and can use the Eject the correct way ( not 12 people hitting it at the same time. ) that zerg push could be stopped....
And the title of the post isn't to say that attackers can't win no matter what because they can win it's just right now the only way to win is cheese ( the Zerg Rush ) or hope and a prayer the reason it got that title is to get people to check it out and post comments on how CW was going for them and if other people felt the same way about CW thus far. I managed to win a few games with these strategies but again I either had a team that worked together or I had a 8+ man group.. I don't like to get these cheap wins that end the 30min game in two mins or less i rahter the hard work Sniping,Brawling it out skill shots wins. And again even if the games went 10-30 mins in actual fighting and we loss i wouldn't care i would take them as fun games i just don't find 12 lights jumping over a wall and winning in less time than it took to find the game fun. IMO.
i would think that if you play VS a full 12 or even a 8-10 man that is ready for this and bring the right mechs with ECM, BAP , UAVs , Strikes and can use the Eject the correct way ( not 12 people hitting it at the same time. ) that zerg push could be stopped....
And the title of the post isn't to say that attackers can't win no matter what because they can win it's just right now the only way to win is cheese ( the Zerg Rush ) or hope and a prayer the reason it got that title is to get people to check it out and post comments on how CW was going for them and if other people felt the same way about CW thus far. I managed to win a few games with these strategies but again I either had a team that worked together or I had a 8+ man group.. I don't like to get these cheap wins that end the 30min game in two mins or less i rahter the hard work Sniping,Brawling it out skill shots wins. And again even if the games went 10-30 mins in actual fighting and we loss i wouldn't care i would take them as fun games i just don't find 12 lights jumping over a wall and winning in less time than it took to find the game fun. IMO.
#71
-
-
- The Widow Maker
- 105 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 01:46 PM
Observations I've noticed so far:
1. The simple zerg rush is the most effective (and in many cases only viable) method for attackers and is almost impossible to defend against. This is a problem because I've been on both sides of it and it is in NO way fun to try to bypass combat and end the match like this. Ignoring opponents and making a beeline for the enemy base to end the match quickly just feels like a waste of time. It IS a game and it's supposed to be fun to actually play, not end the match in less than 5 minutes.
2. There is a huge discrepancy in IS vs. Clan matches due almost entirely to the superior range of clan weapons. The quirks system may have balanced IS mechs vs. clan mechs in standard Skirmish/Assault/Conquest matches, but it's not enough in Community Warfare. It is literally impossible for IS to successfully attack clanners without exploiting the cheap zerg rush tactic as a result, and so far, clanners (vs. us defending) are the only attackers I've seen who have successfully been able to mount an attack WITHOUT having to resort to that tactic. Again, it is due entirely to the superior range of their weapons.
Overall I think this could turn out to be extremely fun. But something needs to be done to FORCE the players to take a more tactical approach than the zerg rush. As it stands right now it's the only real way to mount a successful attack (unless you're clanners attacking vs. IS), it ends the match WAY too quickly, and it's just plain not fun.
1. The simple zerg rush is the most effective (and in many cases only viable) method for attackers and is almost impossible to defend against. This is a problem because I've been on both sides of it and it is in NO way fun to try to bypass combat and end the match like this. Ignoring opponents and making a beeline for the enemy base to end the match quickly just feels like a waste of time. It IS a game and it's supposed to be fun to actually play, not end the match in less than 5 minutes.
2. There is a huge discrepancy in IS vs. Clan matches due almost entirely to the superior range of clan weapons. The quirks system may have balanced IS mechs vs. clan mechs in standard Skirmish/Assault/Conquest matches, but it's not enough in Community Warfare. It is literally impossible for IS to successfully attack clanners without exploiting the cheap zerg rush tactic as a result, and so far, clanners (vs. us defending) are the only attackers I've seen who have successfully been able to mount an attack WITHOUT having to resort to that tactic. Again, it is due entirely to the superior range of their weapons.
Overall I think this could turn out to be extremely fun. But something needs to be done to FORCE the players to take a more tactical approach than the zerg rush. As it stands right now it's the only real way to mount a successful attack (unless you're clanners attacking vs. IS), it ends the match WAY too quickly, and it's just plain not fun.
#72
-
-
- The 1 Percent
- 3,617 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 01:49 PM
Ahhhhahaha that zerg rush is fantastic.
#73
-
-
- 7,239 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 01:51 PM
Attacking is stupid when its puggie against 12man premades...
The MM REALLY needs to make it puggie+2-4man vs Puggie+2-4man
and
8-12 man premade against 8-12 man premade....
IDC if the MM ends up waiting a few extra minutes...id rather have a good match that took 10 minutes over a **** storm battle that is no fun at all....
Just now I just kinda quit out of the one I got in...12 man premade against a puggie group...skip that **** lol.....and yikes......the thing really needs to say what your doing.
Defense
Counter Attack
Attack....
That way we know what the heck were getting into....cuz defense....turns into an attack...dafuq?
CW is alot more fun on defense then it is on attack..
The MM REALLY needs to make it puggie+2-4man vs Puggie+2-4man
and
8-12 man premade against 8-12 man premade....
IDC if the MM ends up waiting a few extra minutes...id rather have a good match that took 10 minutes over a **** storm battle that is no fun at all....
Just now I just kinda quit out of the one I got in...12 man premade against a puggie group...skip that **** lol.....and yikes......the thing really needs to say what your doing.
Defense
Counter Attack
Attack....
That way we know what the heck were getting into....cuz defense....turns into an attack...dafuq?
CW is alot more fun on defense then it is on attack..
Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 13 December 2014 - 01:52 PM.
#74
-
-
- The 1 Percent
- 3,617 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 02:08 PM
An active defense will include attacks.
#75
-
-
- The Widow Maker
- 105 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 03:43 PM
LordKnightFandragon, on 13 December 2014 - 01:51 PM, said:
Attacking is stupid when its puggie against 12man premades...
The MM REALLY needs to make it puggie+2-4man vs Puggie+2-4man
and
8-12 man premade against 8-12 man premade....
IDC if the MM ends up waiting a few extra minutes...id rather have a good match that took 10 minutes over a **** storm battle that is no fun at all....
Just now I just kinda quit out of the one I got in...12 man premade against a puggie group...skip that **** lol.....and yikes......the thing really needs to say what your doing.
Defense
Counter Attack
Attack....
That way we know what the heck were getting into....cuz defense....turns into an attack...dafuq?
CW is alot more fun on defense then it is on attack..
The MM REALLY needs to make it puggie+2-4man vs Puggie+2-4man
and
8-12 man premade against 8-12 man premade....
IDC if the MM ends up waiting a few extra minutes...id rather have a good match that took 10 minutes over a **** storm battle that is no fun at all....
Just now I just kinda quit out of the one I got in...12 man premade against a puggie group...skip that **** lol.....and yikes......the thing really needs to say what your doing.
Defense
Counter Attack
Attack....
That way we know what the heck were getting into....cuz defense....turns into an attack...dafuq?
CW is alot more fun on defense then it is on attack..
Total agreement here. Under _no_ circumstances should a premade 8-12 man group EVER find itself pitted against anything but another 8-12 man group. This has been proven not only in this game but in many games. Solo players should never, ever, EVER have to deal with the headache and frustration that comes from ending up against an organized team on voice comms. Separate queues for people who queue up solo or as small 2-4 man groups is a necessity for balance purposes.
#76
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 4,480 posts
Member
- LocationSweden
Posted 13 December 2014 - 03:49 PM
ContingencyPlan, on 13 December 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:
Observations I've noticed so far:
1. The simple zerg rush is the most effective (and in many cases only viable) method for attackers and is almost impossible to defend against. This is a problem because I've been on both sides of it and it is in NO way fun to try to bypass combat and end the match like this. Ignoring opponents and making a beeline for the enemy base to end the match quickly just feels like a waste of time. It IS a game and it's supposed to be fun to actually play, not end the match in less than 5 minutes.
1. The simple zerg rush is the most effective (and in many cases only viable) method for attackers and is almost impossible to defend against. This is a problem because I've been on both sides of it and it is in NO way fun to try to bypass combat and end the match like this. Ignoring opponents and making a beeline for the enemy base to end the match quickly just feels like a waste of time. It IS a game and it's supposed to be fun to actually play, not end the match in less than 5 minutes.
Just playing well as a team taking out the towers, making superior trades and following up with a normal push is totally viable on attack, this whole idea that attackers can't win without zerging is totally bollocks.
#77
-
-
- Urban Commando
- 3,508 posts
Member
- LocationLooking right at you, lining up my shot.
Posted 13 December 2014 - 04:22 PM
pwnface, on 12 December 2014 - 06:30 PM, said:
Night's Scorn has had much success in attacks against live opponents, I think we've only lost 1? It is a complete waste of time though to have you drop against no opponents and just storm the base and kill the objective freely. They should just give us an attack point without even putting us in a match.
Which would just let you take down that planet twice as fast. If this were to be implemented I'd want to see all the players from that team locked out of the planet for at least 5 minutes. It's easy enough to capture an undefended planet as it is.
#78
-
-
- Bad Company
- 816 posts
Member
- Google+: Link
Posted 13 December 2014 - 04:57 PM
Just my two cents -
I have taken part in about 17 CW games so far. 100% of the time I dropped with the purpose of attacking. Around 75% of the time I have been able to attack, the other 25% it was to play defense and "Hold". Twice the attack was against turrets, no enemy team, but every other time it against other players. Out of 17 matches I have lost one and it was an attack, but it came down to the wire and the team defending (not a full 12) did a great job. Most of the attacks I took part in, whether against mixed teams or full 12's, were fairly easy. It could be everyone is still just learning the game but I felt no oppressive hurdle in any of the attacks so far that would lead me to believe that it is unbalanced to attack, at least with Clan weapons. IS and their shorter range may be another story entirely but I have yet to get to try that.
While playing a "Hold" game I have also faced zerg rushes. These were stopped easily except in one case where we had to actually chase the buggers down and it was close. I am not sure this is actually a strong strategy for winning, though it may work out...I have not tried it yet. My winning games came from progressing slowly through the enemy defenses and killing all the enemy mechs until we had almost nothing stopping us from hitting the base.
I have taken part in about 17 CW games so far. 100% of the time I dropped with the purpose of attacking. Around 75% of the time I have been able to attack, the other 25% it was to play defense and "Hold". Twice the attack was against turrets, no enemy team, but every other time it against other players. Out of 17 matches I have lost one and it was an attack, but it came down to the wire and the team defending (not a full 12) did a great job. Most of the attacks I took part in, whether against mixed teams or full 12's, were fairly easy. It could be everyone is still just learning the game but I felt no oppressive hurdle in any of the attacks so far that would lead me to believe that it is unbalanced to attack, at least with Clan weapons. IS and their shorter range may be another story entirely but I have yet to get to try that.
While playing a "Hold" game I have also faced zerg rushes. These were stopped easily except in one case where we had to actually chase the buggers down and it was close. I am not sure this is actually a strong strategy for winning, though it may work out...I have not tried it yet. My winning games came from progressing slowly through the enemy defenses and killing all the enemy mechs until we had almost nothing stopping us from hitting the base.
#79
Posted 13 December 2014 - 05:06 PM
SomersetStriker, on 13 December 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:
+1. Just plain unbalanced for attackers. If it weren't this topic wouldn't be so hotly debated.
.
hotly debated?
roflmao
4 pages of a dozen or so people is hardly "hotly debated"
#80
-
-
- The Widow Maker
- 105 posts
Member
Posted 13 December 2014 - 05:09 PM
Sjorpha, on 13 December 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:
Just playing well as a team taking out the towers, making superior trades and following up with a normal push is totally viable on attack, this whole idea that attackers can't win without zerging is totally bollocks.
So far I have not yet been a part of a single match where the attacking team was successful without rushing.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
