8 replies to this topic

[Tristan Winter]

A few general observations before we start:

• In a straight up deathball, i.e. full frontal assault where 12 attackers are going up against 12 defenders, the defenders have the advantage of turrets and faster respawn. All else being equal, defenders will always win.
  
• The only way the attackers can win by deathballing is to ensure another advantage. This could be mobility (12 light mechs with jump jets), force (all attackers drop in assault mechs for the first wave) or just plain superior skill and focus fire.
  
• Assuming two teams have relatively identical composition and skill level, you need to rely more on strategy and teamwork.
  
• Everything gets far more complicated with organized 10 / 12 man groups on teamspeak, who are able to defend and attack more intelligently and use scouts and communication to avoid big blunders. This thread is aimed more towards the public groups, which are often fairly basic in their approach.

If you imagine two concentric circles around the defender's base, with one being the outer perimeter of the base and the other being the drop zone of the attackers, it's fairly easy to see that defenders always have the advantage of mobility. You see a lot of unorganized attackers (i.e. pugs) who seem to think it's a good idea to just throw death balls at one gate at a time, hoping they will suddenly surprise the defenders. This rarely works, because the defenders have the advantage of mobility. It's easier for them to relocate.

A somewhat better tactic is assymmetrical division between gates. If the defenders aren't sure where the attack is coming from, they will play it safe and deploy their forces evenly across every possible attack route. If you attack two gates, they will often split into two groups of 6. This is a bit better, because it lets one attacking lance try to stall a superior number of defenders, while the other two lances push through against an inferior number of defenders on the opposite side.

The most effective tactic is often the old "switcheroo". Which is to say, you attack one gate, while giving no impression of wanting to attack the other gate(s). Naturally, the defenders will assume the attack is only coming from one side. While the defenders rush to one side, the attackers send a delayed attack with their main force on the opposite side.
This usually only works if the sacrifice lance can stay alive for some time, while at the same time presenting the defenders with attractive targets. In other words, the sacrifice lance cannot be too aggressive or too cautious.

EDIT: The "switcheroo" is also very effective in reverse, because the defenders have hard time seeing the difference between 8 and 12 mechs attacking a gate. And 1 lance with delayed attack can be enough to take out the Orbital Cannon, if the turrets were removed in the first wave of attack.



It's only day 2 of CW, but this has been my experience so far. Thoughts?

Edited by Nicolai Kabrinsky, 13 December 2014 - 06:13 PM.

[InspectorG]

Defender has advantage due to they drop near base.

Attacker drops way the hell back at the other end of the map, and loses out in travel time. Time in travel is less firepower at the front where its needed.

[Moonlander]

You only have the advantage as a defender until the attackers have 12 lights JJ over the walls and take out the gun without losing a single mech in 2min flat. Try to use that strat because it's obvious really legit.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Well the whole CW is flawed anyway. Conventional military theory states that for an attacking force to win against an entrenched enemy your assaulting force needs to be 3 times greater than that of the defending force. Honestly it is a wonder anyone can actually win an assault. Of course this is probably why teams are resorting to zerg rushing the generator rather than actually fighting to secure a victory.

[decman117]

I've been encouraging pubs to open all gates, preferably simultaneously, have a couple lights poke one to get attention, then deathball through the other, no stopping, direct to base, legging enemies on the way.
The key is not stopping to core every last mech, just kill an ST and a leg, because you WANT them to survive and be unable to catch up.

It works, when the team listens.
When they don't, it ends up with a trickle of mechs trying to rambo 12 players.

[Tristan Winter]

Moonlander, on 13 December 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

You only have the advantage as a defender until the attackers have 12 lights JJ over the walls and take out the gun without losing a single mech in 2min flat. Try to use that strat because it's obvious really legit.

Not sure if serious, but the problem with PUGs is that it's pretty hard to organize everyone dropping in lights with JJs, or assault mechs. 50% of your team may only have mediums and heavies.

But yeah, this thread is mostly about PUGs with fairly similar composition. The light mech tactic may disappear if PGI solves the frame rate issue too.

Viktor Drake, on 13 December 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

Well the whole CW is flawed anyway. Conventional military theory states that for an attacking force to win against an entrenched enemy your assaulting force needs to be 3 times greater than that of the defending force. Honestly it is a wonder anyone can actually win an assault. Of course this is probably why teams are resorting to zerg rushing the generator rather than actually fighting to secure a victory.

You can't really use conventional military theory for a game mode like this. In conventional warfare, the match doesn't instantly end if you destroy a certain building. In MWO, people are prepared to die in a completely different manner than actual warfare, so you can send wave after wave of suicide attacks, and they'll have just as good morale as the defenders.

In this game, it's a victory for the defenders if the cannon is brought down to 1% health with only 1 defending Locust against 12 Dire Wolves when the timer hits 00:00.

And the community rejects any mechanism that makes it more realistic anyway, like repair & rearm costs, or penalties for death which make people more reluctant to suicide.

decman117, on 13 December 2014 - 06:29 PM, said:

I've been encouraging pubs to open all gates, preferably simultaneously, have a couple lights poke one to get attention, then deathball through the other, no stopping, direct to base, legging enemies on the way.
The key is not stopping to core every last mech, just kill an ST and a leg, because you WANT them to survive and be unable to catch up.
It works, when the team listens.
When they don't, it ends up with a trickle of mechs trying to rambo 12 players.

The key for defenders is to leg the attackers as well. Kind of hard to do a spearhead directly towards the objective at 15 kph.

[Moshi]

Nicolai Kabrinsky, on 13 December 2014 - 06:02 PM, said:

• Assuming two teams have relatively identical composition and skill level

sorry, i stopped reading there. mwo's idea of balance is quite laughable

[Tristan Winter]

Moshi, on 13 December 2014 - 07:41 PM, said:

sorry, i stopped reading there. mwo's idea of balance is quite laughable

Fair enough, but it's a bit futile to come up with strategies for how a pug team in trial mechs are going to beat the Lords in pimped out Clan mechs with a billion C-bills worth of modules and consumables.

So I'll just focus on the optimal conditions.

[Moshi]

it's a little disappointing, i did skim over it and admire the pretty pictures. the little groups tend to follow whatever is popular at the moment; a large number of SJRs rushed us one match and completely roflstomped us, no one had seen this before. later that day (maybe 2 games later :S ), some 12-man group tried to do the exact same thing. we were sitting under their dropships by the end. there's different playstyles and people do different things, a good group plays mechs and strategies that compliment their players (and obviously that are functional as a tactic)