31 replies to this topic

[bobF]

This is the new meme of CW it seems.

"My unit/team/faction won most of our matches (insert generously high percentage here) but still lost the Planet. I blame pugs and ghost drops."

That might be a fair statement, but now I see the same thing from everybody on the forums. It's the new excuse for units to save face.

No, you guys losing worlds ARE NOT winning most of your matches, sorry. If you were, you wouldn't lose the planet. I know, you have screenshots as proof positive you bested the very uberest unit ever on the op4, and we both know that was one cherry-picked screen out of a few battles. I know, it's those damn pugs, or ghost drops, even though pugs are getting rare in CW, and it takes three dedicated 12mans to ghost drop a planet in like an hour to 50+%.

So stop saying you're winning even though you're obviously losing. It's quite unseemly. Thanks.

[AlmightyAeng]

"Vegeta, what does the scouter say about his win ratio???"

Edited by Ghost Badger, 05 February 2015 - 10:35 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Faulty Generalization. I have never Blamed PUGs for a Loss. Bad Team work yes PUGs no. To Date I have been on one winning team in CW, and it was mostly PUG.

[AlmightyAeng]

bobF, on 05 February 2015 - 10:14 AM, said:

This is the new meme of CW it seems.

"My unit/team/faction won most of our matches (insert generously high percentage here) but still lost the Planet. I blame pugs and ghost drops."

That might be a fair statement, but now I see the same thing from everybody on the forums. It's the new excuse for units to save face.

No, you guys losing worlds ARE NOT winning most of your matches, sorry. If you were, you wouldn't lose the planet. I know, you have screenshots as proof positive you bested the very uberest unit ever on the op4, and we both know that was one cherry-picked screen out of a few battles. I know, it's those damn pugs, or ghost drops, even though pugs are getting rare in CW, and it takes three dedicated 12mans to ghost drop a planet in like an hour to 50+%.

So stop saying you're winning even though you're obviously losing. It's quite unseemly. Thanks.

I'd love to agree with you, but I've seen us go for 6 straight wins, or 6 of 7, or 8 of 10 too many times and watch the percentage do absolutely nothing or go down.

Thus, if we're winning our games, someone else fighting on that same planet, on our side, is NOT.

Does it automatically mean "blame pugs?" NO!

It means "blame whoever is losing matches," pre-made groups, pugs, or a mix. Doesn't matter. Whoever they are, they're negating our wins. *shrug*

Edited by Ghost Badger, 05 February 2015 - 10:34 AM.

[bobF]

Accurate generalization. When I see the same statement repeated by organized units regarding their planet loss/failed offensive to literally Anybody (i.e. Clan vs Clan, IS vs IS, IS vs Clan) it has passed the point of logical exception and into the realm of Butthurt Excuse.

To your credit Joe, I haven't seen any posts where you (or any Steiners I can recall right now) using the Excuse.

Edit: indeed Ghost, but if every organized unit is using this excuse how can there be so much winning and yet so much losing?

Edited by bobF, 05 February 2015 - 10:37 AM.

[XSurusX]

You're absolutely right. This statement seems to preface everything in CW.

It's an effort for people to "shift blame" for losing planets on their faction. I've seen it a lot in my time in Planetside 1 and 2. There are some extremely good players and outfits, but they can frequently lose bases besides averaging a 4-5kdr if they only make up a small percentage of the defending force.

It's a new concept for MWO. Prior to CW this has always been a game where one or two players can carry a match to victory. Now that we have involved the whole community, people seem to be disappointed that it takes more than just 12 players to affect the outcome of a planet. This is community warfare, not individual warfare.

[AlmightyAeng]

bobF, on 05 February 2015 - 10:36 AM, said:

Accurate generalization. When I see the same statement repeated by organized units regarding their planet loss/failed offensive to literally Anybody (i.e. Clan vs Clan, IS vs IS, IS vs Clan) it has passed the point of logical exception and into the realm of Butthurt Excuse.

To your credit Joe, I haven't seen any posts where you (or any Steiners I can recall right now) using the Excuse.

Edit: indeed Ghost, but if every organized unit is using this excuse how can there be so much winning and yet so much losing?

Oh, I'm sure some people are full of crap lol. Hell, we have nights where we don't win more than 50% of our drops...but when we have really goods nights with stellar win streaks and it doesn't seem to do anything to the planet percentage, it's disheartening.

The visibility on which grids are being fought over reinforces that. "Hey, we turned ours, woo!...hey wtf man...2 other teams lost while we were fighting. Goddamnit."

THAT SAID...the mechanics of the planet work in a manner if both sides are evenly matched for win rates, the side that brought more teams automatically wins, because they get an additional ghost drop. That's just how it's coded *shrug*

Edited by Ghost Badger, 05 February 2015 - 10:42 AM.

[Necromantion]

Hey bobF!

On the note of this topic it is indeed possible, I mean we have seen the same thing happen to our drops, we may have 2-3 12 mans on a planet and when they are not rushing 3-4 min wins the % counter stays the same or drops. Im sure weve been grouped together when this has happened to us.

I mean it is community warfare and it very well can happen that when 5 12 mans are winning, another 5 pug groups are losing at the same or faster rate.

Does that not make sense? I mean I know this is not always the case, that there are way too many contexts that happen and indeed it is a convenient excuse.

[Lily from animove]

bobF, on 05 February 2015 - 10:14 AM, said:

This is the new meme of CW it seems.

"My unit/team/faction won most of our matches (insert generously high percentage here) but still lost the Planet. I blame pugs and ghost drops."

That might be a fair statement, but now I see the same thing from everybody on the forums. It's the new excuse for units to save face.

No, you guys losing worlds ARE NOT winning most of your matches, sorry. If you were, you wouldn't lose the planet. I know, you have screenshots as proof positive you bested the very uberest unit ever on the op4, and we both know that was one cherry-picked screen out of a few battles. I know, it's those damn pugs, or ghost drops, even though pugs are getting rare in CW, and it takes three dedicated 12mans to ghost drop a planet in like an hour to 50+%.

So stop saying you're winning even though you're obviously losing. It's quite unseemly. Thanks.

what if one unit makes like 4 fghts 15 minutes each winning, while only 2 pugs get stomped 4x in a row withn 7 minutes? , that is math, and its a demonic tool of logic.

Edited by Lily from animove, 05 February 2015 - 10:52 AM.

[Chagatay]

Necromantion, on 05 February 2015 - 10:43 AM, said:

Hey bobF!

On the note of this topic it is indeed possible, I mean we have seen the same thing happen to our drops, we may have 2-3 12 mans on a planet and when they are not rushing 3-4 min wins the % counter stays the same or drops. Im sure weve been grouped together when this has happened to us.

I mean it is community warfare and it very well can happen that when 5 12 mans are winning, another 5 pug groups are losing at the same or faster rate.

Does that not make sense? I mean I know this is not always the case, that there are way too many contexts that happen and indeed it is a convenient excuse.

It is possible that your 5 12 man teams fail to make progress as elsewhere other teams are suffering. However, there is a solution. You can instead divide into small units say a 12 man and 6 8-mans greatly increasing your effective sphere of influence (7 teams versus 5).

Edited by Chagatay, 05 February 2015 - 10:51 AM.

[ZenFool]

What the OP sees as an excuse, I see as legitimate reporting of whats happening. That doesn't mean I think we should whip this out every time we need an excuse, just that it has been happening. OP might be insulated from the effect because of faction, or just saw it one too many times and got irritated, idk.

I do understand where people are coming from though. I thought for sure we would take Hot Springs the other night, only to watch the percentage go steadily down despite getting "win" reports from three groups. A big factor is that a "win" while holding territory doesn't gain you anything. Your unit can win ten times holding territory and gain nothing.

Personally, it doesn't matter too much to me whether we "flip" a planet right now. Good games are far more important, and the quality of games has certainly improved for me.

[Deathlike]

If I had to hazard a guess... there's usually not enough people on the planet to overwhelm the odds. That's usually the case. It's not always so much skill, as it is quantity of players at the time.

[pwnface]

bobF, on 05 February 2015 - 10:36 AM, said:

Accurate generalization. When I see the same statement repeated by organized units regarding their planet loss/failed offensive to literally Anybody (i.e. Clan vs Clan, IS vs IS, IS vs Clan) it has passed the point of logical exception and into the realm of Butthurt Excuse.

To your credit Joe, I haven't seen any posts where you (or any Steiners I can recall right now) using the Excuse.

Edit: indeed Ghost, but if every organized unit is using this excuse how can there be so much winning and yet so much losing?

To be fair this really only applies for IS vs Clan planets. A faction can not control who drops in defense for IS vs Clan matches, so it actually does make sense that a faction can be winning 90% of their matches on a particular planet and still lose it.

House Kurita may have 2x 12man groups defending on a HK planet against CSJ and be winning every match. Davion/FRR/Stiener/Marik/Liao could be queuing up on the same planet with pug groups and losing every match. If pug groups are losing faster than the HK groups are winning in this example it is impossible for HK to gain/hold ground.

I'm not saying HK units win 90% of our matches, I'm saying in theory this makes perfect sense. Speaking from experience, Night's Scorn has had nights where we won 8 of 8 matches and lost ground on a planet.

The whole attack/defend counter-attack/hold territory mechanic greatly favors whichever side has more people. If there are two 12man groups on opposite sides of a conflict, whichever group queues first gets the opportunity to gain a tick/token while the other group is tries to stop the tick. Flooding the queue for planet can make it effectively impossible for your opponent to gain ticks at a certain point if you greatly outnumber the enemy.

[MischiefSC]

This is more an outgrowth of letting randoms defend on clan borders than just excuses, though that is part of it. I don't believe most the folks talking about their wins are accurate.

Cold hard truth is though that is HK for example dropped 2x12 comp teams and 2xmixed unit/pug teams on a world and nobody else but the enemy dropped they would do way better.

Why? Generally you wouldn't get made than 4 teams stacking against them, maybe 5. Everyone else would shift locations rather than wait 20 minutes to be 2nd ghost drop.

Instead though terribads and don't cares drop to fill another 3 or 4 teams that literally comprise a bunch of people who don't care if they win or lose and that draws coordinated enemy teams who enjoy the easy farming.

Remove ability of pugs to defend clan border. Let house units 'invite' individuals and units to do so after x hours of matches to prevent smurfing.

Currently the is clan border is totally broken in the same way that for a while you could drop as a 12man in the regular queue. It's a huge poke in the eye experience for everyone except clan units, who get to farm an endless herd of pugs often in trial mechs.

[SgtKinCaiD]

I must repeat myself once again : there is no point in trying to defend the clan border when all the IS pugs are flocking the defense queues, getting rofltstomp, and sapping the wins of the teams that do their best to defend their house.

Did you ever get paired with 5 guys in trial only drop deck ??? I have, and more than once. So, yeah from time to time the pugs are more organised, willing to play in group and we managed to get a win. But for one game like this, you get 7-8 terrible pugs roflstomps. I'm not dropping on the clan border anymore. I can play only a few hours per day, i don't have time to cater the herd.

[Davers]

I believe I remember Lords making similar statements in the beginning of CW. Guess they were really losing all their matches too?

Does this hold true to CGB who say they never lose a battle, but continually lose ground to Clan Wolf?

Edited by Davers, 05 February 2015 - 01:56 PM.

[Lily from animove]

Davers, on 05 February 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

I believe I remember Lords making similar statements in the beginning of CW. Guess they were really losing all their matches too?

Does this hold true to CGB who say they never lose a battle, but continually lose ground to Clan Wolf?

probably yes, because GB mostly attacked wolf when no one was there (usually after cerasfire contracts were made) and left the planets to defend to their pugs.

[Necromantion]

Davers, on 05 February 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

I believe I remember Lords making similar statements in the beginning of CW. Guess they were really losing all their matches too?

Does this hold true to CGB who say they never lose a battle, but continually lose ground to Clan Wolf?

While in the last rotations of our clan groupings as mercs with CGB I have had maybe a loss in twenty matches. Now to clarify things the other week leaders from various units in CGB decided to give up some back planets to hopefully afford wolf new attack lanes to IS. Also if you look at the reddit thread the majority of the planets have been lost on EU peak hours, not North American peak hours attack phase.

Lily from animove, on 05 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

probably yes, because GB mostly attacked wolf when no one was there (usually after cerasfire contracts were made) and left the planets to defend to their pugs.

Actually the initial "breaking" of that ceasefire was by a certain Clan Wolf player who likes to run his mouth on the forums and RP constantly. He dropped on a CGB planet then AFTERWARDS contacted Sans about getting permission to which Sans said NO however said individual even after admitting it himself in text has since deleted that post and now claims that Sans gave him the thumbs up.

Edited by Necromantion, 05 February 2015 - 03:11 PM.

[Lily from animove]

Necromantion, on 05 February 2015 - 03:07 PM, said:

While in the last rotations of our clan groupings as mercs with CGB I have had maybe a loss in twenty matches. Now to clarify things the other week leaders from various units in CGB decided to give up some back planets to hopefully afford wolf new attack lanes to IS. Also if you look at the reddit thread the majority of the planets have been lost on EU peak hours, not North American peak hours attack phase.


Actually the initial "breaking" of that ceasefire was by a certain Clan Wolf player who likes to run his mouth on the forums and RP constantly. He dropped on a CGB planet then AFTERWARDS contacted Sans about getting permission to which Sans said NO however said individual even after admitting it himself in text has since deleted that post and now claims otherwise.

Either you do not know it or you are just lying, the entire time of CW it was the GB's who initially attacked other clans.

http://mwomercs.com/...-cw-time-lapse/

missed that?

Edited by Lily from animove, 05 February 2015 - 03:11 PM.

[Necromantion]

Lily from animove, on 05 February 2015 - 03:10 PM, said:

Either you do not know it or you are just lying, the entire time of CW it was the GB's who initially attacked other clans.

http://mwomercs.com/...-cw-time-lapse/

missed that?

From the poor grammar and lack of logic in your posts that I have seen I am not surprised you would look at a map and think you would be able to deduce who attacked who and exactly when. Just because someone attacks someone doesn't mean they are going to gain ground, especially if met with competent and organized resistance, correct?

Also you were referring to the ceasefire that was going on up until about 3 weeks or so ago correct? That is what I was talking about, not the initial CGB/CW hostilities that started then abated prior to that ceasefire.

I am lying about nothing, Gyrok said himself that he dropped on a CGB planet and then AFTER asked Sans if CGB was OK with that. Which would mean he attacked first and asked questions later, correct? Also he insists that Sans said OK when even Sans posted on that thread saying that he NEVER gave Gyrok, CDWG or any other Clan Wolf unit the OK to take that planet back.

This keeps coming up so often that I am really tempted to start asking around if anyone has the screenshots or pages saved with that self-incriminating admission from Gyrok saved still.

Edited by Necromantion, 05 February 2015 - 03:21 PM.