Spheroid, on 20 September 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:
@Mellifuer: Players like to win and not get stomped. If you believe that CW can be analyzed you will see many people do things that run contrary to the very success they desire.
everyone enjoys winning and no one likes getting stomped but that has absolutely nothing to do with me wanting or not wanting to play CW.
I have analyzed CW and played it day 1 since then it has devolved into a certain set of tactics that work with a certain set of mechs and nothing else. sometimes the mechs change with newer quirks but the game play itself has been set in stone since its inception. and this is mostly the fault of HOW THE MAPS ARE BUILT. DOTA style lane maps have absolutely NO PLACE in a FPS they are not even the same kind of game. to draw an analogy, everyone that plays CW has to bring "Lucian" to snipe down the lanes.
and then there is the name COMMUNITY WARFARE which implies you know the community warring among themselves not one sided stomps from try-hards clubbing baby seals. not set in stone meta and tactics. REAL warfare rewards those with ingenuity and the ability to think ahead of their opponents and change the rules of the warfare to tip the battlefield advantage into their favor.
there are whole classes of warfare dedicated to this concept of changing the rules of the battle
asymmetric warfare
guerrilla warfare
urban warfare
https://en.wikipedia...Warfare_by_type
as you can see styles of warfare are developed almost exclusively to tailor to the setting of the battle and to counter the kind of warfare the opponent is likely to use. this does not exist in CW again its one set of mechs one set of tactics nothing else it is a sham.
but why is this important one might ask, well for that i refer you to history in this case the advent of air power.
when airplanes were first used in warfare almost everyone universally derided airplanes as "paper toys" useful at best for scouting and harassing the enemy. and then airplanes crippled the Bismark that was at the time considered THE most deadly single ship on the high seas so much so that England would avoid it at all costs and the few battles it did get into with the Bismark ended abysmally for England.
air power decimated pearl harbor and knocked the wind right out of the American pacific fleet.
and then American air power was instrumental in defeating the imperial Japanese navy, and again at the time the Yamamato (sunken by aircraft)and the Musashi (also destroyed by torpedo bombers) where considered two of the most powerful and deadly battleships and were in fact the largest and most powerful battleships ever constructed
and soon airplanes made battleships as a class of ship irrelevant a liability and a gigantic waste of resources
air power was instrumental to the German army's success with "blitzkrieg" tactics where they would use massive amounts of bombers of all kinds to pulverize their enemy before land forces even came into contact. this same tactic was employed by the American military in the war in iraq where air power effectively defeated the whole iraq army in 48 hours of bombing.
and all from silly airplanes that most generals (prior to their success) considered a mere "scout" or harasser.
the same thing happened around the Korean war when guided missiles finally got proper guidance and airplanes, warships and tanks that were the center of every modern army suddenly became economically obsolete because a $60 million tank could be destroyed easily by 1 single infantry man with a $500 laser guided missile. it made whole swaths of airplanes completely obsolete and made ships heavily shift their armaments to AA gun's and AA missile batteries.
in fact the most powerful warship built today is the Russian Kirov class battle cruiser
https://en.wikipedia...s_battlecruiser
it is literally armed exclusively with hundreds of missile launchers with thousands of missiles of all kinds for all circumstances and could probably wipe out a whole fleet or small country single-handedly.
and then there are nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines which practically halted open warfare between first world countries as we know it because of their ability to project their firepower deep into enemy territory with little to no risk to the submarine.
CW is not warfare in even the slightest sense. there is no such thing as new tactics, no such thing as changing the rules of the battlefield to counter your enemy. both sides use the same kinds of mechs with the same kind of strategy with absolutely no variation.
also quirked out unicorn mechs are BS and even russ agrees. The quirks were never supposed to make one trick ponies or to make mechs so powerful as to form a meta unto themselves.
it should be called "unit" or "faction" warfare since anyone (as you say) without quirked out unicorn mechs, or very certain "meta" builds, will find themselves, outgunned and over run.
Edited by Mellifluer, 20 September 2015 - 03:59 PM.
3
