31 replies to this topic

[Novakaine]

Stop it.

[cSand]

I had solved this problem many months ago, just uncheck Assault and Conquest

[sycocys]

Defend your base.

Let the noobs on your team rush and die.

Get your ez target points.

Edited by sycocys, 29 October 2015 - 03:43 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

cSand, on 29 October 2015 - 03:42 PM, said:

I had solved this problem many months ago, just uncheck Assault and Conquest

how does cutting oneself off from 50 grab bags...and increasing MM wait times exponentially solve anything?

It's a fact...people are screwing themselves and their teams when they rush to cap from the get go.

And how is it an issue in Conquest? Best, most tactical play happens in conquest. And it takes a long time to cap out.

sycocys, on 29 October 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

Defend your base.

Let the noobs on your team rush and die.

Get your ez target points.

and when it's the noobz on your team doing the capping?

[J0anna]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 October 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

how does cutting oneself off from 50 grab bags...and increasing MM wait times exponentially solve anything?

It's a fact...people are screwing themselves and their teams when they rush to cap from the get go.

It's a perfectly reasonable way for someone to grief you. You get screwed out of any rewards and they can legimately claim they are "playing the game the way they are supposed to..." Rather than whine about it (which only fuels them more) just accept it and move on.

[sumbody]

There seems to be two camps of thought when it come to playing MWO.

One camp prefers to collect trinkets and the other wants to win the match.

Edited by sumbody, 29 October 2015 - 04:25 PM.

[Wintersdark]

cSand, on 29 October 2015 - 03:42 PM, said:

I had solved this problem many months ago, just uncheck Assault and Conquest

Bishop Steiner, on 29 October 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

And how is it an issue in Conquest? Best, most tactical play happens in conquest. And it takes a long time to cap out.

This - Conquest is actually pretty ideal for this event, I find.

You can NOT caprush a Conquest win. But what DOES happen is either on your team or theres, sometimes groups splinter off to go cap things. Either way, this tends to split up the opposing team too, making it trivially easy to get a 250 match score.

Assault can be problematic, but Conquest is completely not.

What I find, though - and I'm not necessarily pointing fingers at cSand here - is that people's hate of Conquest is really out of touch with how Conquest actually plays. "Our team is full of slow assaults, we lose" - Who wins conquest is determined by combat and strategy. It doesn't matter how fast your assault is, you shouldn't be capping in it anyways. Ever since Alpine's capture points where brought closer in, I haven't seen a single Conquest match have much of anything to do with who's team was fastest.

Who's team was smartest, absolutely.

I personally believe its because there are a lot of players who are good at clicking pixels and pew pew, but really bad at juggling more complex battlefield situations, so they just make cry about it rather than getting gud.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 29 October 2015 - 04:27 PM, said:

This - Conquest is actually pretty ideal for this event, I find.

You can NOT caprush a Conquest win. But what DOES happen is either on your team or theres, sometimes groups splinter off to go cap things. Either way, this tends to split up the opposing team too, making it trivially easy to get a 250 match score.

Assault can be problematic, but Conquest is completely not.

What I find, though - and I'm not necessarily pointing fingers at cSand here - is that people's hate of Conquest is really out of touch with how Conquest actually plays. "Our team is full of slow assaults, we lose" - Who wins conquest is determined by combat and strategy. It doesn't matter how fast your assault is, you shouldn't be capping in it anyways. Ever since Alpine's capture points where brought closer in, I haven't seen a single Conquest match have much of anything to do with who's team was fastest.

Who's team was smartest, absolutely.

I personally believe its because there are a lot of players who are good at clicking pixels and pew pew, but really bad at juggling more complex battlefield situations, so they just make cry about it rather than getting gud.

Pretty much this... when the Conquest placement on Alpine was changed, it was literally like the rest of the existing maps (some of them prior to conversions)... caps were close, and didn't require too much of the map (you'd be playing a far less portion of Alpine on Conquest than Assault/Skirimish - but in different relative areas).

The only "true Conquest map" currently is the one on Terra Therma. It's a map I hate the most, but actually works best for Conquest.


It's mostly why we're in many versions of deathmatch in this game... the gamemodes (besides Skirmish) don't promote the objectives (value, rewards, whatever) and it's not like capping in Assault buffs your match score at all (minimal change in PSR).

Edited by Deathlike, 29 October 2015 - 04:44 PM.

[Johny Rocket]

Try a pregame announcement. Let it be known there are consequences.

Edited by Tractor Joe, 29 October 2015 - 05:54 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 29 October 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

Pretty much this... when the Conquest placement on Alpine was changed, it was literally like the rest of the existing maps (some of them prior to conversions)... caps were close, and didn't require too much of the map (you'd be playing a far less portion of Alpine on Conquest than Assault/Skirimish - but in different relative areas).

The only "true Conquest map" currently is the one on Terra Therma. It's a map I hate the most, but actually works best for Conquest.


It's mostly why we're in many versions of deathmatch in this game... the gamemodes (besides Skirmish) don't promote the objectives (value, rewards, whatever) and it's not like capping in Assault buffs your match score at all (minimal change in PSR).

missing the point... like in the other thread.

No one is talking about people actually playing it for the objective win... though that is OK.

What happens, is because of the possibility of Objective Win, you see a lot less mindless deathball TDM (ok, maybe not a lot less, this is MWO's playerbase we speak of), but you do see more tactical fighting than in skirmish.

It's called entertaining gameplay.... something that people mad rushing the caps on assault does not accomplish.

Oh well...who plays the game to actually have fun... and make some cbills? Just selfish people, apparently.

[1Grimbane]

All your base are belong to us

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 October 2015 - 05:13 PM, said:

What happens, is because of the possibility of Objective Win, you see a lot less mindless deathball TDM (ok, maybe not a lot less, this is MWO's playerbase we speak of), but you do see more tactical fighting than in skirmish.

It's called entertaining gameplay.... something that people mad rushing the caps on assault does not accomplish.

Oh well...who plays the game to actually have fun... and make some cbills? Just selfish people, apparently.

It's why I tend to play Conquest more than everything else. Combat is more fun - and it's still a combat centric game mode, despite what people say - because it's not enough to just run in a circle and attempt to out-nascar the opposition. Positioning and battlefield control is critically important, for all the same reasons as it is in Skirmish, but more as well.

Conquest purely adds to Skirmish. It's Deathball plus more.



Also, Conquest pays better.

[Alistair Winter]

I don't get why people do it, regardless of whether there's an event going on.

No C-bills
No XP
No PSR increase

You get nothing.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alistair Winter, on 29 October 2015 - 05:32 PM, said:

I don't get why people do it, regardless of whether there's an event going on.

No C-bills
No XP
No PSR increase

You get nothing.

apparently we are idiots for realizing this.

And selfish
And whiners

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 29 October 2015 - 05:37 PM.

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 October 2015 - 05:13 PM, said:

missing the point... like in the other thread.

No one is talking about people actually playing it for the objective win... though that is OK.

What happens, is because of the possibility of Objective Win, you see a lot less mindless deathball TDM (ok, maybe not a lot less, this is MWO's playerbase we speak of), but you do see more tactical fighting than in skirmish.

It's called entertaining gameplay.... something that people mad rushing the caps on assault does not accomplish.

Oh well...who plays the game to actually have fun... and make some cbills? Just selfish people, apparently.

You're missing the point.

You're suggesting a high portion of Assault matches end in a base cap.

That is simply not the case.


If it were the majority, then I'd reconsider my position, but it has virtually been the total minority of Assault matches for who knows how long.

I get that people are trolling like this, but that's not the reality this game is in currently.

Even in the events that supported base capping, that was STILL THE MINORITY.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 October 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 29 October 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

You're missing the point.

You're suggesting a high portion of Assault matches end in a base cap.

That is simply not the case.


If it were the majority, then I'd reconsider my position, but it has virtually been the total minority of Assault matches for who knows how long.

I get that people are trolling like this, but that's not the reality this game is in currently.

Even in the events that supported base capping, that was STILL THE MINORITY.

At no point did I say that. SO since you are starting from a false premise, I would suggest you simply stop.

[Johny Rocket]

Alistair Winter, on 29 October 2015 - 05:32 PM, said:

I don't get why people do it, regardless of whether there's an event going on.

No C-bills
No XP
No PSR increase

You get nothing.

If Im in a bad mech for the map I might say screw it, like a Black Knight on Mordor. But early base rushes usually lead to a fight anyway. Bigger the rush the bigger the response.

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 October 2015 - 05:43 PM, said:

At no point did I say that. SO since you are starting from a false premise, I would suggest you simply stop.

Your premise is "don't cap because of the event".

You can't stop human nature.

That is your error.

It will happen, whether you'd like it or not.

I've told people to STOP CAPPING (especially when we're winning big) and they still cap.

People will be people.

Why are you trying to persuade them otherwise?

Edited by Deathlike, 29 October 2015 - 06:08 PM.

[Xetelian]

I've been base capped once during this event and I've already put out 50+ games.

Certain people think the lack of turrets on the base is a license to base rush out of spite. This is NOT the majority but a very selfish and disgruntled minority.

[1Grimbane]

so hard not to troll whiners these days