224 replies to this topic

[PyckenZot]

Brethgar, on 15 November 2015 - 06:32 PM, said:

The problems I ran into this weekend in CW were mostly due to attitude and an unwillingness to cooperate.

...

People didn't listen to directions given.
At the beginning of matches I almost always say to bring heavies and assaults first. This sets the tone of the match by bringing heavy firepower and tankiness first. Yet I would always have someone in a cheetah or adder for their first drop. Then at the end when everyone else is dead or near so, I would see someone bring out a gargoyle or a dire as their last mech. What are these people thinking?
At times I would try to give direction over voip and people just don't pay attention or think I am full of bull.
"Gather up outside the gate after you die"
"Don't trickle in one by one"
"Wait for the rest of the group, don't go in"
"DON'T GO IN"
"Push around the corner!" This usually results in me pushing the corner and dying very alone.
"Everyone go left gate" This almost inevitably has the guy in the kit fox as his first mech headed off in the other direction.

It is the teachers life,... but patience will get you a long way. A very nice example from yesterday is a counter-attack my 5-man group played with some solo PUGs. I'm usually on TS on a different PC so I type commands to the team members not on the server. As usual, pushes were not followed. So after a first debacle attack I reiterated how to move a push. Before getting there I needed to restate that trickling in is a bad idea.
First win. They listened.
On the second push the team -somewhat- followed us in and we were able to secure omega for awhile. Yet instead of shooting enemies, some members decided omega was a better target. Despite using multiple iterations of "DO NOT SHOOT OMEGA", they didn't listen.
Result, a better, yet still failed push and a PUG wondering in chat why the match wasn't over not that he killed omega.
So I kindly reminded him that I specifically told not to shoot omega. However, whilst forming up for push 3, also had the time, to explain WHY.
Result, push 3 and 4 were successes, the full team followed logical tactics and behaviour and we won the drop ggclose 42 to 41. An event that would not have occured had the team not followed the last ditch call to dive straigth into the bunched up opposition.

TL:DR
When you have the guts to call. Be patient, reasonable and iterate orders and rationale when possible. Many players will follow orders once they know why they should.

Edited by PyckenZot, 16 November 2015 - 04:36 AM.

[bLeeat]

PyckenZot, on 16 November 2015 - 04:34 AM, said:

It is the teachers life,... but patience will get you a long way. A very nice example from yesterday is a counter-attack my 5-man group played with some solo PUGs. I'm usually on TS on a different PC so I type commands to the team members not on the server. As usual, pushes were not followed. So after a first debacle attack I reiterated how to move a push. Before getting there I needed to restate that trickling in is a bad idea.
First win. They listened.
On the second push the team -somewhat- followed us in and we were able to secure omega for awhile. Yet instead of shooting enemies, some members decided omega was a better target. Despite using multiple iterations of "DO NOT SHOOT OMEGA", they didn't listen.
Result, a better, yet still failed push and a PUG wondering in chat why the match wasn't over not that he killed omega.
So I kindly reminded him that I specifically told not to shoot omega. However, whilst forming up for push 3, also had the time, to explain WHY.
Result, push 3 and 4 were successes, the full team followed logical tactics and behaviour and we won the drop ggclose 42 to 41. An event that would not have occured had the team not followed the last ditch call to dive straigth into the bunched up opposition.

TL:DR
When you have the guts to call. Be patient, reasonable and iterate orders and rationale when possible. Many players will follow orders once they know why they should.

is the only tactic that was played was to group up and attack a gate?

[Magna Canus]

So far the best insight I have seen in this topic.
If you attack as a group you can at least get a ghost drop and win sectors. This eventually causes someone to defend when the planet is in danger of being lost. Defending has no such option so why defend if there is no currently active attacker.

The most attractive part of defending for pugs is the illusion of "ghost team members" in the form of turrets. Many think to them selves "even if my team sucks I still have my turret buddies". This kind of thinking either makes you passive (waiting for turrets to do the hard work) or supports an already passive play style.

If your attacker plays just as insecure then you have it made as a defender, but most times you have an opponent that wants said planet and is playing to take it. That means W key for the win; take the gate down and focus fire until nothing is left standing.

[PyckenZot]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 03:44 AM, said:

for myself though, i find CW unbearable as a IS player. long waits just to find a team,then another wait to find a game, just to be put in a game with players with 0 communication vs a clannies who are like 70% all in the same clan. is it not a problem when all the "good" players gravitate to clan mechs for free cash?

My unit switches contracts now and then to farm mechbays. This simply to explain the jade falcon tag with a post on IS.
When I want a IS CW drop when my unit mates are not around I go the the Davion, or FRR hubs (don't know the others so can't vouch such hubs exist). As such little old solo playing me, becomes part of a coordinated 12-man with little wait time.

It remains a mystery to me why people keep complaining on having to play solo when it clearly is a choice,...

[bLeeat]

Magnakanus, on 16 November 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

So far the best insight I have seen in this topic.
If you attack as a group you can at least get a ghost drop and win sectors. This eventually causes someone to defend when the planet is in danger of being lost. Defending has no such option so why defend if there is no currently active attacker.

The most attractive part of defending for pugs is the illusion of "ghost team members" in the form of turrets. Many think to them selves "even if my team sucks I still have my turret buddies". This kind of thinking either makes you passive (waiting for turrets to do the hard work) or supports an already passive play style.

If your attacker plays just as insecure then you have it made as a defender, but most times you have an opponent that wants said planet and is playing to take it. That means W key for the win; take the gate down and focus fire until nothing is left standing.

imo grouping up/ balling up seems to be the only tactic in CW. and when it comes down to IS vs CLAN pugs, IS is nothing but random players most of the time.on the other hand you get all the try hard clans playing clan mechs for the cheese and easy play mechs.

[TWIAFU]

PyckenZot, on 16 November 2015 - 04:48 AM, said:

It remains a mystery to me why people keep complaining on having to play solo when it clearly is a choice,...

Low hanging fruit on the rewards tree.

Solo player see mechbays as a reward. Goes and plays CW, solo, for rewards. Has horrible time grinding for bays, due to playing solo. Complains CW sucks and has to be made for solo, repeats 12man lie, wants groups nerf'd, wants Units limited - in the Group and Unit focused part of the game.

Same damn thing happens during CW events.

We MUST have a popup box with confirmation informing non-group and non-unit players that this mode is for Group and Units. Failure to partake in the designed intent will result in a hard time.

That or remove the low hanging fruit.

[PyckenZot]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

is the only tactic that was played was to group up and attack a gate?

Well that is the start,.. You are learning. Good job!

[TexAce]

With the premium time given and a win I was able to get over 1 million c-bills with ONE match. Thats pretty new for me. Over 1 million cbills in 30 minutes is not that bad. Combined with 4 mechs, which all get x2 XP for the first win I did over 13k XP on the same match.

The biggest loss I had was still roughly over 250k cbills, which puts me somewhere in the range of 600-800k cbills per match.

I like!

[Roadbuster]

Although the "carry harder" crew already made their move on the OP...

If PUGs would at least try to play as a team, their chances would be ALOT better.

But most of the time you see this:
- no communication
- no general tactic
- mechs wandering around the whole map
- no focus fire, instead
- mechs running away if they see an enemy, or
- mechs hiding behind teammates, blocking them, because
- people are scared of taking damage
- players moving behind eachother instead of next to eachother, resulting in
- blocked firelines
- people don't help teammates and rather run away
- pushes fail, because
- people are scared of taking damage and try to move back while getting blocked, or don't follow the push and cower behind cover
- people camping behind cover, looking in one direction, waiting for an enemy to move in their line of fire, while a mech moves up from behind and kills them
- people so focussed on getting a shot at the enemy or the kill, that they run into the line of fire of the others and take lots of friendly fire, wasting "heat" and ammo of their teammates
- people so focussed on getting a shot at the enemy or the kill, that they don't care about teammates in their line of fire and just shoot them
- UAVs get ignored
- map and enemy movement gets ignored


It's sad if half of the players in a PUG team try to play MWO like a single player mobile game.


EDIT:
Ok, I have 1 complaint.
Even during this event and no matter if solo or in a full LFG group, getting a match always took 10-20 minutes.

We need more players...

Edited by Roadbuster, 16 November 2015 - 05:05 AM.

[bLeeat]

PyckenZot, on 16 November 2015 - 04:48 AM, said:

My unit switches contracts now and then to farm mechbays. This simply to explain the jade falcon tag with a post on IS.
When I want a IS CW drop when my unit mates are not around I go the the Davion, or FRR hubs (don't know the others so can't vouch such hubs exist). As such little old solo playing me, becomes part of a coordinated 12-man with little wait time.

It remains a mystery to me why people keep complaining on having to play solo when it clearly is a choice,...

again your just a noob who conformed to the noob way of playing mwo. but for new players who dont wanna join a group or join a TS,to have a decent matched game, what do they do? i have to join people on a third party program to have a decent game? i have to deal with listening to babble from "pros" who only play cheese?

[VanguardMk1]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 04:49 AM, said:

imo grouping up/ balling up seems to be the only tactic in CW. and when it comes down to IS vs CLAN pugs, IS is nothing but random players most of the time.on the other hand you get all the try hard clans playing clan mechs for the cheese and easy play mechs.

As a Davion, I encounter Wolf much more than other Clan factions. You're calling the majority of Clan players tryhards, but in all my drops against Wolf they don't seem all that super awesome at all. There's cheese mechs on both sides, I see a lot of Thunderbolts and BJ-1X's every single drop on my own side (and I use 2 BJ-1X's in my dropdeck). I really enjoy the pug vs pug fights in CW but when I'm with a group and we go up against a decently organized group, we have fun too. You can blame yourself losing to the others having Clan mechs but in the end it comes down to your player skill and coordination. Grouping up just makes it so much easier.

Clan pugs are the same as IS pugs. Maybe the Clanners just have fewer people with Trial mechs or bad mechs, because Clan mechs are seen as a bigger investment.

[PyckenZot]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 05:02 AM, said:

again your just a noob who conformed to the noob way of playing mwo. but for new players who dont wanna join a group or join a TS,to have a decent matched game, what do they do? i have to join people on a third party program to have a decent game? i have to deal with listening to babble from "pros" who only play cheese?

Then you don't play CW. You don't fly your noobship into nullsec in EVE either.
Well, you can, but you won't achieve anything.

[bLeeat]

VanguardMk1, on 16 November 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

As a Davion, I encounter Wolf much more than other Clan factions. You're calling the majority of Clan players tryhards, but in all my drops against Wolf they don't seem all that super awesome at all. There's cheese mechs on both sides, I see a lot of Thunderbolts and BJ-1X's every single drop on my own side (and I use 2 BJ-1X's in my dropdeck). I really enjoy the pug vs pug fights in CW but when I'm with a group and we go up against a decently organized group, we have fun too. You can blame yourself losing to the others having Clan mechs but in the end it comes down to your player skill and coordination. Grouping up just makes it so much easier.

Clan pugs are the same as IS pugs. Maybe the Clanners just have fewer people with Trial mechs or bad mechs, because Clan mechs are seen as a bigger investment.

CW doesnt come down to individual skill/play though. all im stating is that more top tier teams in mwo play clannies because its a lot easier and free cash. and it favors their individual play which is cheese.

[Lightfoot]

I haven't had the time to play CW this weekend, but the problem with CW is MWO's laser-vomit balancing cancelling out player tactics. When all the weapons work equally well in MechWarrior they allow terrain based tactics to be employed by players and terrain based tactics, such as working LRMs, evens the field of play quite a bit between 12 mans and PUGs.

It's not just LRMs though, in MechWarrior you want all the weapons to work equally well because this is the only thing that enables player tactics which in turn validates player decisions in Mechlab. That creates a MechWarrior game with exceptional gameplay depth. Sometimes I feel like the mindset here and at PGI is that laser death is the only honorable way for a mech to die, that death by LRMs or PPCs and Gauss is some kind of hack, but it's not. It's gameplay depth and MWO just doesn't have enough of it for CW's attack/defend terrain maps.

[bLeeat]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 05:22 AM, said:

CW doesnt come down to individual skill/play though. all im stating is that more top tier teams in mwo play clannies because its a lot easier and free cash. and it favors their individual play which is cheese.

and isnt that the only thing they do in cw is "group up"? if you hated nascaring and grouping up , go play cw hahaha

[Metus regem]

OP, you do understand that CW was sent for groups right? They wanted a que that was hard core mode away from the filthy casuals, they got it, then bitched that no-one used their new playground....

[Kdogg788]

oldradagast, on 15 November 2015 - 06:33 AM, said:

Back when CW was launched, this problem became immediately apparent - casuals and PUG's were being stomped over and over by coordinated 12-mans. Those of us who understand the problems this would create rightly protested this poor design and asked for some level of match-making. Unfortunately, we were shouted down by an endless clown-car full of try-hards who felt that stomps and seal-clubbing were all a "vital part of the high-skill CW environment." This was followed up with expectations that "everyone" would just magic up a whole pile of new friends to form a unit or have some strange desire to join the unit that just stomped them (while often loudly commenting on how "sucky noobs should stay out of CW.") The parting shot was, of course, "git gud or git rekted."

None of the dim-bulbs realized that most players didn't "git gud or git rekted" - they simply decided to stop playing CW and no longer spent any time trying to get the format fixed because they were tired of being shouted down about it. PGI, naturally, saw no reason to correct the lack of match-making at that point since the format's small surviving player base seemed fine with it. Only now that there's any incentive for casuals and PUG's to again tip-toe back into CW do we again see the problems the format has brought to light. Too bad nothing will be done about it.

This is very true. While I have been in a unit since this game's inception in closed beta, there are times when we have a small group online or heaven forbid, I'm the only one on and I have time for a CW match. What could it possibly hurt to have a fraction of the planetary ticks allotted to a matchmaker style solo queue where players of a faction could be matched together for CW games. The mode needs the population and even players in units don't always have a large enough group to spontaneously get it together. As a check valve, the matchmaker could also even the number of players on each side with like unit tags to help prevent sync drops. Of course it would also mean the sync dropping players would not always get the same match or even the same planet. Do you guys really want to save CW or do you want to shout down many players who want to participate until Phase 3 is DOA?

-k

Edited by Kdogg788, 16 November 2015 - 05:41 AM.

[VanguardMk1]

bLeeat, on 16 November 2015 - 05:22 AM, said:

CW doesn't come down to individual skill/play though. All I'm stating is that more top tier teams in mwo play clannies because it's a lot easier and free cash. And it favors their individual play which is cheese.

Most top tier competitive teams don't even play CW. There are very few units who are very active in CW and half of those switch between factions often. CW has never been all that profitable compared to public queue matches, earnings are generally lower when looking at earnings over time. You complain about cheese but fail to mention the top IS mechs, which are just as cheesy. You can't blame people who prefer Clan mechs, it's not their fault that balance isn't completely perfect (but is pretty decent IMO). I can never understand it why people would play CW without having the mechs, attitude and knowledge of the game modes anyway. There's nothing I can do about that unless I group up with 11 others, which gives me a more reliable team. Grouping up solves so many of the issues you seem to have with CW.

[Magna Canus]

Well, 2 mechs shooting 1 is more efficient. 1 Mech focusing its fire on 1 enemy instead of spreading it across the 3 it can fire on is also more efficient. I was a soldier so I think like one when I play a combat game, it's second nature. People do what seems to work for the most part unless they have "reasons" not to (e.g. my will vs. reality).

In a larger group you present more targets to the enemy and reduce the chance of being focused. You have more guns to fire when you encounter an enemy, etc. Good combat sense will always win over poor choices, even if some people don't want to acknowledge that they are poor choices.

To "clan cheese": As a merc I am on both sides of the fence and much more prefer IS to clan in CW, but that is personal preference.

[bLeeat]

VanguardMk1, on 16 November 2015 - 05:39 AM, said:

Most top tier competitive teams don't even play CW. There are very few units who are very active in CW and half of those switch between factions often. CW has never been all that profitable compared to public queue matches, earnings are generally lower when looking at earnings over time. You complain about cheese but fail to mention the top IS mechs, which are just as cheesy. You can't blame people who prefer Clan mechs, it's not their fault that balance isn't completely perfect (but is pretty decent IMO). I can never understand it why people would play CW without having the mechs, attitude and knowledge of the game modes anyway. There's nothing I can do about that unless I group up with 11 others, which gives me a more reliable team. Grouping up solves so many of the issues you seem to have with CW.

its easy to talk in black and white.and hasnt already been proven that clannies have more top tier mechs to drop than IS in CW? imo as an IS player im more likley to drop with a bunch of randoms vs a bunch of clannies who are on the same team. you say attitude and knowledge? but in cw all you guys to do is ball up and bum rush a gate. IMO it takes more attitude and knowledge to win a random pug on regular maps than it does on cw.