121 replies to this topic

[Khereg]

This comes up a lot, usually as an assumption when someone is making a related point about CW, but I thought it deserved its own thread.

Simple question, do groups really do this?

I'll speak for my unit, -MS-. The answer is a pretty emphatic, "no".

Here's how CW works for us during a routine NA primetime evening:

People start gathering on teamspeak and form up into dropships with new dropships getting started as others fill up. We generally will have 1 - 3 groups running on any given night. Group sizes are usually 6 - 12. We usually don't go through the effort of starting another group until there's several people sitting around waiting.

We make a bit of an effort spread the talent around. We have tags for accomplishments in CW that generally correlate to skill. We try to keep the higher performing players spread across groups. Likewise, prospects (new recruits who are not yet members of -MS-, but are dropping with us) are generally limited to 3 per 12-man. This isn't rigorously enforced, but generally holds.

There are usually instructions posted in our teamspeak to guide planet selection for the current attack phase. These generally look like, "attack the X faction planet first, don't do defenses or attack elsewhere until that planet is secured". Note there's no mention of other groups involved, just general guidance on where we want to focus our drops.

It's not always attacks, either (although it usually is). We also do some defenses, depending on the night and the situation (e.g. there's a planet being attacked we have tagged that we want to keep for some reason, or we've been asked by an ally to help hold a certain planet, etc.)

Whoever has group lead then decides where to drop, usually going along with the instructions in teamspeak, but not always. The goal then is to get into drops as fast as possible, because we want to actually play the game and earn c-bills as quickly as we can. On most nights, this is how it works. Who our opponents are likely to be never even enters the discussion.

On some nights, we might actually seek out other groups to fight. If we hear that Unit X is attacking/defending somewhere, we may shift our drops to go find them. Sometimes we'll put together an "A-team" to do so if they're a solid unit, but this happens very rarely.

Also very rarely, a unit leader may come to our teamspeak or we may go to theirs to arrange a fight. We know and are on good terms with most of the other bigger units in the game. The main reason this is rare is because it takes time and effort to set up these meetings and it cuts down on our rate of c-bill earning. So, we're not usually inclined to go through all the trouble to make it happen, and I assume the same is true for most other groups.

Anyway, let's clear the air - does your group avoid other groups in CW? Seek them out? Indifferent?

[B L O O D W I T C H]

I second everything what Kereg wrote.

I want to add that our prospects sometimes run groups of their own (they won't have Unit tag, but they will (try) to operate very similar to MS premades.


I spent the last 3 days fighting for Liao, before that i fought 3 days for Marik.
I've literally seen 3-4 attack groups ghostdropping a planet to 60-70% and on the opposite site, 3-4 defense groups ghostdropping a planet down to below 50%.

I went and asked the Units directly, they told me that is was ordered by their highcommand to not attack/defend if enemies are arround.
I seriously questioned to why so many people (not) play the game like this.

[pwnface]

Speaking for NS, absolutely not.

Although we won't actively schedule matches to sync up with other groups in CW (that's what lobbies are for), we will requeue whenever we run into a decent team whether we win or lose.

Why would any unit want to avoid another unit in CW? Playing against non-PUG teams makes for a much more rewarding experience for both sides involved. People have been quoting Russ and stating his opinion as fact when the truth is Russ is incredibly out of touch when it comes to this game's community.

[Hotthedd]

No. Units aren't avoiding each other.

Generally Units attack.
Defenders can be of any faction in the I.S. OR Clan (depending on which tech), and not from the attacking house or clan if using the same tech. (Why this lore-killing aspect was put in place Blake only knows)
Therefore the probability of an attacking team facing a full 12 man is less than if defending. (Unless as the OP pointed out, a unit is defending one of its tagged planets for some reason)

The statistics bear this out.
What statistics CANNOT show us is INTENT, so any extrapolation of intent from raw numbers is disingenuous at best. (However it DOES create a boogeyman that PGI can use to blame their game design failures on)

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

As QQ, we don't. We actively hunt for units if we're 6+. And when we get one, we keep requeueing that planet until the other group leaves or Ceasefire hits.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Hotthedd, on 13 January 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

No. Units aren't avoiding each other.

Generally Units attack.
Defenders can be of any faction in the I.S. OR Clan (depending on which tech), and not from the attacking house or clan if using the same tech. (Why this lore-killing aspect was put in place Blake only knows)
Therefore the probability of an attacking team facing a full 12 man is less than if defending. (Unless as the OP pointed out, a unit is defending one of its tagged planets for some reason)

The statistics bear this out.
What statistics CANNOT show us is INTENT, so any extrapolation of intent from raw numbers is disingenuous at best. (However it DOES create a boogeyman that PGI can use to blame their game design failures on)

That's why QQ defends over attacks. If most groups attack and we want to fight groups, best way to catch a group is to defend.

[sycocys]

Most won't admit it, but there's a reason why you don't often see groups in the defense queue.

-The not lining up matches, which would be near instant drops match after match, because you'd prefer to grind c-bills off of pugs than have a quality match-up is a pretty telling bit. Especially between large units that are able to field multiple full teams against each other.

[Deathlike]

I do believe there are units that avoid other groups, but it's probably not as big as some would like you to believe.

Most of the time it's generally because they aren't as good, for whatever reason. It's human nature to a degree where you feel like "it's too hard", that one would be less likely to redrop. It's not out of the realm (there's too many ongoing discussions as is about this)..

However, the more success you breed (even if you aren't a skilled team or player, but you have people willing to do what they are told), the less likely you are to concern yourself with these things.

[AnimeFreak40K]

I used to be in [-MS-] and Khereg speaks the truth. In all of my time with [-MS-], never once did I ever get that they wanted to avoid fighting other groups.

This being said, I understand exactly why the perception exists that units avoid each other:

As it stands, Faction Warfare favors the Attacker. The more a unit attacks a planet, the more likely that planet will have that unit's tag on it when it flips. Defending a planet doesn't get a unit's tag on the planet, and when you have units that are more interested in taking planets or see there are greater rewards to be had by maintaining the attack, they will do so.

This is a fault in Faction Warfare's design (I vaguely recall a thread on these forums that stated that the best way to defend your faction's holdings was to not bother defending at all and instead stay on the attack). Are there ways to fix it? I don't know. My knee-jerk reaction is to say there is and this is done by increasing the rewards of defending (even if it's just a little bit) and set it up that when it comes time for planets to flip the only way a unit holds a tagged planet is if they actively defend it (if another unit defends more than you, they get the tag, if defenses were mostly by skittles/no unit then the planet goes to an untagged state; nobody gets it)

So yeah, I do see the perspective of the large/organized units here. This current status isn't entirely their fault...

BUT...

There *is* something to be said both by Sycocys and Lord Scarlett Johan:
- If units were truly as interested in fighting other units as they like to claim, then they would take more Defense missions, where they would have that increased likelihood of facing off against another unit. The fact that by Khereg's own admission (and my own experience with [-MS-]), these units pretty much stay on the attack means that they will most likely fight against unorganized PUGs.
And let's be honest here, you guys can say "we don't know who we're facing" all you want...and while it is a true statement, you also know very well that most drops on the attack are going to have unorganized PUGs defending.
- Unorganized PUGs are what make up the vast majority of defend missions due a combination of the "Call To Arms" feature and that everybody can partake in the defense (that is; you won't see skittles on the attack. The fact of the matter is that these guys are easier to beat and it does make for faster games that net larger rewards.

The way I see it, if large units like 228 and MercStar were truly honest about wanting to face off against other groups, they would take a page out of QQ's book and spend some time actively defending worlds instead of leaving that duty to PUGs/Skittles.

[Khereg]

sycocys, on 13 January 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

-The not lining up matches, which would be near instant drops match after match, because you'd prefer to grind c-bills off of pugs than have a quality match-up is a pretty telling bit. Especially between large units that are able to field multiple full teams against each other.

That's not what I said...

You're right that once we got the match against another group, we could get instant matches from there on out, but it can take 15 - 30 minutes to get the initial match started, depending on people's availability. That's time away from other drops we could be getting just as quickly. Also, there's a certain amount of effort needed to make it happen. Effort we may not want to put in on any given night.

What I said about c-bills is that we want to earn them, quickly (just like everyone else who plays this game). We can earn them just as well against groups as we can against pugs. Even if we lose, we're generally good enough that the matches are close. In fact, because groups are better at spreading damage around, we may actually earn a little more when we fight them. I haven't looked into it that closely, but considering you get paid for damage, this would seem to be true.

You've assumed a motive where there isn't one.

Edited by Khereg, 13 January 2016 - 10:51 AM.

[Azzgaroth]

pwnface, on 13 January 2016 - 09:44 AM, said:

Speaking for NS, absolutely not.

Although we won't actively schedule matches to sync up with other groups in CW (that's what lobbies are for), we will requeue whenever we run into a decent team whether we win or lose.

Why would any unit want to avoid another unit in CW? Playing against non-PUG teams makes for a much more rewarding experience for both sides involved. People have been quoting Russ and stating his opinion as fact when the truth is Russ is incredibly out of touch when it comes to this game's community.

We, Death Watch, do exacly like NS (GG yesterday guys) if we face good team we keep droping to figth as much possible with other good team. Seal clubing get boring....

[Lukoi Banacek]

Unless things have changed, defending a planet enough can actually earn you a tag there if the planet is in your faction.

[Khereg]

AnimeFreak40K, on 13 January 2016 - 10:45 AM, said:

- If units were truly as interested in fighting other units as they like to claim, then they would take more Defense missions, where they would have that increased likelihood of facing off against another unit. The fact that by Khereg's own admission (and my own experience with [-MS-]), these units pretty much stay on the attack means that they will most likely fight against unorganized PUGs.

Anime raises a point here, but there's a non-sinister explanation:

Taking an attack almost always results in faster drops, because the call to arms goes out to defend and people show up. Yes, there's a good chance they'll be pugs, but our only concern is getting fights faster and not sitting around wasting time. We don't care who shows up to defend - it isn't part of the discussion.

Conversely, taking defense tickets just plain means a longer wait to get match. When a call to arms goes out, defenders rush into the queue. When I see the planet options for defense, they almost always look something like 24/38, 37/52, or similar. There's already more defenders waiting for more attackers to show up, which means we're going to be sitting around waiting, which we don't want to do.

Blame the mechanics of the mode, but in terms of our decision making about where to drop, the order of priority is, 1. Do we have instructions to go somewhere specific?, if not or if the planet we're instructed to go to is secure, then 2. Where can we get a fight the fastest?

That's really it. Who our oppoents are likely to be almost never even gets brought up.

Azzgaroth, on 13 January 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

We, Death Watch, do exacly like NS (GG yesterday guys) if we face good team we keep droping to figth as much possible with other good team. Seal clubing get boring....

We do the same. When we find a group, we stay with them until one of us leaves/disbands or cease fire hits.

[GI Journalist]

What troubles me is that it is even possible to manipulate or exploit the drop queues. PGI has created a system in which two teams from opposite sides of a border can spend ten minutes or more waiting on different planets, then drop without opponents. With the right design, it should be simple to steer those teams and players into opposing queues, so they are getting matches and not ghost drops.

I'm here to play a game in which I pilot a giant walking robot into battle against live opponents.

When MWO fails to provide me with an opponent, PGI is failing as a game designer.

[habu86]

sycocys, on 13 January 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

grind c-bills off of pugs

lol I grind C-bills faster dropping solo, whether in the regular queue or CW. My earnings per match actually take a nosedive almost every time I drop with more than 3-4 other unit members.

The idea that you can, as 12-man grind c-bills off pugs more efficiently than by fighting other good players, who know how to tank and spread damage, only holds true in one very specific instance: in invasion attack, when you are able to smash the defenders' first wave quickly and then immediately dunk Omega.

I've seen matches end in less than 7 minutes on Boreal (!) when this happens and the winning team walks away with an average of ~500k, including win bonus, but otherwise, if you're expecting to break 1 mil per match (thus having CW be more profitable than spending ~ 30 mins. doing regular queue), you need to hit at least 1500+ dmg and get multiple kills, which can be surprisingly difficult in the feeding frenzy that can ensue when skittles collapse completely after a wave or two. Actual organized units are more difficult to shatter and will likely display a higher skill level, so the potential to farm more damage is certainly there, though, conversely, people will also put their tryhard boots on when dropping against solid teams and firing discipline becomes a lot more noticeable, so targets drop faster too.

That being said, the best, most memorable matches are against other capable units, and those will be the highlight of your evening.

Lastly, here's my suggestion to put an end to all these stupid rumors that big units are somehow actively avoiding each other. Let's start a thread in the forums where units post endgame screenshots of our matches against other units - these fights happen VERY regularly and people need to see this. Just my 2cts.

[AnimeFreak40K]

Khereg, on 13 January 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

Anime raises a point here, but there's a non-sinister explanation...

I was not trying to sound sinister, if I was, I do apologize.

I was simply stating facts as I see them, and the point you quoted really should be taken in context of the points that preceded it, specifically about the design structure of Faction Warfare as it stands right now.

Faction Warfare favors the attacker with regard to match times, rewards, etc. in its present state. I do not feel that MercStar (or any unit, large or small, competitive or casual for that matter) should be faulted when it comes to trying to get fast matches, make C-Bills/LP as quickly as possible or make the most out of a system by staying on the attack (since that is what Faction Warfare seems to favor at the moment).

That being said, I do stand by my statement of the desire to face against units however. I understand what is wanted (strong opponents and short wait-times), but sometimes you have to decide which is more important.

If you really want to face off against units and get strong opposition, spend some time defending; wait times be dammed. If you want to focus on earning money and quick matches then don't complain about the lack strong opponents.

And the way I see it, as long as it remains clear to me that units prefer chasing the money and/or quick matches, they don't get to use the "but we want strong opponents" argument with me.

[Armando]

When I want to make money....I attack.
When I want to have fun...I defend.

Attacking allows for faster matches with a lower level of competition. This is the best method for C-Bill per hour grind IMO.
Defending is not as fast, but the level of competition is much higher. This is the best method for having fun IMO.

While I enjoy having fun as much as the next guy....chances are the next guy isn't trying to load out 308 different mechs (I am). It is for this reason that I am likely found leading the attack (gotta grind dem c-bills).

I'm not avoiding anything (or anyone)....just trying to grind dem c-bills baby.

Edited by Armando, 13 January 2016 - 11:28 AM.

[Khereg]

AnimeFreak40K, on 13 January 2016 - 11:19 AM, said:

I was not trying to sound sinister, if I was, I do apologize.

No worries, man. Bro-fist.

[Tom Sawyer]

I work a 40 hour week. A wife unit and 2 kids and 3 noisy parakeets (that my team mates keep asking when using TS who owns the jungle)

This means that I get to play after work EDT, after making sure the family has dinner or sometimes cooking it. I do love to cook but it does take time.

Any other issues need to be handled.

Ok finally got an hour or possibly 2 to get some big stompy robot action in. Hop onto TS, join a group or be asked to lead. Fine. Should we attack or defend, which then boils down to GOT 2 HOURS, maybe more on the weekend. Ok FASTEST game is WHERE.

So in my ramble no I do not avoid. I prefer to face other organized units. Said games are much more fun for the limited time. But if that means we have to attack and get pugs sorry that is life. My time is just as valuable as any others.

[Sandpit]

Khereg, on 13 January 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

This comes up a lot, usually as an assumption when someone is making a related point about CW, but I thought it deserved its own thread.

Simple question, do groups really do this?

I'll speak for my unit, -MS-. The answer is a pretty emphatic, "no".

Here's how CW works for us during a routine NA primetime evening:

People start gathering on teamspeak and form up into dropships with new dropships getting started as others fill up. We generally will have 1 - 3 groups running on any given night. Group sizes are usually 6 - 12. We usually don't go through the effort of starting another group until there's several people sitting around waiting.

We make a bit of an effort spread the talent around. We have tags for accomplishments in CW that generally correlate to skill. We try to keep the higher performing players spread across groups. Likewise, prospects (new recruits who are not yet members of -MS-, but are dropping with us) are generally limited to 3 per 12-man. This isn't rigorously enforced, but generally holds.

There are usually instructions posted in our teamspeak to guide planet selection for the current attack phase. These generally look like, "attack the X faction planet first, don't do defenses or attack elsewhere until that planet is secured". Note there's no mention of other groups involved, just general guidance on where we want to focus our drops.

It's not always attacks, either (although it usually is). We also do some defenses, depending on the night and the situation (e.g. there's a planet being attacked we have tagged that we want to keep for some reason, or we've been asked by an ally to help hold a certain planet, etc.)

Whoever has group lead then decides where to drop, usually going along with the instructions in teamspeak, but not always. The goal then is to get into drops as fast as possible, because we want to actually play the game and earn c-bills as quickly as we can. On most nights, this is how it works. Who our opponents are likely to be never even enters the discussion.

On some nights, we might actually seek out other groups to fight. If we hear that Unit X is attacking/defending somewhere, we may shift our drops to go find them. Sometimes we'll put together an "A-team" to do so if they're a solid unit, but this happens very rarely.

Also very rarely, a unit leader may come to our teamspeak or we may go to theirs to arrange a fight. We know and are on good terms with most of the other bigger units in the game. The main reason this is rare is because it takes time and effort to set up these meetings and it cuts down on our rate of c-bill earning. So, we're not usually inclined to go through all the trouble to make it happen, and I assume the same is true for most other groups.

Anyway, let's clear the air - does your group avoid other groups in CW? Seek them out? Indifferent?

As with any bandwagon and scapegoat on here, it gets blown out of proportion. Yes, some units do it.
Guess what
some players do it in the PUB queue as well. They purposefully tank PSR to stay low and beat on new players. Isn't it curious that the same people jumping up and down and clamoring about "evil groups" aren't doing it in regards to the solo queue?

makes me wonder if they aren't really hoping for solos to be separated so THEY have an easier time to farm new players and such because I know for a fact that none of the units (big or small) on our Marik site do this.