164 replies to this topic

[Davegt27]

Helsbane, on 13 March 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

Withdrawing to a superior defensive location that has the availability of air support and rapid reinforcement isn't cheating. It's simply using the available elements to your advantage while denying the enemy the benefit of same. It's a tactic, not a cheat, and not an exploit. It's simple good defensive judgement. This location > pretty much every other location, at least in certain situations.

I agree with Helsbane it’s a tactic

You’re not supposed to like the enemy’s tactics you’re just supposed to overcome them

I would be very reluctant to nerf tactics (PGI might think differently)

Each nerf starts a new round of crying

The first day of CW when a spider jumped on top of Omega I thought what a great idea now let’s get him

[The Dancing Joker]

Arguing about a tactic distracts PGI from developing the game. Stop bogging down PGI because you cannot adapt and overcome.

Dropships do not loiter for long. Push en masse and get the kill advantage. Withdraw when the dropships are inbound. Speed is life.

Join up with friends and communicate your tactics.

[Wuldain]

So people have been using this tactic for months, but because CWI has decided to not do CW until now it has to be changed so the special snowflakes who havent been practicing for months can not get their feelings hurt. It's not that hard to counter. And it's a valid tactic.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Strategies are cool. I'm by default for anything above "just go killemall" tactics.

Unfortunately, "hide in your drop zone" strategy in counterattack is too illogical for me to like. It straight up makes no sense AND it tips the advantage in a wrong direction (CW gamemodes are impossible to be made perfectly balanced because different objectives)

Wouldn't mind this "tactic" if it at least made sense it terms of logic. Unfortunately it doesn't.

The defenders abandoned their base and hid. They refuse to go out and engage the forces that now station in the base they suppose to defend. So they've lost right? Nope, they have 1 kill advantage after one of the clashes so now the (counter)attackers have to leave the base they were supposed to win back (and they did!) and go rush the enemy who refuse to defend its own base and resources because killcount. Not exactly a believable war simulation I would say.

Another basic stupidity of having this "tactic" available is that it is another thing making attacking and conquering planets actually easier than defending them. In a hypothetical situation of perfectly matched opposing teams, the attackers will always win the planet in the end, and that's a problem that plagued CW from the very beginning. In history, it always was easier to defend than to conquer, for thousand of reasons. For plausibility, CW should mimic that universal law of war.

Whether invasion mode is now easier for attackers (because destroy 4 immovable objectives using 48 expendable mechs and win) or defenders (because tons of turrets) is up for debate, but the counterattack mode significantly favours the invaders. Objectives make it easier to defend a mobile base you've set up half an hour ago than an actual base with walls, turrets and whatnot.

Simple solution - set up a big conquest-type cap zone in the back of the base. This zone grants (counter) attackers victory if it stays capped for over a minute. This cap would be a good indicator if the defenders are unable or unwilling to actually defend what they were supposed to defend.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 13 March 2016 - 12:44 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

dropships are overpowered

They dont prevent hopeless games from snowballing but they do create an ecological niche for spawn camping/hiding in certain circumstances


I still manage to get shot by the ******* dropship even when im not spawn killing

Edited by Kin3ticX, 13 March 2016 - 01:07 PM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Kieva, on 13 March 2016 - 10:16 AM, said:

Withdrawing to a defensible location is one thing. Withdrawing in to the Dropships auto-CT hitting LL roulette is not a good example of a defensible location. That seems entirely manipulative of a game mechanic meant to prevent lone mechs spawning from getting camped and killed.

When my team regained the lead in this match, we did not withdraw to our dropship. We used one of the gates as a choke point.

Also, the violation of the CoC that my group claimed, was exploitation.

So despite them using this unfair and overpowered advantage (exploit?), as you call it, you still managed to take the lead and prevail? Good for your unit. I fail to see the problem then. Your team was obviously superior. Seeing that, should your opponent just walk into your guns? Or should they try to use every strategy available to them to pull out a win?

[Leeroy Lazer Vomit Kerensky]

I got stuck with on a premade that demanded we do this on Hellbore yesterday. Told them it was "lame", was told "you want to win right". We got smashed lol, I was actually happy we lost. Guy told me team on comms decided so better do it. Not paying with that group again.

[MTier Slayed Up]

I don't really think it's that great of a tactic. Yeah, you get dropship support, but you're risking your next wave of mechs being out of synch, or worse, if you're on a map like Emerald, you'll have a lance of dead pilots. The con's outweigh the pro's in this case.

At the end of it though, I do find it funny that there isn't some sort of way without dealing with the dropship issue. You can set up a cliff with a gate and a time limit to exit the spawn (excluding DC's.) Pretty simple solution. Until then, either way, just accept the facts that it's viable and to work around it. No point in trying to make a debate out of it.

[Clownwarlord]

First off it is a true up strategy called defending. Now as for it though it only works on 2 maps that I can think of. Emerald Tiaga and Boreal Vault, because both these maps your team drops in the same location in an elevated position that can over look a wide area that the enemy is forced to come out into to get up and into the drop area.

As for a lot of other maps this strategy doesn't work in the drop zone because they break it up or the drop zone is just not a good defend-able position. So again this is all strategic and allowed through just knowing your maps.

[The Mecha Streisand]

So, tell me that there isn't some inherent tech limitation with the game engine or something...

Is it not possible to put the drop zones themselves under some sort of extended out-of-bounds status, where you have like, say, 40 seconds to get out or you blow up? Say, it's out of bounds altogether for Team A to be in Team B's DZ, and vice-versa. And Team A mechs have 40 seconds to get out of their own DZ, same for Team B and THEIR DZ.

Now, if THAT is too hard for the CryEngine to handle, then we've got bigger problems than spawn camping.

EDIT: Dropship OP. Got shot by my own dropship on Sulfurous Rift the other day. Why did it shoot me? Well, I had the distinct misfortune to be standing directly between one of its lasers and the enemy mech it was targeting.

SO WAS THE F***ING HILL (between the Dropship and its target), but that didn't stop anything.

The AI dude(s) needs to get on this concept of hard cover, and how his bots should NOT be trying to fire THROUGH it (or friendly mechs, for that matter).

Edited by The Mecha Streisand, 13 March 2016 - 08:21 PM.

[MechWarrior4023212]

If the team is so bad that it allows the other side to camp because it is getting hammered before that, then this means a quicker end to a very one sided match.

This is a good thing IMHO.

[Rushin Roulette]

Kieva, on 13 March 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

My interpretation of the Code of Conduct is that this is a violation of it's rules aforementioned.

If you are going to claim that it is against the CoC, then at least quote the full and unedited CoC passage you think that players like this are breaking. I personally can not see a single passage where this tactic is forbidden.

I do find this tactic lame and boring myself, but if they managed to get a kill lead, then it their job to keep it that way and not their job to make it easy for you to get your kill lead, especially if there is no reason for them to go back to your Omega zone.

[Karl Marlow]

Boo hoo. The enemy isn't lining up to be shot.

[sycocys]

Kieva, on 13 March 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

In my opinion something really... REALLY needs to be done to eliminate this tactic.

The solution is simple - you get rid of the re-spawn mechanic because it simply doesn't offer anything that actually improves the game.

[Der Hesse]

clownwarlord, on 13 March 2016 - 06:27 PM, said:

First off it is a true up strategy called defending. Now as for it though it only works on 2 maps that I can think of. Emerald Tiaga and Boreal Vault, because both these maps your team drops in the same location in an elevated position that can over look a wide area that the enemy is forced to come out into to get up and into the drop area.

As for a lot of other maps this strategy doesn't work in the drop zone because they break it up or the drop zone is just not a good defend-able position. So again this is all strategic and allowed through just knowing your maps.

And Hellebore Springs.
Indeed i see this tactic on Hellebore Springs more often then on any other map.

[habu86]

Der Hesse, on 14 March 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

And Hellebore Springs.
Indeed i see this tactic on Hellebore Springs more often then on any other map.

^^

If anything, I'd say Hellebore Springs has probably got the most easily defensible spawn points, if the spawn defenders are give time to set up. All other maps have at least two entrances, isolated spawns, or some combination thereof. Hellebore's spawn are set up in such a way that the spawn defenders can dig in behind a single chokepoint.

The tactic, aggravating though it is, is perfectly valid under the current game rules. What a lot of the people who try it tend to forget, however, is that, unless they are somewhat closely matched in skill with the spawn attackers, they're just going to get overrun and crushed regardless.

[Tom Sawyer]

Sigh another one of these threads.

So make it so if you stay in your drop zone longer than 1 minute the next incoming dropship takes your mech away and it counts as a kill for the enemy side. Or make some super turrets that can not be destroyed but will shoot ANYTHING that lingers for more than a minute in the dz.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

clownwarlord, on 13 March 2016 - 06:27 PM, said:

First off it is a true up strategy called defending. Now as for it though it only works on 2 maps that I can think of. Emerald Tiaga and Boreal Vault, because both these maps your team drops in the same location in an elevated position that can over look a wide area that the enemy is forced to come out into to get up and into the drop area.

As for a lot of other maps this strategy doesn't work in the drop zone because they break it up or the drop zone is just not a good defend-able position. So again this is all strategic and allowed through just knowing your maps.

The problem with this "true up strategy called defending" is that you're not defending what you're supposed to be defending. You're not fighting for your dropzone. You're not fighting for your mechs. You're fighting for your base. And the enemy is in your base. You abandoned it, left it to be destroyed, looted, dismantled, stripped clean of anything valuable. They could just set up new generators and turn the planetary back on while you're "defending". By any logic, you failed. Yet according to the artificial game objectives you're "winning". If my country invades your country and all your soldiers abandon the cities and hide in the mountains, refusing to engage the enemy, who is winning the war?

I want community warfare to resemble warfare. That's it. All dirty tricks are fine as long as they would make any sense in a real war. Defending your facilities by abandoning them doesn't

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 14 March 2016 - 03:45 AM.

[Koshirou]

The Mecha Streisand, on 13 March 2016 - 08:18 PM, said:

Is it not possible to put the drop zones themselves under some sort of extended out-of-bounds status, where you have like, say, 40 seconds to get out or you blow up?

It probably is, but it would just mean the return of spawn camping with a vengeance, since respawning players would be forced out of their DZs without being able to group up. And of course, it would repeatedly kill anybody who disconnected for any length of time.

Game modes which rely on killing all enemy units as either a victory condition or an ending condition will always produce annoying tactics of this type. The only solution is to fundamentally change Counterattack.
That predicament is also the reason why, in spite of Conquest and Assault usually turning into de facto Skirmish fights, I still prefer these game modes to actual Skirmish - you can end them no matter how determined that wall-jumping ACH pilot is to drag the game out to the full 15 minutes.

[STEF_]

The easier fix to this is to consider the dropzone like out of bound area (1 minutes after being dropped, if you are still there, you pop)

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 14 March 2016 - 04:06 AM.