321 replies to this topic

[JigglyMoobs]

Cover is so essential since it's infinite armor. Only a highly coordinated push could trump fighting from cover. Even on offensive pushes I try to use cover to protect me during breaks in my firing and try to isolate enemy mechs I face using terrain.

[JigglyMoobs]

Now, if you really have to Leroy, lean in with your shoulders

https://youtu.be/tau-Td52S_Y

[Red Shrike]

I find that's mostly like in World of Tanks:

Spoiler

You sit behind cover, you peek out of cover and fire everthing that the heat scale allows, then move back into cover and wait for your lasers and/or ballistics to cycle while your heat drops, then you repeat the whole process.
What's even worse is that both sides take turns doing this. (First player 1 on team A peeks and shoots, then player 1 on team B peeks and shoots, then player 1 on team A again, etc.)

[Nightmare1]

Red Shrike, on 26 June 2016 - 01:37 AM, said:

I find that's mostly like in World of Tanks:

Spoiler

You sit behind cover, you peek out of cover and fire everthing that the heat scale allows, then move back into cover and wait for your lasers and/or ballistics to cycle while your heat drops, then you repeat the whole process.
What's even worse is that both sides take turns doing this. (First player 1 on team A peeks and shoots, then player 1 on team B peeks and shoots, then player 1 on team A again, etc.)

That is Lore though. I can't count the number of times pilots did this in the novels. "So-and-so fired his lasers and felt his heat spike sharply. He ducked behind a pillar of rock to hide from incoming missiles and give his Mech time to cool down."

Etc.

I really don't understand what it is you want out of this game. Use of cover is probably one of the most fundamental aspects of warfare. Starting in the 18th Century with the French and Indian War, cover started becoming more and more important on the battlefield as military strategists realized that an army decked out in red and/or blue and standing in the open, couldn't beat a foe who hid in the woods while wearing earth tones. That eventually led to trench warfare in the Civil War, which General Longstreet developed to deadly effect. This was then was brought to the world stage in World War I. World War II, Korea, Vietnam, etc. have all been wars where use of cover were critically important for equipment as well as for people.

...And we see that in the BT novels and the MW franchise too. So, why not MWO?

In fact, if you ever watch the documentary "World's Greatest Tank Battles," they detail the real-life use of cover by tank crews. Mechs are essentially walking tanks, so why should they be expected to forgo cover and ignore one of the most basic rules of combat?

Edited by Nightmare1, 26 June 2016 - 05:13 AM.

[Red Shrike]

Nightmare1, on 26 June 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

...And we see that in the BT novels and the MW franchise too. So, why not MWO?

I play RO2, where cover is everything. Difference with MWO is you die from a single bullet. In RO2 you're nervous about getting hit, in MWO however, you just shrug it off until your CT is red. And yet I see assaults shaking in their boots at the sight of a medium. Maybe it's the no-respawn thing or maybe it's just the player mentality.
Either way, the thrill from getting shot at while in cover in RO2 is simply not there in MWO.

You ask why not in MWO? IMO because it causes the battle to slow to a crawl and it loses the "big stompy robots" appeal because of it. I don't mind the usage of cover, I just wish people wouldn't rely on it so much.
Just look at the new Frozen City, everyone's too scared to take the fight to the riverbed in the middle and simply decide to lob large lasers at each other from behind buildings on the river banks. Eventually someone decides to close to short range, but that only really happens when both sides are moderately if not severely damaged.

Edited by Red Shrike, 26 June 2016 - 05:35 AM.

[Nightmare1]

Red Shrike, on 26 June 2016 - 05:33 AM, said:

I play RO2, where cover is everything. Difference with MWO is you die from a single bullet. In RO2 you're nervous about getting hit, in MWO however, you just shrug it off until your CT is red. And yet I see assaults shaking in their boots at the sight of a medium. Maybe it's the no-respawn thing or maybe it's just the player mentality.
Either way, the thrill from getting shot at while in cover in RO2 is simply not there in MWO.

You ask why not in MWO? IMO because it causes the battle to slow to a crawl and it loses the "big stompy robots" appeal because of it. I don't mind the usage of cover, I just wish people wouldn't rely on it so much.
Just look at the new Frozen City, everyone's too scared to take the fight to the riverbed in the middle and simply decide to lob large lasers at each other from behind buildings on the river banks.

That's an issue with player mentality and weapon balance though; not the fact that cover is available or necessary. In pug matches, nobody wants to push because they have no guarantee that anyone will follow. The group queue if very different though, with Assaults actually playing their role. You also see a lot of charges and open combat brawling.

Pugs hide. That's all they know to do. Groups attack, which is what you want from the sound of things. It comes down to trust and psychology. Pugs don't trust each other. Groups do. Because of that, groups can do things and thrive in situations where no Pug would dare tread.

[Johnny Z]

Red Shrike, on 26 June 2016 - 05:33 AM, said:

I play RO2, where cover is everything. Difference with MWO is you die from a single bullet. In RO2 you're nervous about getting hit, in MWO however, you just shrug it off until your CT is red. And yet I see assaults shaking in their boots at the sight of a medium. Maybe it's the no-respawn thing or maybe it's just the player mentality.
Either way, the thrill from getting shot at while in cover in RO2 is simply not there in MWO.

You ask why not in MWO? IMO because it causes the battle to slow to a crawl and it loses the "big stompy robots" appeal because of it. I don't mind the usage of cover, I just wish people wouldn't rely on it so much.
Just look at the new Frozen City, everyone's too scared to take the fight to the riverbed in the middle and simply decide to lob large lasers at each other from behind buildings on the river banks. Eventually someone decides to close to short range, but that only really happens when both sides are moderately if not severely damaged.

Frozen City isn't my favourite map, but that it promotes skirmishing(Long range poking and LRM's) before the battle starts is actually very well done.

I don't necessarily want to see a lot of Frozen City maps, but it is an excellent addition to the maps library.

A tunnel centric map, metro with super sky rises with long open avenues and tight back streets, and a few more generic forest, plains, desert maps would be excellent to see at this point, not to mention Solaris maps.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 June 2016 - 05:47 AM.

[SplashDown]

Triordinant, on 08 May 2016 - 04:12 AM, said:

PGI says TTK is too fast. End of story.

PGI says alot of things..and 95% of what they say,,then implement into game is pure fail.

[PhoenixFire55]

Red Shrike, on 25 June 2016 - 04:56 PM, said:

IMO Mechwarrior shouldn't be about corner peeking in the first place, that's a World of Tanks thing.

Nightmare1, on 25 June 2016 - 07:19 PM, said:

Never played WoT, so I don't know about that. I do know that I did a lot of corner peaking in the MW4 franchise though. I also know that, in every single situation I can think of, fighting from cover will trump fighting out in the open.

But here is the thing ... You remember the old Caustic map, right? It had minimal cover on the edges of the crater (i.e. where 99% of mechs were), so if you could flank the enemy there were completely in the open. Same way, when one of the teams decided to counter nascar with brawler builds it was a battle in the completely open space. Now look what they did to the map ...

People want some mech on mech action without corner peeking, thats fine. But imagine that we have a completely flat and open map ... Do you think your "mixed" builds would suddenly become effective? Or do you really think your TTK would improve? LOL

You can't fix whats not broken. Any simulator (ish) game will tend to replicate what happens in RL, and fighting from cover is what happens, focusing targets is what happens etc. The more crutches PGI adds catering for crybabies the worse the game becomes.

[PhoenixFire55]

Red Shrike, on 26 June 2016 - 05:33 AM, said:

You ask why not in MWO? IMO because it causes the battle to slow to a crawl and it loses the "big stompy robots" appeal because of it. I don't mind the usage of cover, I just wish people wouldn't rely on it so much.

So tell us what is this "big stompy robots appeal" then? You want to be able to stand under fire from 12 mechs for how long exactly?

You are controlling your pace of battle. You won't believe how fast the enemy will start running as soon as you flank them and start shooting their a$$es. Funniest thing is that they panic so often when it happens and start running right into the firing line they've been hiding away from in the first place lol.

For some mystical reason my battles are never static, maybe thats because I always choose to do something rather than sit in one spot, i.e. flanking, harassing or simply repositioning to draw attention / draw enemies away. Yeah, sometimes you are pinned down in one spot, but it happens like 1 time out of a 100, in most cases you are free to move wherever you want, so if your fights are static it is your own doing.

[Red Shrike]

PhoenixFire55, on 27 June 2016 - 01:34 AM, said:

So tell us what is this "big stompy robots appeal" then? You want to be able to stand under fire from 12 mechs for how long exactly?

Honestly, I don't. I'd much rather stand under fire from maybe 2 mechs while we all engage the enemy team and not just me.

What's my big stompy robot appeal?

PhoenixFire55, on 27 June 2016 - 01:34 AM, said:

For some mystical reason my battles are never static, maybe thats because I always choose to do something rather than sit in one spot, i.e. flanking, harassing or simply repositioning to draw attention / draw enemies away. Yeah, sometimes you are pinned down in one spot, but it happens like 1 time out of a 100, in most cases you are free to move wherever you want, so if your fights are static it is your own doing.

When I play Canyon (not of my own volition), the first 6 to 8 minutes are always the same: Everyone collects around the rock in the middle and I end up shooting at the occasional 'mech that pokes out of cover. Sure, I try to flank, but because the map is so small more often than not I get spotted and because I'm alone I get picked off by the enemy team.

Frozen city on the other hand is great for flanking and I love to flank there.

[PhoenixFire55]

Red Shrike, on 27 June 2016 - 02:06 AM, said:

Honestly, I don't. I'd much rather stand under fire from maybe 2 mechs while we all engage the enemy team and not just me.

So is there any in-game mechanics that prevent you (and your team) from doing it? Nope. You (and your team) choose not to do it, i.e. people is the problem, not something else.

Red Shrike, on 27 June 2016 - 02:06 AM, said:

When I play Canyon (not of my own volition), the first 6 to 8 minutes are always the same: Everyone collects around the rock in the middle and I end up shooting at the occasional 'mech that pokes out of cover. Sure, I try to flank, but because the map is so small more often than not I get spotted and because I'm alone I get picked off by the enemy team.

First of, I don't know how you guys do it, but 99% of my matches on Canyons are well over at 8 mins mark.

Second of, Canyons is one of the best if not the best map for flanking. It provides high vantage points with plenty cover and amazing firing lines as well as hidden approach along trenches.

Third of, there is NOTHING preventing you from NOT doing what "everyone" does. THAT is the difference between playing with PUGs and being one.

If you are flanking and getting picked off then you aren't doing it right. You either start harassing from the side and press on if opponents are weak enough or you dish out enough damage to make them go after you and lead them into your team. The only mechs that might have a problem on Canyons are slow non-JJ brawler assaults (i.e. Atlas). Anything else should have more than enough mobility and/or range to flank well.

Active players tend to lead their teams to victories while passive ones just drag their teams down. Its not always going to work, but unlike standing in one spot and getting murdered it sometiems does ...

[H I A S]

Quote

When I play Canyon (not of my own volition), the first 6 to 8 minutes are always the same: Everyone collects around the rock in the middle

Canyon is a great map to force movement by flank the enemy.
You can do this on most maps if u are in the right mech for it.

/e: me get rekt. Press F5 before submit a new post.

Edited by arivio, 27 June 2016 - 02:40 AM.

[Nightmare1]

PhoenixFire55, on 27 June 2016 - 01:24 AM, said:

But here is the thing ... You remember the old Caustic map, right? It had minimal cover on the edges of the crater (i.e. where 99% of mechs were), so if you could flank the enemy there were completely in the open. Same way, when one of the teams decided to counter nascar with brawler builds it was a battle in the completely open space. Now look what they did to the map ...

People want some mech on mech action without corner peeking, thats fine. But imagine that we have a completely flat and open map ... Do you think your "mixed" builds would suddenly become effective? Or do you really think your TTK would improve? LOL

You can't fix whats not broken. Any simulator (ish) game will tend to replicate what happens in RL, and fighting from cover is what happens, focusing targets is what happens etc. The more crutches PGI adds catering for crybabies the worse the game becomes.

You quoted me, but I can't figure out why. Nothing you said directly addresses what I said in the quote, lol. I'm guessing that you're agreeing with me though?

[PhoenixFire55]

Nightmare1, on 27 June 2016 - 01:09 PM, said:

You quoted me, but I can't figure out why. Nothing you said directly addresses what I said in the quote, lol. I'm guessing that you're agreeing with me though?

lol ... Yeah, just quoted the wrong post.

My point over here is that its the average player (or rather PUG) mentality that is responsible for peek-a-boo alphawarrior gameplay rather than the game itself. I think we seem to agree on that indeed.

[Kynesis]

A few quick (approximate) numbers from 2016 world championships - 32 8v8 fights on Canyon Network.

I mention these as these are all very competent players (nearly always) using the most meta builds in a controlled environment (ie the same map for each game).

Game 1 brawl starts at 6:26 and ends at 7:50 with all blues dead, 0 red dead

Game 2 brawl starts at 4:02 and ends at 4:59 with 6 blues dead, 3 red dead; 2 blue Jenners flee.

Game 3 poke starts at 2:12 and ends around 3:40
They chase from about 3:52 to 4:12 and brawl from 4:30 to 5:20 with 4 red dead, 7 blue dead; 1 blue Jenner flees.

Game 4 poke starts 2:30, brawl starts 2:35 and ends 3:50 with 7 blues dead, 5 red dead; 1 blue Jenner flees.

Game 5 light poke from 1:20, blue charge 2:20
At 3:00 6 total dead, at 3:38 3 blue dead, red team wipe (10 mechs dead in 38 seconds).

Edited by Kynesis, 14 July 2016 - 10:01 PM.

[Belacose]

Kynesis, on 14 July 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

A few quick (approximate) numbers from 2016 world championships - 32 8v8 fights on Canyon Network.

I mention these as these are all very competent players (nearly always) using the most meta builds in a controlled environment (ie the same map for each game).

Game 1 brawl starts at 6:26 and ends at 7:50 with all blues dead, 0 red dead

Game 2 brawl starts at 4:02 and ends at 4:59 with 6 blues dead, 3 red dead; 2 blue Jenners flee.

Game 3 poke starts at 2:12 and ends around 3:40
They chase from about 3:52 to 4:12 and brawl from 4:30 to 5:20 with 4 red dead, 7 blue dead; 1 blue Jenner flees.

Game 4 poke starts 2:30, brawl starts 2:35 and ends 3:50 with 7 blues dead, 5 red dead; 1 blue Jenner flees.

Game 5 light poke from 1:20, blue charge 2:20
At 3:00 6 total dead, at 3:38 3 blue dead, red team wipe (10 mechs dead in 38 seconds).

My first thought was 'way to necro, dude!', but, hey, there's already another thread of the same theme presently on the first page so why not?

I've watched all those 8 x 8 championship canyon match videos and judging by what the two hosts often are saying would make one think lots of those teams are not exactly the most competent. They also keep questioning the player's builds.

My favorite of those videos was the one where an unheard of team wrecked the team the hosts had touted as one of the best. Always fun seeing a so-called underdog team upend a "famous" vet team.

Btw, you kind of appear to be on a 10 posts sock puppet account to bump this thread? Don't even rank on the leaderboard with a single game played.

Edited by Belacose, 14 July 2016 - 10:44 PM.

[Nightmare1]

Good grief Charlie Brown! Why the necro???

[PhoenixFire55]

Nightmare1, on 15 July 2016 - 03:37 AM, said:

Good grief Charlie Brown! Why the necro???

Better than making a new topic about the same thing, no?
Plus, TTK is still fine where it is, so why not?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Don't mistake all team's in the tournament to be the best, there i's a reason divisions exist in MRBC, and it's not just to simplify the structure.