50 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

PJohann, on 07 January 2017 - 10:50 PM, said:

I'd rather prefer Leeroying myself and dying 2 minutes into the match than watching 15 minutes of gauss/ppc pokefest.

See? Too many players have very little patience. So easy to exploit that by picking them off as they charge foolishly one by one.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Focus on making good trades and using terrain to make your engagements more favorable, especially if you have weapons with shorter optimal ranges. Don't be afraid to move to get awkward angles on your enemy that forces them to reposition if they want to fire back. When someone calls for a push or you see the blob of allies moving-- don't be left behind. Move it or lose it.

It's a little more complicated than that but in solo queue most players aren't bright enough to do complex things.

Edited by Snazzy Dragon, 07 January 2017 - 11:28 PM.

[Novakaine]

Timing is the key.
Push when you have a kill advantage.
And when you do it all in or nothing.

[Lykaon]

Ruar, on 07 January 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

Looking for some help. I'm trying to figure out if it's worse to play hard charging with emphasis on moving up and taking the fight to the other team, or whether it's worse to sit back behind hills poking a few shots while ceding initiative.

Personally I think being timid is worse, but I see so many players who prefer to hide instead of fight so maybe they know something I don't.

Yes, I realize there is a time to trade and conserve armor... but at some point you either push or die. I'm talking about the times where I think it's a push or die moment and people don't push.

As a lone pilot both choices are terrible depending on what your team is doing at the time.

As a whole team, Absolutley seize the initiative as often as possible. And in the solo queue this goes double.

But then again I also feel that 12 players following a bad plan is better than nobody following any plan.

[Lykaon]

Novakaine, on 07 January 2017 - 11:47 PM, said:

Timing is the key.
Push when you have a kill advantage.
And when you do it all in or nothing.

In truth sometimes you push when you're down in kills.Especialy if you're team is being thinned out by long range attacks and ending up coming up short on the hidey pokie trades.

Obviously at that point your current plan of playing peek-a-boo trading shots is not working time to try something else or keep losing doing what you have been doing.

[Jman5]

I think I would prefer a timid teammate over one who tries to Rambo the enemy every game. With a timid teammate at least I can fall back and force him to fight with me, or use him as a speed bump while I flank around. With a charger, it's really hit or miss. Often you're just not in any position to take advantage of his charge, so you lose a valuable teammate for almost nothing.

[Fleeb the Mad]

I see these choices distilling down into active and passive styles of play. It also depends on if you're after personal stats or a team win. Those two are not necessarily the same.

Personally I find passive play loses matches more earnestly because it relies on the enemy team outright handing you the upper hand.

I find in simplistic terms it compares to the Monty Hall paradox. Given 3 doors, one of which contains a prize, you pick one. You have a 1/3 shot of winning. One of the doors is opened to reveal nothing. Two remain and you have the option of changing your mind. It's been mathematically and also empirically proven that taking the option to switch choices yields substantially higher odds of winning. That, however, requires taking action. A passive team will give up its ability to make a change and stay on its course. It will always have that same shot at winning as they did in the onset. Sometimes they will still win by luck of the draw, but most of the time they'll lose because they would not take action to improve their odds.

It's also easy to think that staying back and avoiding damage is better for the team. Problem is that's not a strategy that works if everyone on the team does it. Either not everyone is shooting, or the team is spread out over a broad area with lots of intervening obstacles. You can only gain advantage on the enemies that present themselves to unequal returns. If your team isn't set up where they can all provide supporting fire to each other, it's vulnerable to an aggressive enemy that can roll in and overwhelm individuals.

There's all sorts of anecdotes about how you can get burned pushing without enough support. Sure, it happens. Being aggressive is a risk. Sometimes it doesn't work. Generally though it's more difficult to coordinate a response to an aggressive action than it is to be part of one. It's slower to identify what the enemy is doing, where they are, and move to counter. In that time the damage can already be done.

I'd personally suggest being aggressive, though don't confuse that with charge into the enemy. Success is going to be measured in your ability to read your team and weigh the risk of going ahead. Rushing forward when a team's not moving is usually suicidal, but many players simply don't want to be the first guy in and they will follow someone who takes the risk of being on point. Sometimes that's all it takes to get the whole team moving.

Edited by Fleeb the Mad, 08 January 2017 - 12:50 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Being timid in the sense of not ever actively looking for shots, simply waiting behind a rock until someone comes is very bad. Being aggressive in the sense of just charging into an enemy team without thought of survival is very bad. I prefer teams that at least try to trade, since its possible to carry if your team is exposing themselves and presenting distractions (even if they arent hitting much), so the few actually good shots can get trades without being shot at by everyone because they are the only ones exposing themselves.

[Zolaz]

Good question OP, the answer depends on what Team Potato is doing.

[Iron Heel]

Not that being overly aggressive can't be a bad thing, but I have seen defeat stolen from the jaws of victory more by teams sitting pat and not pushing a numbers or tonnage advantage.
There's nothing more disappointing than having a 2 or 3 mech advantage and losing the match because team mates won't leverage that lead and close the deal.

[The Basilisk]

Hands down....beeing timid.
The reason for this is quite simple.
After all this is a game and a slow and painfull loss is less profitable ingame wise than a quick loss.
Additionally a quick win is doubble fortunate.

So get together and get into an attacking position without reckless charging. Eithter the enemy anticipated this and will get you while you are drawn out and the game is over after some minutes or you hammer the enemy and the game is equaly quickly concluded in your favor.

[jss78]

Literally timid is bad, cautious and patient can be good. The difference between the two is generally lost on those simple-minded Leeroys you get on VOIP/in-game chat.

Best of all is being able to rapidly transition between cautious and aggressive.

But if I had to choose, I'd take the over-aggressive guy over the one who doesn't push with the rest of the team.

[LowSubmarino]

Being dumb is worse.

The context is the deciding variable.

It always is and always will be.

There are timid teams that bunch up and see right in front of them and behind them two obviously split groups attacking them. Had that scenario on Mordor yesterday.

Me and a few other ppl say/write 'theyr split push one side = win gogogogo' and the team or 95 % of them stays there turning back turning forward trying to shoot at those surrounding them all at once while they could have easily crushed either one group.

They chose to stay there though.

We lost.

Most ppl shouting 'push push push' are big fat noobs.

They dont know that theyr talking about and randomly say weird stuff completly ignoring whats going on in front of them.

A blind stupid push means you all die.

You push when you know you have a big advantage. Thats a valid, swift strategy.

Most ppl dont really care about whats actually happening on the map though.

They feel strategically observing and waiting and reserving the initiative is boring and bad and just wanne wander about and shoot stuff.

Those teams always get annihilated as soon as theres a team with even the tiniest bit of skill and brain.

Those are the cannonfodder teams.

[Pika]

What's more important than both of these is communication. You can be passive or aggressive as long as everyone is on the same page and shooting in a coordinated manner - you can play either style.

That said, aggression is what wins games. A timid team will lose almost every time against a team that pushes and moves itself into aggressive positions. Pushing the river to the citadel on River City is one of the only ways you'll win on that map, poking from the city is a guaranteed loss. Nascaring and jostling for a superior position on Caustic is what wins that map, hunkering down and leaving a flank open is a loss - however a team that is able to communicate it's intent will do better, almost every single time.

Played a game on Frozen City where a certain two well known forum users darted across the clearing and right up into the enemy team while the rest of our team was still spread out and crossing the vally. The two who charged instantly got cut down and then blamed the team. Who was at fault here? If they had pressed Caps Lock and let the team know, people could have crossed sooner. If they had listened to others telling them not to bull-rush headlong into the enemy guns, they would have lived longer.

Moral of my story? Caps Lock is the second most useful button in the game, right after R.

oneda, on 08 January 2017 - 05:33 AM, said:

Me and a few other ppl say/write 'theyr split push one side = win gogogogo' and the team or 95 % of them stays there turning back turning forward trying to shoot at those surrounding them all at once while they could have easily crushed either one group.

They chose to stay there though.

We lost.

Task by name\lance and give a clear indicated target\grid. Is what I try and do, works better.

Edited by Pika, 08 January 2017 - 06:03 AM.

[Idealsuspect]

Ruar, on 07 January 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

Looking for some help. I'm trying to figure out if it's worse to play hard charging with emphasis on moving up and taking the fight to the other team, or whether it's worse to sit back behind hills poking a few shots while ceding initiative.

Depend if the team is full of potatoes or full of good pilots...

With potatoes it's worst to camp... coze they suck they will lose the poke trade game.
With good pilots, well they know when they will have to push or keep hold.

[Corrado]

timid turret turtling always lose. deathball push don't.

[Idealsuspect]

oneda, on 08 January 2017 - 05:33 AM, said:

Me and a few other ppl say/write 'theyr split push one side = win gogogogo' and the team or 95 % of them stays there turning back turning forward trying to shoot at those surrounding them all at once while they could have easily crushed either one group.

They chose to stay there though.

We lost.

Most ppl shouting 'push push push' are big fat noobs.

Dont expect anything from mwo players, 90% are just dirty casuals

[JediPanther]

I'd rather have an aggressive team mate rather than a timid chicken. The aggressive team mate will at least attack the enemy instead of run for cover all the time.I prefer the experienced team mates the most. Ones that will attack when given the chance but not leroy out at the enemy. Ever get into that rare solo skirmish match when you have all the experienced solo players? It's like everyone has a hive mind with super map awareness. The whole team goes after a targeted enemy like sharks at a feeding frenzy all trying to do damage to it. What's better is when they notice you under attack from an enemy mech and come to your aid.

The timid ones drag out those fifteen minutes slowly until the enemy gets wise and starts the curb stomp.

[Deathlike]

Jman5, on 08 January 2017 - 12:41 AM, said:

I think I would prefer a timid teammate over one who tries to Rambo the enemy every game. With a timid teammate at least I can fall back and force him to fight with me, or use him as a speed bump while I flank around. With a charger, it's really hit or miss. Often you're just not in any position to take advantage of his charge, so you lose a valuable teammate for almost nothing.

While I get that, but the biggest problem with that is that you're essentially using teammates as meat shields... which has its own sets of problems.

It's one thing to be helping your teammates out... it's another to use them to take hits because well... they are target dummies that allow you to live.

It's not ideal, but it blends between the line of being a teammate and not being a good one.

[BLOOD WOLF]

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."-George patton


quoted this on my clans forums but thought I bring it out. The most important Piece in FW is the player that knows how to make the moves to help his team win.

If I said on a drop call to clear them out in a grid or area, its expected that 12 players can figure out how to work together, move together, and fire together to be able to make that goal accomplished.

If not, then I know why the other team won.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 08 January 2017 - 08:42 AM.