465 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Bud Crue, on 09 August 2017 - 08:18 PM, said:

Now excuse me. I need to go convince my TEAM (not platoon, not company, but team...as in a team that plays a god damn game) that we all need to start playing CW again so we can spawn camp the f*** out of the people who think this stompy robot game is a proxy for real life war.

By all means. As I've said, it's up to the player/team on if they perform the tactic.

I was merely mentioning that, as this is a game, we should be seeking balance and fun game play. As such, we should also discuss it, and how things may be altered to improve the overall game play. Not every idea will be good, but it's worth talking about at least.

For the record, it was someone saying "this is war, and killing off reinforcements before they become a threat is a legit strategy of war". Though, I agree, I was mentioning that this game isn't war... It's a game. As such, if spawn camping is a serious problem, than we should discuss why it's a problem and make suggestions as to how it could be address. (Maybe PGI is listening.)

Personally, I don't think it's as big a problem as some people make it appear, but it can be a problem. The biggest issue presented so far, and I agree with it, is that you can't even react while in the dropship, and while you are falling out of the dropship. That moment can be really frustrating, as you can be damaged/nearly killed/killed before you can even react or control your mech at all. Getting to the dropzone I don't think is as much an issue as not being able to even react.

[Leggin Ho]

James Argent, on 09 August 2017 - 11:16 AM, said:

Sorry if lights don't want to fight like heavies to make it 'convenient' for you to kill them. If you're 'wasting time' chasing them you brought the wrong mechs to fight a fourth wave.

My point since you seemed to miss it is that after I've already beat down one or more waves from the other team why should the system just up and move them from where I've already had to move across the map (some maps that's well over 2 K) just to have to track them down again or all them to use it to rush and cap a base because i pushed out to engage them and won the engagement.

[Leggin Ho]

Mycroft000, on 09 August 2017 - 02:46 PM, said:

For everyone who has complained about lights running away and hiding, you can't call spawn camping a legitimate tactic, and evasion(assuming they're not powering down for the remainder of the match) an illegitimate tactic.

Removed the rest to cut down on the wall of text but here's the rest of the rule about non participation to consider....

The use of the shutdown mechanic or avoiding contact with the enemy under the following situations may be classed as an act of non-participation, subject to evaluation and moderation actions by Support services:

• Ceasing to meaningfully contribute for the remainder of the match if you still have support equipment, useful modules, or weapons (with any necessary ammo) available. Losing your primary weapon is not an acceptable excuse for hiding and/or shutting down if you still have a secondary weapon, a support-based item such as a TAG, or a consumable module available for use.
  
• Running out the clock, or needlessly extending the duration of the match, in cases where doing so will not assist you towards victory.
  
• Running out the clock or needlessly extending the duration of a Faction Play match in an attempt to keep a particular group or Unit in the current engagement for as long as possible, in cases where doing so will not assist you towards victory, is not considered an acceptable tactic.

[Tesunie]

Leggin Ho, on 09 August 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

My point since you seemed to miss it is that after I've already beat down one or more waves from the other team why should the system just up and move them from where I've already had to move across the map (some maps that's well over 2 K) just to have to track them down again or all them to use it to rush and cap a base because i pushed out to engage them and won the engagement.

It's called "Tactics". Often, if a drop zone is too hot, a Dropship wont drop there. They will go to an alternative drop zone instead. This is to prevent the ship from being shot down as well as provide safety to those who are disembarking.

It would be the same drop zones (as far as I'm discussing it). Just, the mechs would now drop in as safe of one as possible.

It makes sense to me, as well as solves several problems with a single solution. It's something that (technically) can already be done in game. So... I don't exactly see your issue so much. Most of the spawns are still relatively close to each other. Also, this would solve "hesitant" groups who wish to use their spawn's dropships to their advantage (another common problem/complaint), as they no longer would be able to reliably do so. No more than the enemy could reliably camp a single spawn.

Two common complaints/problems, a single concept that could approach both.

[Leggin Ho]

Oh I get what your saying, it's one more of the silly things PGI put in that if your getting beat 40 to 8 those lights can still cap your base to win, makes no sense to me, however it's there and I don't think they system should just automatically move them as far from the enemy team that's already traversed the distance to engage them because they are too scared to leave their spawn or hope for the extra weapons the drop ships provide them to rush in and be able to win with nothing to engage them at all.

You have spoken about the changes made to stop the gen rushing and I remember some my team even did it on Boreal once in less than 3 mins from drop, was that fun, not really but it worked so why did PGI change it? The whole base capping in Assault mode to stupid to me, we have adapted and usually make sure it's being watched, know why, because we've already had teams refuse to engage with the entire purpose of base capping. Fun for them, maybe since they get a win, but annoying for those of us that sit in lobby wanting to actually shoot things in drop and not just rush in to the base and sit there to 90 seconds to record a win.

We both know of teams that still do nothing but gen and base rush and use all those quirks you like to mention while ignoring the enemy team, yes they lose 2 or 3 waves and win the drop, but they do next to no damage and if I wanted to shoot mechs that don't bother shooting back as they run past me I'd just drop into training grounds.

You guys are looking at this issue and trying I'll give you that, but it still boils down to teams are getting spawn camped because they are camping at on in their spawn to begin with, so why add a mechanic that rewards them for doing that by moving them away from the attackers that have already walked the map to even get to engage them in the first place?

[Wing 0]

Mycroft000, on 09 August 2017 - 02:46 PM, said:

For everyone who has complained about lights running away and hiding, you can't call spawn camping a legitimate tactic, and evasion(assuming they're not powering down for the remainder of the match) an illegitimate tactic.

For those who don't understand that games can and should evolve when a particular tactic becomes unhealthy to the game need to look at examples like Magic the Gathering. It is a game that has inexplicably thrived despite being a massive money pit because the developers practice good game design. They alter the most current "mode" of the game every few months by releasing new components to the game. In the most "advanced mode" sanctioned form of the game, they have restrictions on many parts of the game that eliminate certain paths to victory,

If a game is going to have true longevity, it needs to be constantly examined to make sure that all involved are able to enjoy themselves.

Trying to stand on the argument that this is "war" is inherently flawed as well. If that were truly the case then the code of conduct would need to be altered to allow for delaying tactics. Sacrificing oneself to slow down a more powerful force in war and allow other forces to achieve victory elsewhere is considered valiant and worthy of awards like the Congressional Medal of Honor. I don't condone the tactic, but if you claim spawn camping is completely okay because it "allows everyone to move on to the next match" while also claiming that keeping KCom in a match and delaying them from achieving another victory(which would help your allies in other matches tilt the tug of war in their favor) then you're being disingenuous both with yourself and with everyone else.

Per the code of conduct, you are allowed to power down if you have no weapons and have superior numbers and are trying to secure a victory by getting killed.

Am I obligated to power up and let the enemy kill me in a situation where:

I have no weapons
My team had superior numbers when I powered down
I am unable to see the kill counts while powered down and am unsure of the status of the match
The enemy team ends up securing the kills required to end the match

Technically the answer is yes. Why is the answer yes? It's because delaying is considered an abuse of a game mechanic and as such something that detracts from the fun of the rest of the players involved with the match.

That is why there are those of us who want a solution to spawn camping. Not because we're all scared of getting killed, we're not, I die in 3 or 4 mechs in nearly every match I drop in. We want a solution because the solution would add more fun and strategic depth to the game, not less.

If you truly believe that any match that ends in spawn camping was decided early on, and are confident that you would win without spawn camping then you should do so in the spirit of sportsmanship. If on the other hand you think that giving the enemy even the slightest chance of a comeback is completely and in all ways unacceptable, then you didn't play enough little league as a kid(at least little league of my era, we did keep score) because you weren't taught to be a good winner, or a good loser.

You've come to the wrong place kid. Maybe you should go some where else.

Ceasing to meaningfully contribute for the remainder of the match if you still have support equipment, useful modules, or weapons (with any necessary ammo) available. Losing your primary weapon is not an acceptable excuse for hiding and/or shutting down if you still have a secondary weapon, a support-based item such as a TAG, or a consumable module available for use.

Running out the clock, or needlessly extending the duration of the match, in cases where doing so will not assist you towards victory.

Running out the clock or needlessly extending the duration of a Faction Play match in an attempt to keep a particular group or Unit in the current engagement for as long as possible, in cases where doing so will not assist you towards victory, is NOT considered an acceptable tactic.

Disliking a map or game mode or attempting to preserve a player statistic such as Kill/Death Ratio are NOT acceptable excuses for non-participation.

Ive already gotten 2 idiots in deep **** since they been doing this every single time on us and now they are somewhere is **** space not able to play mwo because of it. If you are among those who ***** and not willing to try and fight then get out of here. Most of these posts Ive been seeing from this thread has been a ***** waste of time reading. Posts being made here by players who are not even playing Faction play actively and are bitching of getting murdered by active teams who play on daily basis.

If I was a moderator, I would've laid a forum smack down on this thread and sent it to the abyss but I don't. however; I am going to request a lock on this thread since most of the idiocy seen in this thread is irrelevant.

[Mycroft000]

Leggin Ho, on 09 August 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

Code of Conduct excerpt

Notice I did say evasion, not hiding to delay. Evading while still attempting to do damage is in line with the Code of Conduct.

[James Argent]

It's not a silly thing to capture the base, it's what you've been ordered to do. The silly thing is to go so far off mission to farm kills that you LET the base get capped while you were too far away to react to it being captured. Skirmish is only the secondary way to win any match except for Skirmish matches. You seem to expect to be able to limit the terms of an Assault match's resolution to the secondary goal, and complain when someone from the other team decides to have a heroic moment of their own by meeting the match's primary goal.

Yes, everyone loves destroying enemy mechs...but when that's clearly only happening in a single direction, you can't fault someone on the other team for attempting to gain a victory by taking advantage of your team's target fixation and overextension into their spawn point. You may have played better, but you still got outplayed.

[Carl Vickers]

Please let a Moderator close off this topic, please.

[Aramuside]

live1991, on 21 June 2017 - 07:46 PM, said:

So you just wait till your out of that range and set up there?

In fairness that would allow the defenders to reorganise and come out together rather than being shot IN the dropship even before they finish dropping.

So many sad people in this thread defending tactics like that.

[Jaroth Corbett]

Mycroft000, on 09 August 2017 - 06:16 PM, said:

One other note, on the equating of this game to war:

https://en.wikipedia...eva_Conventions

An argument could be made that any pilot who is not able to shoot back is technically not participating in the hostilities.

Yes it is not ACTUAL war but the game is based on it so you trying to make that point is silly. The fact remains this is not a snowboarding simulator this is a game where one side is trying to destroy the other side. Since you keep moving the goal posts by asking for proof of something saying you will back off then getting the proof & not backing off, this is what people see when they click the GAME link up top i.e. the official description of MWO by the people who make it:

Quote

MechWarrior Online

The battlefields of the 31st century are perilous, dominated by mechanized units known as BattleMechs. Piloting these advanced war machines are the most elite soldiers the galaxy has ever known. To most, they are known simply as MechWarriors.

I bid you good day sir.

Edited by Jaroth Corbett, 10 August 2017 - 04:57 AM.

[Tesunie]

Jaroth Corbett, on 10 August 2017 - 04:56 AM, said:

I bid you good day sir.

That is game description. Something that is suppose to be catchy and draw people into the game to play it.

I'll make an example here. Anyone familiar with Babylon 5? In that, they had an Earth/Nimbari war. In that war, the humans stood no chance and only had one victory against the Nimbari, destroying only a single starship. If a game was made about it, and it was PvP, it would have descriptions of the war, and the desperate losing battle for Earth. However, they would have to make Earth Destroyers equal to Nimbari ships if it was a PvP game, so people who play as Humans would be able to stand a chance. Otherwise no one would play the "losing" side, especially if mass swarms of Earth ships was useless against even a single Nimbar ship...

My point is, no matter how many times battle or war may be used in the descriptions, and no matter what the "lore" might say, every game that has player vs player options must be balanced and seek balance. Sure, the game may be based upon the concepts of a fictional war and battle technologies, but that doesn't change the fact it is still very much still a game. As such, it's primary concern should be "is this fun", not "eh, it's war. Who cares if it's fun". Don't know about you, but it isn't "fun" to be killed before I can even do anything, where I may as well walk about from the [user input device] because it's about as effective. (This is also the reason why Flamers can't push you over 100% heat threshold and stop at 90% heat, to prevent "stun lock", which also isn't fun to play.)


Just for the record, I am not here to try and invalidate spawn camping, nor am I complaining about it happening completely. As has been pointed out numerous times already, it's permit-able within the current game and code of conduct. It will always have a legitimate strategic advantage. That doesn't mean we can't discuss it, and even consider ways to make it more challenging/difficult to pull off successfully. Just like how the Omega was altered to make it more difficult to destroy for game balance, spawn mechanics may also need to have a look at for better game balance and fun.

There are many possible suggestions and topics to discuss within how we can approach this possible problem. We should consider as many different ideas as people suggest, and talk about how they might have an impact within the game. (Though the thread title probably could be altered to better support such a topic.)

[Grus]

Lovas, on 09 August 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

Grus thinks he is one of the big boys.

may not be one of the "big boys" but you would be foolish to ignore me on the battlefield.

[Grus]

Pat Kell, on 09 August 2017 - 04:26 PM, said:

Marquis said it very well and I thank him for that. The issues isn't that you were able to do 700 damage in one light mech while two waves of your teammates died, it's that while 2 waves of your friends died, you didn't do all you could do in order to help them do a little better. You sat on the edge of the engagement and pecked away at us while we barreled into your teammates. If you would of been in a much heavier mech and standing toe to toe with your teammates, you could of done 3-400 damage AND allowed your teammates to do maybe another 100 pts of damage each. This occurs because as a light on the edge of the engagement, we often times will just strafe you with lasers to get you to go away and then immediately refocus on your team. If you would of been in that scorch, right up front, we would of needed to spend much more attention to you right off the bat which would of allowed some, if not all of the rest of your teammates live longer. I may be being too harsh when I call people who do this armor farmers as I think they honestly believe they are doing the right thing for their team but I am telling you right now that they are not. They are allowing us to focus on fewer mechs at a time. Marquis is right, lights in the first wave are the absolute lowest priority and I have put standing orders out there not to even call them out if they are behind us. Whoever is in the back is supposed to just turn around and either kill them or chase them off and resume the push.


Lights can be effective only if the enemy allows themselves to squirrel after them or if they sacrifice themselves for their team by being an enormous distraction. I actively work to prevent this so when you are in your light, sitting on the edge of the engagement, we are actively ignoring you. The best thing you could of done was charge right into the middle of us and try to get as many of us as possible to shoot at you and either miss or hit each other. Yes, you will die and you will likely die doing very little recorded damage. But think of what you can accomplish. You can get the enemy team to shoot themselves. You can get 6+ mechs shooting at you, raising their heat status and making it more difficult for them to fight the heavier mechs that are nearby and you can disrupt an enemy death ball if things go really well. Each one of these things can absolutely tip the balance of a fight to your favor, provided your team takes advantage of it. It's difficult to do when your team is not communicating but it can still be done. Just sit back and watch and as soon as they brawl is about to commence, just dive in man. If the timing is right, it can throw off the whole engagement, too soon and you die quick, too late and everyone just ignores you till the end. Practice doing it and you will start to get a good sense of when you should just dive in. The key here is to stop thinking about what is going to allow you to do better and start thinking about what you can do that will help your team do better.

Also...Patricia...really?

point taken, and just like in comedy, timing is everything.
And yes, really you're one of my favorite pilots to shoot at. Well right up there with Justcallme ASH.

And I say it with love.

[Commander A9]

What is an attacking force to do if the opposing force uses their spawn zone as a platform from which to fire upon the enemy?

[MischiefSC]

So many attempts to strawman and segue.

It's not complicated. If you push away from your dropzone (as you absolutely should) you'll respawn with enough time to group up with your team before the attackers get there. You can end up losing 48-18 and never get spawncamped. Players get spawncamped because they wanted the sense of safety the dropships provide or they were simply too scared to push forward. Regardless of the reason they played too close to their own dropzone and functionally forced the other team to come there to fight.

The damage I take from dropships is often more than I take from the other team; it would be to my benefit to have no fear of dropship fire and functionally force the other team to march into my prepared firing line, which is exactly what the 'protect the DZ' idea would do. I could easily farm out matches 48-0. It would just delay matches and make the situation for the other team far, far worse.

It happens because teams and players make bad choices and try to play FW like QP and because the game has respawns. If the game has respawns then the game will have people getting killed where they respawn at if they play close to where they respawn.

The attempts to imply good sportsmanship means intentionally playing poorly or backing off to let the other team win. The hockey reference was exceptionally stupid. Please let me know when the following has happened:

1. When has a pro hockey team gotten out of the way to give the other team an easy shot 'so that they didn't feel like they never had a chance to win'.

2. When has a pro hockey team completely out-maneuvered the other team to get a clean shot at the net and then waited for the other teams goalie to get back into position so that they had a good chance to block it?

I could go on and on and on about how incredibly, absurdly and remarkably stupid such a blatant and manipulative misuse of 'good sportsmanship' this who line of argument is. Nobody is cheating, hacking or abusing anyone. Also the argument that this is anything like pro sports vs gradeschool kids is equally absurd and false. Nobody in FW is some elite untouchable, unstoppable god among men. There's no tricks or tech or mechs available to one group of players but not the others. All it takes is a few good choices instead of bad choices to totally turn a game around; the difference between a complete roll and suddenly having a match you thought you were winning turn completely around is just a couple of players sacking up and coordinating their teammates. Seen it happen plenty of times. The difference between winning and losing teams is a truly minimal amount of effort.

The assumption that everyone who's winning should start playing like the other team is full of incompetent, inept, incapable people who are totally unable to adjust or seriously fight back is also not just absurd but so contemptuous and insulting that if I played that way, if I played the game assuming the other team was an inept group of children who needed coddled and petted because they are incapable of getting better, rising to challenges or learning from their mistakes like the rest of us.

Sportsmanship is about treating people with respect and playing the game as it's intended to be played. That's exactly what playing hard and to win is. KCom has the most ridged adherence to good sportsmanship of any team I've played with - I'm a bit chatty in allchat. I like to joke and play and if the other team seems up for it even some good natured teasing and trashtalking back and forth. However I can not do that when playing with/as KCom because our tendency to win consistently means it's like to be mistaken for cruel or insulting remarks. We play, play hard and play to win and always assume the other team is going to play their hardest, adjust, adapt and put in their best effort to win right back at us.

That is exactly what good sportsmanship is. Play your hardest, assume the other side will too, show respect and a handshake at the end of the match. Treating the other player like an inept child who needs coddled and protected and their mistakes forgiven so they feel like they did well even if they didn't is a show of contempt I'm absolutely uncomfortable with.

As a side note when the other team (or someone on our own when playing with pugs) shows themselves to be a new player we always offer helpful advice and Pat has consistently and repeatedly spent his own valuable time reaching out to those people in private chats after matches or taken the time even in a match to patiently explain things to them and answer questions. Why?

Because that's good sportsmanship. Assuming the other player is a responsible, competent, capable adult who can learn and improve via experience (both good and bad) and advice if they are looking for it.

This is a team v team PvP game. FW is the section with no matchmaker, respawns and the most genuinely aggressive section that is the least forgiving (aside obviously from comp queue) of people playing selfishly or timidly. That's the game, that's how it's meant to be played. That's the sport in question around which good sportsmanship is actually being applied.

[Lucifaust]

OP,
What about the guys that sit in spawn and delay because they don't want to die? They could delay the end of the match for everyone and prevent the other players from getting into a better match. I realize this is a omfgijustgotspawnrekt rage thread, but spawn invading has its place in a well-functioning game. Besides, telling PGI it's non-negotiable isn't going to get them to do anything for you, genius.

[Mycroft000]

Lucifaust, on 10 August 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

OP,
What about the guys that sit in spawn and delay because they don't want to die? They could delay the end of the match for everyone and prevent the other players from getting into a better match. I realize this is a omfgijustgotspawnrekt rage thread, but spawn invading has its place in a well-functioning game. Besides, telling PGI it's non-negotiable isn't going to get them to do anything for you, genius.

That is both against the CoC and not what any of us who are presenting feasible solutions are suggesting or condoning.

[Mycroft000]

Mischief, if you have seen me use logical fallacies please call me out on them. I want to refine my arguments to be as cogent as possible.

[Tesunie]

Commander A9, on 10 August 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

What is an attacking force to do if the opposing force uses their spawn zone as a platform from which to fire upon the enemy?

One can push into a spawn if the enemy refuses to leave it, without actively camping the spawn.

Basically, if the enemy wont leave their spawn, push in and wreck face. Then, pull out before they start dropping again and let them reorganize. They still wont leave? Do it again.

Though, personal feelings aside, if a team is willingly camping their own spawn, they have no reason at all to complain when the enemy comes knocking and camps it in return. The enemy will go to where you are. If you camp your own spawn, you invite them to camp it as well in return.

MischiefSC, on 10 August 2017 - 03:42 PM, said:

It's not complicated.

If this was directed my statement/phrasing, I was more so remarking on how what can seem like a simple "fix" can have drastically unintended affects. "Oh, lets have less rewards when shooting enemies whom are in their spawn zone". Sure, that would prevent people using it as a C-bill grind, but then people might use it to penalize the enemy. Even my suggestion of "what if they were invulnerable until they hit the ground" concept might have some way to abuse it (besides the "how are they not taking damage even though I'm shooting them/strange shielding effect" question).

I'd also like to remark that, not always is spawn camping a result of a team intentionally not pushing from their spawns or not moving far enough away (although doing/not doing* each does greatly help your team and greatly reduces your chances of being spawn camped). I've been spawn camped (true, some time ago before the new spawn locations), where my team did try to push out, but we got swarmed before we could. (Doesn't happen nearly as often as it once did, showing that the new spawns do help prevent spawn camping to an extent.)
(*Okay, this phrase is getting confusing...)

So... Consider me in partial agreement with you. As an average, yes. You are correct. (I'll also admit now, I didn't read your whole post. Sorry. )