63 replies to this topic

[Kaeb Odellas]

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

MWO is the only game/community I have ever encountered that actively wants to avoid the objective and complains if you attempt to achieve it.

No wonder the playercount is in the dumpster.

Then again, I guess I'm old; I come from an era where progress bars and payouts weren't the 'point' of competitive multiplayer video games, just victory over the opposing team.

Attempting to play the objective at the wrong time is one of the most common mistakes I see in MWO's objective modes. People don't seem to understand that securing the objective is much, much easier to accomplish with a numerical advantage, and the most reliable way to gain that advantage is by killing the enemy before he can kill you. 3 mechs taking all 5 points in conquest on the outset is a meaningless accomplishment when the rest of the team got steamrolled because they were outnumbered.

[MischiefSC]

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 01:22 PM, said:

Nor could they be, if the other team actually wanted to play a stompy robbit shooting game.

It is impossible to win by base capture unless the other team actively refuses to defend their objective. One 'mech does not capture anywhere near fast enough to accomplish it solo unless all twelve enemy units decide that they will not bother securing their defense point. And if a large portion of your team is there -- large enough for the cap speed to be anything appreciable -- then that is where the fight is. So if the other team isn't defending their point, it's because they have chosen not to fight.

This is true in Assault, it is true in Incursion, it is indirectly true in Escort because 'mechs that are shooting at the VIP are NOT shooting at your team, meaning you have the advantage to push in and beat them down. The only thing stopping you is your own steadfast refusal to fight unless you can poke them down with the absolute minimum amount of actual combat involved.

The only time this mythical "capping without a fight" happens is when both teams are NASCARing around like idiots, one of them makes it to the objective first, and the other team cannot be bothered to go back to engage them. They didn't get a fight because they didn't want a fight, not unless it was a fight they were 99% certain they couldn't lose no matter how badly they played.

Okay. I'm good with all that - you're talking about leveraging objectives to force a fight on your terms. That's what it's there for. If the other team wusses out and would rather lose to a base cap then confront you that's a reasonable loss.

I'm also fine with it in FW. I'm in KCom and we play very hard - I have no issue with people trying to beat us on objectives. Have had some awesome matches where we got suckered in to pushing all the way to the enemy base and they had 3 people try to cap us out. The others tried to fight a delaying action to ties us uo. Several of us ejected and respawned to clean tgem off but it was close. Have had a few matches like that.

The issue is with people cap rushing to sweep the win before any fighting takes place in QP. I see it periodically. Especially on maps like Canyon where you have to move a bit off from your base to secure a good map position. Polar and Alpine see it a lot too.

The point of an objective win is to pull a win against a team you flat out can't beat otherwise or to force a fight on your terms. Doing it to avoid a fight (which happens often enough) is weasely.

[Ruar]

MischiefSC, on 24 September 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

Okay. I'm good with all that - you're talking about leveraging objectives to force a fight on your terms. That's what it's there for. If the other team wusses out and would rather lose to a base cap then confront you that's a reasonable loss.

I'm also fine with it in FW. I'm in KCom and we play very hard - I have no issue with people trying to beat us on objectives. Have had some awesome matches where we got suckered in to pushing all the way to the enemy base and they had 3 people try to cap us out. The others tried to fight a delaying action to ties us uo. Several of us ejected and respawned to clean tgem off but it was close. Have had a few matches like that.

The issue is with people cap rushing to sweep the win before any fighting takes place in QP. I see it periodically. Especially on maps like Canyon where you have to move a bit off from your base to secure a good map position. Polar and Alpine see it a lot too.

The point of an objective win is to pull a win against a team you flat out can't beat otherwise or to force a fight on your terms. Doing it to avoid a fight (which happens often enough) is weasely.

Ultimately the problem is the objectives are placed in poor terrain so people don't want to stay in that area. It's PGI's fault for not thinking through their maps and objectives better.

[El Bandito]

I am more pissed about Incursion base rushes in CW. A chance to earn tons of cash and LP is gone from both sides. If the underdog team does it, it is understandable, but if the superior team does base rush instead of good old farming, it is kinda non-sensical.

[adamts01]

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

Then again, I guess I'm old; I come from an era where progress bars and payouts weren't the 'point' of competitive multiplayer video games, just victory over the opposing team.

Bigbacon, on 24 September 2017 - 12:06 PM, said:

so....the point is to win.

It's all about a good fight to me. A 12-0 stomp is like sparring with a girl scout, it's just not satisfying. Same with objective wins, there's normally zero challenge so there's little satisfaction with a victory, which is made worse due to the absolute lack of payout. This is why I only like Skirmish in solo que, I actually want to shoot stuff in a first person shooter, go figure.

[Trissila]

MischiefSC, on 24 September 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

The issue is with people cap rushing to sweep the win before any fighting takes place in QP. I see it periodically. Especially on maps like Canyon where you have to move a bit off from your base to secure a good map position. Polar and Alpine see it a lot too.

This is kind of my point though. Nobody is "cap rushing" in an assault 'mech. They're not doing it any heavy other than a Linebacker, either, and a Linebacker by itself isn't exactly a top-tier unit for fighting off defenders by itself.

By definition, you are closer to your base than they are. If they had a light or a really fast medium rush your base, you can easily respond with something similar or heavier LONG before they win by cap. The only way a "cap rush" works is if you don't even bother to defend at all, and that's all on you.

I actually had exactly this thing happen a few nights ago. Assault on Crimson Straight, and an Arctic Cheetah rushes to our base (we were on the industrial complex side). Everyone else is fighting on the two-level side of the saddle, I'm in a Huntsman at the tunnel side-entrance, I call out the attempt and tell everyone I'll handle it. So I go back there, I shove some SRMs up his tailpipe, and he bugs out because he knows he's not winning a 1v1 like that.

It's not hard. All you have to do is care about the objective even a tiny bit.

[Cato Phoenix]

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 05:35 PM, said:

By definition, you are closer to your base than they are. If they had a light or a really fast medium rush your base, you can easily respond with something similar or heavier LONG before they win by cap. The only way a "cap rush" works is if you don't even bother to defend at all, and that's all on you.

This is not often true. You'll have an entire team show up at the base, and sometimes on the other side the other team piling on just to even it out.

My point is not about the defenders - it's on the attackers. Why are they pushing a win? There's very little objectively beneficial in doing so. Yet it continues to happen fairly often.

If the objectives were rewarded appropriately- then you'd have impetus to complete them and also to defend them - but they aren't, so the best scenario is still fight -> kill -> win.

[Trissila]

How did "an entire team" just "show up at the base"? Surely your team realized that they should have run into the enemy by now, and they haven't, which means the bulk of the enemy force went around the side to your base? So your team turns around and engages them. If they made it all the way to your base, heavies and all, and your team didn't turn around well before then due to lack of engagement, then that was a grievous failure to read the match and you deserve the loss.

This goes back to my original post on this: it happens when BOTH teams are doing a mindless deathball and not giving one whit as to the objective. Even the tiniest bit of game knowledge informs you of the approximate time-to-engage on each of the game's map/mode combinations, and it's a pretty trivial extrapolation from "we have failed to encounter the enemy within the typical engagement window" to "they must have all gone to our base, because the only other option is that they all stayed back at theirs and that's even less likely".

Given all that, you all should have already been turned around before the enemy "showed up at the base", and moved to engage them. Even with the whole team piled into the capzone, it still takes some time (And even if they were: hello free, massive airstrike damage). So now you get the fight you want so much, it's just on a different bit of terrain than the one it's on 99.9999% of the time

[MischiefSC]

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 05:35 PM, said:

This is kind of my point though. Nobody is "cap rushing" in an assault 'mech. They're not doing it any heavy other than a Linebacker, either, and a Linebacker by itself isn't exactly a top-tier unit for fighting off defenders by itself.

By definition, you are closer to your base than they are. If they had a light or a really fast medium rush your base, you can easily respond with something similar or heavier LONG before they win by cap. The only way a "cap rush" works is if you don't even bother to defend at all, and that's all on you.

I actually had exactly this thing happen a few nights ago. Assault on Crimson Straight, and an Arctic Cheetah rushes to our base (we were on the industrial complex side). Everyone else is fighting on the two-level side of the saddle, I'm in a Huntsman at the tunnel side-entrance, I call out the attempt and tell everyone I'll handle it. So I go back there, I shove some SRMs up his tailpipe, and he bugs out because he knows he's not winning a 1v1 like that.

It's not hard. All you have to do is care about the objective even a tiny bit.

I was literally in an identical map and said 'we need to get someone fast back to base' and.... nobody would go. I was in an Annihilator. Watching our lights, one running around trying to leg an Awesome in the water, the other trying to poke people from outside range with SPLs on his Cheetah from the top at basement targets. Just ignoring it.

So we dominated on kills, lost on caps. That? That's fine. We lost because those players sucked.

However, the 2 or 3 lights who just sneak off to cap rush with cap acceleration on? That comes up and it's just... crappy. I've been on that team. I didn't want that win. They said they were just playing to the objectives. One bragged about being in a Raven with no weapons. Just TAG and NARC and cap stuff and stealth armor.

You absolutely can try to avoid the other team and just cap rush. It's a crappy game experience.

[arcana75]

The solution is to somehow time-lock the VIP. Save for skirmish the modes need some sort of guaranteed time duration before things can be concretely decided. In the cases of Escort and Domination, the former could do with the VIP appearing on the map later, not together with the drop, while the latter the Domination counter could do with a longer timer eg 3 minutes and a bigger circle. For Domination, the opposing team could be a no-show and the match would be over in 2 minutes flat without a single shot fired.

[Mystere]

Cato Phoenix, on 24 September 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

I keep seeing this over and over again.

Either base rushing on Assault, pile-driving the base on Incursion, or sniping out the VIP in Escort, but cranking down a win in some modes seems to be done quite often.

However, there's absolutely no reason to do this. You (and your teammates) will mark exceptionally low match scores, with pitifully low C-bill rewards to match.

Now people will probably clamor: "But I'm playing the objective!" . I get it. I know what PTFO is, and like winning games, but a win without rewards is essentially meaningless. I'd much rather smash the opposing team and then work the objectives, or do it slowly. Just about the only time to push the objective win, in my opinion, is if you're going to lose by any other circumstances or if its such a close match that you need to make the outcome certain.

And for those stats-centric folk: while a quick win might bump your WLR improve marginally, but really push your match score to the dumps. I don't know - I guess some people care about WLR but it's a pretty meaningless stat to me, given you're often finding yourself in the potato fields in PUGlandia no matter what.

Well, I personally find wins a better stat than match score. The former is real. The latter is just a made up number.

Bombast, on 24 September 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

it's Reds fault, not yours.

At least this person gets it.

Trissila, on 24 September 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

MWO is the only game/community I have ever encountered that actively wants to avoid the objective and complains if you attempt to achieve it.

No wonder the playercount is in the dumpster.

Then again, I guess I'm old; I come from an era where progress bars and payouts weren't the 'point' of competitive multiplayer video games, just victory over the opposing team.

And another one who does.

Maybe there really is still hope for humanity.

Edited by Mystere, 24 September 2017 - 08:04 PM.

[Mystere]

Cathy, on 24 September 2017 - 12:09 PM, said:

Why there should be bigger pay outs for objectives and less for damage/kills

Well, as a founder, I think you know very well why pay outs for objectives are low these days.

[Requiemking]

Mystere, on 24 September 2017 - 08:07 PM, said:

Cathy, on 24 September 2017 - 12:09 PM, said:

Why there should be bigger pay outs for objectives and less for damage/kills

Well, as a founder, I think you know very well why pay outs for objectives are low these days.

Hint: it involves a lot of whining from certain groups of players who absolutely, positively should under no circumstances ever be listened to.

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 24 September 2017 - 12:52 PM, said:

I'm a big fan of winning.

However, which is better - a hard fought victory in a match that is talked about long after and for which toy were richly rewarded

Or

The other team didn't show, you win by default and nobody gets any bonus pay, the fans amble out muttering that you guys couldn't have beaten the other team if they hadn't been held up.

Both are a win. One is way more satisfying than the other.

Objectives exist to force a fight a prevent turtling. At the time they originated poptarting was king and teams would take high ground/best cover and just turtle, poptarting anyone who came into range. Objectives stopped that. It was never intended as a way to avoid shooting stompy robbits in a stompy robbit shooting game.

Guess what? No matter what rationale people utter to defend their refusal to play for objectives, one simple truth cannot be disputed whenever one team wins via objectives:

Bombast, on 24 September 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

it's Reds fault

[Mystere]

Ruar, on 24 September 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

Especially when trying to win meant playing unfavorable terrain for two out of three options.

Damn! Whatever happened to rising to the challenge? <smh>

[Mystere]

Ruar, on 24 September 2017 - 04:38 PM, said:

Ultimately the problem is the objectives are placed in poor terrain so people don't want to stay in that area. It's PGI's fault for not thinking through their maps and objectives better.

I actually think that is one of the extremely rare occasions of their genius .... assuming it was all intentional, of course.

El Bandito, on 24 September 2017 - 05:25 PM, said:

I am more pissed about Incursion base rushes in CW. A chance to earn tons of cash and LP is gone from both sides. If the underdog team does it, it is understandable, but if the superior team does base rush instead of good old farming, it is kinda non-sensical.

Tsk! Tsk!

Cato Phoenix, on 24 September 2017 - 05:48 PM, said:

If the objectives were rewarded appropriately ...

You're a founder. You should know why they are not.

Edited by Mystere, 24 September 2017 - 08:30 PM.

[Insanity09]

On the other hand, objective wins, base rushes particularly, tend to be very fast. Rather than whining about not being able to get your kills/damage, look at it as an opportunity to quickly move on to the next match.

More frequent matches means more frequent payouts. Even if they are lower individually, they can still add up fast. That's why there is a win bonus in the first place. Not every game has that.

QP seems to be where most of the quick wins happen, and the QP wait times are usually very low, <1 min. I play another game where the equivalent of QP matches often take 4-5 min to start up.
1 min is a small fraction of match time, so a quick win makes good sense.

Not that people will ever see it that way in a million years. Anyhow...

You want payouts? Greed ftw? Okay.
I have often suggested a victory bonus based on the number of enemy mechs still active. The idea is that match score, xp, and cbills would be boosted based on what you would normally get for an assist. That number gets multiplied by the number of enemy mechs remaining alive at the end of a match.

So, for example, if your team base rushed and got only two kills, leaving 10 alive, every single player on the winning team would get the equivalent of 10 assists added to their payouts (again, match score, cbills, and xp).
Problem solved, objective wins become meaningful and useful.

[El Bandito]

Mystere, on 24 September 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

Tsk! Tsk!

Hey, all the time spent on queuing and waiting in lobby needs to pay itself off. Otherwise, even victory is hollow.

Edited by El Bandito, 25 September 2017 - 01:26 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Speaking of group queue only:

The only times I worry about the opposing team trying a "quick win" via incursion base rush, or escort assassination (nobody it seems anymore, caps on assault right away even when they could; and conquest capping doesn't count as it is never a "quick" way to win) is:

1) Incursion on Tourmaline, some opposing players are ALWAYS going to try a base cap; and
2) If the opposing team has more than 4 or so of a well recognized team.

As to the later condition, I think better teams do this not because of some ego driven need to win at all costs, or some ill-conceived desire to get low payouts and low scores. Rather, I think they do this cuz they're bored.

[Asym]

And, now we know why PGI is headed to Solaris.....

Kind of like playing Doom with red and blue Robots in a small dungeon where all you do is shoot at anything that moves....

If that happens, well, we'll lose a portion of the non-existent MWO population that "wants to think", wants real teams and wants to "try and win" by outsmarting the bad guys......

Oh gosh, I forgot ! Most of you only want to destroy mechs and accumulate damage no matter the cost ! Oooops, here, and I thought MWO is advertised as a "teamwork" required game? Remind me of that as I'm being destroyed in the Big Yellow circle in a Domination match where I can see the Heavy and Assault mechs, hiding behind cover, laughing their butts off as the pieces come off my Nova and I end up with 50 damage and the "hero's" wait till the very end to decimate or be decimated (and then, find fault with everything)......

Good form lads.....jolly good form.