95 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Kiran Yagami, on 31 May 2018 - 12:39 PM, said:

Or it could just be that wasting your time running around the map until 4 of your teammates are dead is a losing strategy. Yep, I think that's it.

Not even close.

Scapegoats, people really love them.

Edited by Mystere, 31 May 2018 - 12:47 PM.

[Xiphias]

Mystere, on 31 May 2018 - 12:05 PM, said:

Winning an 11 vs 12 fight is something that is nowhere close to insurmountable. Fights have been won with much worse odds.

The fact that one team has an entire lance or more wiped quickly is an indication of something much worse. In a quick 11-0 wipeout, the blame is 100% somewhere else. The player who decided to go solo in such a situation is nothing but a mere scapegoat of the up to 11 others who obviously did something much much worse. <shrugs>

I disagree on the point that the blame is 100% somewhere else. The responsibility of winning a match is on the whole team. Every player contributes to that. If you run around long enough for 4 players on your team to die before you even engage you are definitely part of the reason your team lost. Maybe only 5%, maybe more/less, but still you contributed to the situation.

Mystere, on 31 May 2018 - 12:45 PM, said:

Not even close.
Scapegoats, people really love them.

While I agree that people like scapegoats to blame and that it's highly unlikely that the OP could have done anything that would have won an 12-0 match. That said, what the OP is doing is a losing strategy that is going to result in losing other matches that might have been close/winnable if they continue to use the same bad strategies. There's definitely fault to be found in how the OP is playing and they should address it as it's the one consistent factor that they can control in their matches.

[Jman5]

If two or more people are consistently dying before you get into position it means you're taking too long too get into position.

[50 50]

It's only a 'poor choice' if it hasn't been executed in enough time and then if the resources used are not sufficient enough to make it effective.

In that regard we can say that the choice to flank and harass the enemy is a good option, but you do need to make sure you can get into position within a sufficient time frame and then bring enough firepower to make it effective.
The build described is better suited for sniping and while we might understand the reasoning behind using the Gauss, harder to pin point and heat efficient, it is lacking enough punch to have an effective impact.

Ideally when flanking you would want to hit the enemy body hard enough that they are forced to pay attention.
In a hit and run, you would be wanting to draw mechs away from the main body to 'chase the squirrel' in an attempt to then give your team the numerical advantage.
Or it could be to get in among the enemy and disrupt their line enough that the main body of your team can again take advantage of the situation.
In these scenarios, should the enemy ignore or be oblivious to your flank, you want to be able to take down, cripple and damage as many mechs as possible so that it creates an advantage.

With a sniper build, it would be to try and force the enemy to move and expose themselves to fire, try and negate their cover or negate an advantage they might have from their position. This is also something that you could achieve while staying with the main body using your speed to get to a forward location and provide another angle of fire.

There is no harm in trying these things and trying different builds, always try and improve and where possible co-ordinate and talk with your team.

[Popcat]

"The absence of even one player in a match can directly impact the playing experience and level of enjoyment for all other players in that match. Initiating the search for a match should be seen as an unspoken commitment to all other players who will be placed into the same match."

Your just arguing for the sake of arguing and digging through dirt hoping to throw mud. For that reason I will reply one last time. but this is a mike drop.

The part your referring to is under the AFK section referring to the actual player. Not their mech. It is not there to promote player/mech quality just activity. The Terms of service specifically states kids under 13 can play with their parents permission. Gives no minimum age. That guy *pointing to the lurker in he red shirt with he kid behind him*. Could let his 6 year old play according to the terms of service Though it is possible for a six year old to do more damage than this offending player with his mech. (What can I say I have faith in that guy * pointing to the same lurker* and his kid, not being disrespectful to the tread starter or his mech.) tought It's probably not likely. That kid can be in every game you have that night and it's not breaking the rules. You are guaranteed only the absolute minimal quality of play by the ToS an CoC. That was also referring to repeated offenses. Actually the only abuse of actual game function I recall discussed is AFK, Chat, Shutdown, Decals The mech build is never covered an experimenting with mech builds is the core of mech warrior online. A mech does not have to be heavy damage dealing to be fun to a player. I have a locust with nothing but a ERPPC. Very fun mech lots of spotting not much damage but the damage it does leads to a lot of humorous moments and turning of heads.

Just for the record a contract with unwritten rules just leads to litigants with poor resolutions. PGI covered what thy needed to cover.

On the harassment note I gave specific examples of harassment as defined by the rules of this game. Although I should add according to the CoC if I tell you I like my mech an you keep repeatedly telling me it stinks. Even if you don't think so, you are harassing a player.

"Excessively communicating the same phrase, similar phrases"

Just tought that was interesting side note.

Edited by Popcat, 03 June 2018 - 12:28 PM.

[James Argent]

Regardless of 'fault' or 'blame' or anything else, if your flanking maneuver leaves you as the last member of your team, you are no longer flanking, you are (briefly) the new front line.

[MTier Slayed Up]

It's only a bad idea if it doesn't work.

I've had games where, unless I was in a light, there was no possible way I could get into position before it became a 9vs12 scenario or something similar to that. It would take an act of God to warp me to one location to the next.

So in defense of whoever likes flanking, I do too. There's nothing more effective imo, then having some cross fire, as long as you are close enough to the team to get some back up, or have some type of escape route that prevents their team from completely focusing you, or at least, capable of making a 1v12 into a 1v2.

So maybe I'll get some flak for this, but I often break off away from the team to either take the high ground elsewhere, to where I know I'll be hitting someones rear, or I'll be forcing their team to look into two different directions. 90% of the time, I can grab a kill or two, strip a side torso off or open CT a couple people before I have to move.

If it works, it works.

[R Valentine]

Mystere, on 31 May 2018 - 12:45 PM, said:

Not even close.

Scapegoats, people really love them.

Ah yes, "scapegoats", when it was the OP who was complaining about his team. Pot, kettle... oh, I see you two have met already.

[Akillius]

Minamitsu, on 29 May 2018 - 08:25 PM, said:

Suddenly every single person with a mic comes out, along with typers, talking about how bad and useless I am for not being dead with them.

Was blue team dead quiet during match and only talked when you were last one left?
Seen that plenty before and I used to keep trolling... er... I mean telling them:
"time to talk and call targets was at start of match, but you failed so its too late to talk now bye."
(& exit match asap)


Just turn off all chats/voips when in quick play.
I've gotten warnings for back-talking the salt & vinegar freaks and trolling the trolls for kicks as per above.
But until PGI makes an effort and fixes buggy block list to actually mute after re-logging into game... I'll just keep the chats/voip off in QP from now on.
BTW PGI also needs cmd wheel commands and enemy spotted (location) to appear even when chats are off.

Edited by Max Rickson, 04 June 2018 - 08:40 AM.

[Nightbird]

Good players believe they can carry any team to victory, it's just a question of what actions to take. Bad players never believe there are actions they could personally take to avoid a loss.

[Mystere]

Kiran Yagami, on 04 June 2018 - 07:03 AM, said:

Ah yes, "scapegoats", when it was the OP who was complaining about his team. Pot, kettle... oh, I see you two have met already.

Mystere, on 31 May 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

When one single person does something out of the ordinary, it is 100% entirely that player's fault when the team loses. However, if the team wins because of said person, it's simply okay.

People.

<shrugs>

[LowSubmarino]

MechaBattler, on 30 May 2018 - 11:47 AM, said:

If you don't support your team directly. Then they die. This game is about local superiority. That means your team has to have more firepower in a given area of engagement. BUT to be fair. If you're in a light and that happens right away. You're going to have low damage no matter what. If the fight doesn't last, you don't get damage. Similarly if you're a sniper with low firepower. You're just not gonna get the numbers no matter what.

Frankly the people complaining are probably just pissed that they lost so hard. But they can't blame themselves so they'll blame everyone around them. I wouldn't take it to heart.

I was in an arctic wolf double cerppc sniper, with 17 DHS, completly skilled for cooldown and heat.

That thing can dish out dmg pretty quickly.

Half of my team raged vs me and called me noob to not share armor.

I did 1,2 k dmg. Killed 5 of team reds mechs and many assissts.

And, no. I didnt slowly pick off team red after my team died.

I got those 5 kills within the match.

And those noobs tell me I should have shared armor.

In a non-survival skilled, squishy arctic wolf.

It would have been better to share my friggin armor instead of taking out 5 mechs within the game.

Ppl hate snipers. No matter how well you do.

Those ppl telling me I should have shared armor did 100 - 200 dmg.

In the end they won by capping our base. 2 Heavies. I almost took down one but there was no time left and I was too hot to fire whenever cooldown was ready.

Even if you kill 9 mechs and do 2,5 k dmg they will tell you that you should have shared armor dwl.

[MechaBattler]

Because you had enough time to poke at people with your 30 damage. But what if it isn't a pokefest? What if a critical brawl ensues. Can you provide enough damage to tip the brawl in your team's favor? More over are you in a position to do that from whatever vantage point you choose to snipe from?

Sometimes matches drag out and sniper builds can rake in the damage. Other times three mechs are downed relatively close together and it turns into a steamroller because one team just can't bring enough firepower to counter. This doesn't leave a sniper enough time to net enough damage.

I'm not saying snipers are bad. It's just they need time to do respectable damage.

[Eisenhorne]

MechaBattler, on 04 June 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

Because you had enough time to poke at people with your 30 damage. But what if it isn't a pokefest? What if a critical brawl ensues. Can you provide enough damage to tip the brawl in your team's favor? More over are you in a position to do that from whatever vantage point you choose to snipe from?

Sometimes matches drag out and sniper builds can rake in the damage. Other times three mechs are downed relatively close together and it turns into a steamroller because one team just can't bring enough firepower to counter. This doesn't leave a sniper enough time to net enough damage.

I'm not saying snipers are bad. It's just they need time to do respectable damage.

And what if it does turn into a pokefest? You'll be glad you have the 2 ERPPC sniper, as long as he can aim. Point is, it's quick play. You can't control the map, so you have no idea what you should bring. You just gotta pick what you want (hopefully something that's optimal in at least one situation) and roll the dice.

Edited by Eisenhorne, 04 June 2018 - 12:09 PM.

[MechaBattler]

Well that was my original point. I was only explaining that low damage can't be helped with lights and certain builds. You're not completely without blame if you don't try to intuit when your team needs you most. But it's also not entirely your fault that your team lost. Most of the time people just want to blame anyone but themselves.

[Xiphias]

Popcat, on 02 June 2018 - 08:41 PM, said:

"The absence of even one player in a match can directly impact the playing experience and level of enjoyment for all other players in that match. Initiating the search for a match should be seen as an unspoken commitment to all other players who will be placed into the same match."

Your just arguing for the sake of arguing and digging through dirt hoping to throw mud. For that reason I will reply one last time. but this is a mike drop.

You are the one who came in here and started arguing with me, unprovoked. I said it was pedantic when I brought it up. There are literally requirements for participation. Those requirements are little more than having a pulse, but they exist. Before you go and get up in arms about me saying that, look up what pedantic means and understand that I was acknowledging that the point I made is trivial, I agree with his point overall, but technically he's incorrect.

Since you don't seem to understand what pedantic means let me give you the definition:

"overly concerned with minute details or formalisms, especially in teaching."

Wow, kind of like the original point I made.

Quote

The part your referring to is under the AFK section referring to the actual player. Not their mech. It is not there to promote player/mech quality just activity.

None of what I previously said contradicts this. You are making a straw-man to argue against. Again, if you want to be technical/pedantic there are restrictions on what mechs you can build, they just happen to be enforced in the mechlab. You're required to have at least one weapon on your mech and the CoC says you have to at least make an attempt to contribute to your team. You don't have to be good, but you do have to try to contribute to winning.

Quote

The Terms of service specifically states kids under 13 can play with their parents permission. Gives no minimum age. That guy *pointing to the lurker in he red shirt with he kid behind him*. Could let his 6 year old play according to the terms of service Though it is possible for a six year old to do more damage than this offending player with his mech. (What can I say I have faith in that guy * pointing to the same lurker* and his kid, not being disrespectful to the tread starter or his mech.) tought It's probably not likely. That kid can be in every game you have that night and it's not breaking the rules.

I agree with you and I never said it was.

Quote

You are guaranteed only the absolute minimal quality of play by the ToS an CoC. That was also referring to repeated offenses.

Yes, but it's still an agreement/contract that governs how you are allowed it play, even if only in the most minimal way.

Quote

Actually the only abuse of actual game function I recall discussed is AFK, Chat, Shutdown, Decals The mech build is never covered an experimenting with mech builds is the core of mech warrior online. A mech does not have to be heavy damage dealing to be fun to a player. I have a locust with nothing but a ERPPC. Very fun mech lots of spotting not much damage but the damage it does leads to a lot of humorous moments and turning of heads.

Again, this is a complete straw-man argument. I never said anything about the ToS requiring you to build mechs a certain way. You feel the need to make up a point to argue against because I never said that and the point I did make is correct (even if it is a petty technicality).

I don't understand why you keep bringing mech builds up, because I never mentioned them being restricted in the ToS and I already said that I agree the ToS doesn't cover them.

Quote

On the harassment note I gave specific examples of harassment as defined by the rules of this game. Although I should add according to the CoC if I tell you I like my mech an you keep repeatedly telling me it stinks. Even if you don't think so, you are harassing a player.

"Excessively communicating the same phrase, similar phrases"

Just tought that was interesting side note.

I didn't disagree with your examples, or say that they were appropriate, however what the OP was talking about was players calling the behavior bad. That in and of itself isn't necessarily harassment, the way the Cicada was played sounds pretty bad from the description. Did some of those players cross the line between calling bad game-play out and harassment? Probably, but I wasn't their so I can only speculate.

As to your second point, again, I agree that if I went into a match and repeated called your mech bad (even if it was) for no reason that could easily be considered harassment.

That said if you said your mech was "good" (not that you like it) it's perfectly fine for me to explain why it isn't good and to say as much. If you continue to insist that your build is "good" I'm not harassing you if I continue to argue and tell you that it's not. You don't have a right to be factually wrong and then to just tell someone they have to shut up because you don't agree with their point of view. I'll even go so far as to agree that calling someone out repeated can get to the point where it becomes harassing, but having, for example, random people tell you that LRMs are bad or that your build is bad isn't really harassment and if you're going to run bad builds in a team game you should have a thick enough skin to take getting called out on it.

To be clear, I don't really go around calling people out on their builds, it's not really worth my time. I might occasionally make a comment here or there, but for the most part I'm more than happy to let people play the way they want to play if they aren't being actively detrimental to the team. If you go around claiming to be a great player and you aren't or that your build is the best thing since sliced bread, then yes, I might call you out on it, but it's pretty rare.

Also, there is a quote button that makes it a lot more clear who/what you're quoting. I'd recommend using it.