141 replies to this topic

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 09:09 PM, said:

Easiest solution then would be to remove escort from the game.

Agreed. But I doubt anything will change either way.

[KoalaBrownie]

S O L A I S, on 03 July 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

I actually don't as it is not a mystery. Seems you are not even aware of this though, so I will help you out. HPG, Canyon Network, The Mining Collective, and Viridian Bog do not support Escort or Incursion. This is a fact like I pointed out, that most people are aware of.

Don't assume what thousands of people do or do not know. All that tells me is that your argument is based on you opinion and assumptions. For my part I left shortly after Escort was introduced, and only returned recently. Escort shows up too infrequently for me to bother seeing a pattern of what maps are available and what are not.

Either way, its frequency can be increased while still allowing for the popular maps, Canyon, HPG & Mining to show up a lot of the time. No one is saying that Escort should be the dominant form of play, just more common an option. And no I don't list Viridan Bog because that's a third tier pick behind the likes of Highlands, Frozen City and River City.

S O L A I S, on 03 July 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

Cute my source....Ok.

I will help you out. It's called autocorrect.

S O L A I S, on 03 July 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

Instead I will say that when I play (in Tier 1 account which perhaps makes a difference) I will only see Escort chosen once or twice in an average sitting (for me about three hours). Enough to observe even without proper numbers that most of the people online when I am, do not pick Escort.

Once or twice out of how many possibles?

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

Attackers can get into position faster than the defenders. Most of the time, defenders have to fight at a severe disadvantage. Seldom do they get the luxury of an even fight. If you drop as defender, save for massive derpage from the attackers, the best you can do is plau for a draw.

If they're into position faster than the defenders, then by definition they are closer to their side of the map and the defenders have more time to move in front of the VIP and engage the enemy team.

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

And playing for draws don't win you games.

Except in Escort, where the enemy team can only fire at one of two targets, you or the VIP. And if you hit them hard enough that they target you instead the VIP will get closer to its objective.

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

The funny thing is that this issue is incredibly easy to fix but pgi doesn't do it. They don't do it because players play it like skirmish and then rave about "dynamic" fights. They just have to rearrange spawn points so the vip doesn't need to waddle through the entire enemy team to reach the evac. That would give you the dynamic "intercept" fights you wanna have.

Don't know what players you're talking about since I clearly said earlier that most other game modes devolve into Napoleonic warfare which is certainly not dynamic.

Turning Escort into an intercept mission for the attackers would remove their slow mechs from the engagement entirely, since they would be unable to catch the VIP mech. That would break the game, not enhance it.

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

But nooooooo. Some people not only wanna drink the koolaid but also tell people that it's high in vitamin c and helps prevent colds.

Given that we're not discussing anything that PGI has stated about Escort, your kool-aid suicide cult analogy is not applicable. But it's good to see that you're mature about people who disagree with you.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 03 July 2018 - 10:03 PM.

[The Lighthouse]

Johnathan Tanner, on 03 July 2018 - 10:10 PM, said:

This thread is cancer and needs to die, Help me brothers and kill this thread with fire and spiderman before it gets out of control.

Wait, no....

We need moar escort modes. Moar is always better.

[Wil McCullough]

KoalaBrownie, on 03 July 2018 - 10:02 PM, said:

If they're into position faster than the defenders, then by definition they are closer to their side of the map and the defenders have more time to move in front of the VIP and engage the enemy team.



Except in Escort, where the enemy team can only fire at one of two targets, you or the VIP. And if you hit them hard enough that they target you instead the VIP will get closer to its objective.



Don't know what players you're talking about since I clearly said earlier that most other game modes devolve into Napoleonic warfare which is certainly not dynamic.

Turning Escort into an intercept mission for the attackers would remove their slow mechs from the engagement entirely, since they would be unable to catch the VIP mech. That would break the game, not enhance it.



Given that we're not discussing anything that PGI has stated about Escort, your kool-aid suicide cult analogy is not applicable. But it's good to see that you're mature about people who disagree with you.

Why are you assuming attackers will just wail on the VIP? This is a game where removing your opponent's assets from the board wins games because they're nonreplaceable. Attackers aren't waiting in a superior position to hit the vip. You're sitting in a superior position to hit YOU.

The VIP is a failsafe. If the attackers somehow lose the fight despite their superior positioning, they just need to focus fire the VIP to win the match. I think you're vastly overestimating the VIP's armor.

Intercept won't remove slow mechs from the game. Not with proper drop zones. And not when the fight is based around a robot who moves slower than a tortoise.

Also, escort is frigging cancer. Arguing that it isn't is like arguing that water isn't wet. That's not an "opinion" thing anymore. I don't feel the need to be polite to flat earthers and i don't feel the need to be more courteous than usual to people who think escort promotes dynamic play. Escort promotes the MOST static of gameplay - the most effective winning strategy for attacker is literally to SIT in a good position and WAIT for the opposing team to engage.

If you can't see that, then i'm afraid we're operating on two very different levels of thinking ability.

[KoalaBrownie]

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 11:19 PM, said:

Also, escort is frigging cancer. Arguing that it isn't is like arguing that water isn't wet. That's not an "opinion" thing anymore. I don't feel the need to be polite to flat earthers and i don't feel the need to be more courteous than usual to people who think escort promotes dynamic play. Escort promotes the MOST static of gameplay - the most effective winning strategy for attacker is literally to SIT in a good position and WAIT for the opposing team to engage.

Show me proof or see yourself out.

[Wil McCullough]

KoalaBrownie, on 03 July 2018 - 11:39 PM, said:

Show me proof or see yourself out.

That's a terrible argument. Proof of what? That escort promotes more static gameplay?

[TheBossOfYou]

KoalaBrownie, on 03 July 2018 - 11:39 PM, said:

Show me proof or see yourself out.

People HATE escort. It's the least popular gamemode, to the extent that you see people committing war crimes and just taking the timer so everyone else can be free.

[KoalaBrownie]

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 11:54 PM, said:

That's a terrible argument. Proof of what? That escort promotes more static gameplay?

Why are you asking me to define your own argument? Particularly when I QUOTED what I'm responding to. Do you not know what it is? You seem to believe it unquestioningly, and you're astonished, appalled, and derisive that other people would dare to not adopt your opinion. So I ask where are your facts?

OR are your "facts" purely anecdotal? Personal experience filtered through selective memory and confirmation bias?

I'm not interested opinions- just facts, or failing that, sound reasoning. You've offered neither.

For example you said that defenders have to fight at a disadvantage because attackers can get into a superior position faster, and the VIP is slower than a tortoise.

But those three statements don't line up, if the VIP is slower than a tortoise then the defenders can outpace it and engage the attackers from a more favourable direction. They're not forced to fight on the attacker's terms. And on the other side of the coin, if the attackers engage before the defenders outpace the VIP then the attackers would still be moving into position and won't have the advantage.

You also claim that Attackers can just destroy the VIP if they lose the fight against the Defenders. Define lose. Because your claim assumes not one, but three things:
1. That the attackers are in a position to engage the VIP after battling the Defenders
2. That the attackers are in a state where they can destroy the VIP
3. That the attackers, having compromised themselves to the defenders by switching targets, can survive long enough to destroy the VIP.

If any of those three assumptions isn't true, the attackers lose.

And if the VIP is slow as a tortoise, and the Attackers having taken up positions have to wait minutes to engage, how is taking up positions in Escort a more effective strategy in this mode than in any other mode where a team decides to take up positions? Either the VIP is fast enough to force unfavourable engagements, or its slow enough to give the Defenders opportunity to engage on their terms. It is one or the other. And if its not one or the other, then one cannot definitively say what will happen either way.

Grimmwold, on 04 July 2018 - 12:29 AM, said:

People HATE escort. It's the least popular gamemode, to the extent that you see people committing war crimes and just taking the timer so everyone else can be free.

And yet in a forum poll last year, only 53% of 199 respondents agree with your statement
https://mwomercs.com...age__mode__show

Not a statistical poll. And drawn from the minority that participates on the forum.
But it is one group of 200 players that does not overwhelmingly hate Escort.

That is hardly the "vast majority" that other respondents in this thread have claimed.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 04 July 2018 - 12:44 AM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Spheroid, on 03 July 2018 - 12:23 PM, said:

Hell no. It should be deleted outright.

I suppose you would be happy with hangars opening across from each other so no one has to move and you can simply start shooting?

As a rule, people who use cancer as a means to describe displeasure should probably be ignored and their opinion is worthless. People have been banned around here for less.

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 04 July 2018 - 12:51 AM.

[Wil McCullough]

KoalaBrownie, on 04 July 2018 - 12:30 AM, said:

Why are you asking me to define your own argument? Particularly when I QUOTED what I'm responding to. Do you not know what it is? You seem to believe it unquestioningly, and you're astonished, appalled, and derisive that other people would dare to not adopt your opinion. So I ask where are your facts?

OR are your "facts" purely anecdotal? Personal experience filtered through selective memory and confirmation bias?

I'm not interested opinions- just facts, or failing that, sound reasoning. You've offered neither.

For example you said that defenders have to fight at a disadvantage because attackers can get into a superior position faster, and the VIP is slower than a tortoise.

But those three statements don't line up, if the VIP is slower than a tortoise then the defenders can outpace it and engage the attackers from a more favourable direction. They're not forced to fight on the attacker's terms. And on the other side of the coin, if the attackers engage before the defenders outpace the VIP then the attackers would still be moving into position and won't have the advantage.

You also claim that Attackers can just destroy the VIP if they lose the fight against the Defenders. Define lose. Because your claim assumes not one, but three things:
1. That the attackers are in a position to engage the VIP after battling the Defenders
2. That the attackers are in a state where they can destroy the VIP
3. That the attackers, having compromised themselves to the defenders by switching targets, can survive long enough to destroy the VIP.

If any of those three assumptions isn't true, the attackers lose.

And if the VIP is slow as a tortoise, and the Attackers having taken up positions have to wait minutes to engage, how is taking up positions in Escort a more effective strategy in this mode than in any other mode where a team decides to take up positions? Either the VIP is fast enough to force unfavourable engagements, or its slow enough to give the Defenders opportunity to engage on their terms. It is one or the other. And if its not one or the other, then one cannot definitively say what will happen either way.



And yet in a forum poll last year, only 53% of 199 respondents agree with your statement
https://mwomercs.com...age__mode__show

Not a statistical poll. And drawn from the minority that participates on the forum.
But it is one group of 200 players that does not overwhelmingly hate Escort.

That is hardly the "vast majority" that other respondents in this thread have claimed.

Im asking because i'm not sure which part you're having difficulty understanding.

You seem to be under the impression that your "busy busy" tactics can counter a sit-and-wait strategy in escort. How do you engage an attacking team entrenched in fortress on tourmaline? Or upper city on river city? Or attackers who arr already entrenched in frozen city?

The best you can hope for is to trade.

The only map that defenders have an advantage is polar highlands because it's huge, attackers have to spread out to have eyes on the defenders and it's an open plain where cover is intermittent.

I have no idea how tanky you think the vip is. You seem to be arguing.under the impressiom that attackers have to really pour fire into the thing to take it out. They don't. Focus fire from two mechs can take it down before it even travels 400-500m.

Trust me. I know how to win games. There's an old video from col oneil ranting about the stupidity of the things i just described to you and why it makes escort such a ridiculously lopsided mode. This is a guy who played competitively and has more game knowledge than you and i could ever have. I suggest you find it on his youtube channel, watch it and take him seriously enough to understand what he's talking about.

[SFC174]

Can't believe you guys are still arguing with the troll. I mean, cmon, he ticks all the boxes - not least of which is making a controversial, unsupported assertion and then demanding that you prove him wrong....

TBH, if I were a conniving rat ******* and I wanted to get the community to unify against Escort, I might actually post a troll thread like this. Of course, I'd have a better command of the facts (like which maps don't support Escort, lol).

[Dragonporn]

Conquest is fine, Escort must be eliminated with prejudice.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Who cares if someone has "played competitively" when it comes to an extremely casual mode? There are improvements that need to be done to it, but it doesn't have to go away. If the drop leader could actually command the VIP down certain predetermined coordinates to respond to battlefield situations, that would be cool.

[Wil McCullough]

Mechwarrior1441491, on 04 July 2018 - 07:09 AM, said:

Who cares if someone has "played competitively" when it comes to an extremely casual mode? There are improvements that need to be done to it, but it doesn't have to go away. If the drop leader could actually command the VIP down certain predetermined coordinates to respond to battlefield situations, that would be cool.

If you're.going to make human input something the vip responds to, you may as well make a human player the vip.

[JediPanther]

I think the fact that defenders willing mass disco or team kill the vip alone should show how much players hate the vip. Opps vip walked into red smoke again...or did it just leeroy the enemy fire line I couldn't see.

[Revis Volek]

KoalaBrownie, on 03 July 2018 - 12:20 PM, said:

Escort, along with Conquest, are the two best game modes in the game as they force players to commit to mobile, dynamic combat situations at different parts of the map. As opposed to the typical game where both teams take up a position and then proceed to engage in long-range napoleonic warfare, shooting, standing, shooting until one team affixes bayonets for a charge.

While Conquest shows up regularly, Escort only seems to pop up once in every 25+ games and then is often not voted for. It really ought to come around more often.

Meanwhile a game mode like Skirmish ought really to be removed or reduced in frequency since the existence of Assault makes it redundant and its only difference is to discourage the use of light and medium mechs.

Wut?


Escort is the worse game mode ever in the history of games.





[Redacted]

Edited by Tina Benoit, 04 July 2018 - 03:57 PM.
nonconstructive to discussion

[KoalaBrownie]

SFC174, on 04 July 2018 - 05:46 AM, said:

Can't believe you guys are still arguing with the troll. I mean, cmon, he ticks all the boxes - not least of which is making a controversial, unsupported assertion and then demanding that you prove him wrong....

Revis Volek, on 04 July 2018 - 08:59 AM, said:

Please close this thread OP is clearly insane.

Contribute or leave.

Wil McCullough, on 04 July 2018 - 02:42 AM, said:

You seem to be under the impression that your "busy busy" tactics can counter a sit-and-wait strategy in escort. How do you engage an attacking team entrenched in fortress on tourmaline? Or upper city on river city? Or attackers who arr already entrenched in frozen city?

If that's a fool proof strat why isn't it used in every mode? And if it's not fool proof, what are its counters and why are those counters impossible to apply in Escort?

Wil McCullough, on 04 July 2018 - 02:42 AM, said:

There's an old video from col oneil ranting about the stupidity of the things i just described to you and why it makes escort such a ridiculously lopsided mode.

I take people seriously who deserve to be taken seriously. Seeing some of his comments on reddit, don't think I'd give him the time of day. He certainly ain't no Purge.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 04 July 2018 - 11:13 AM.

[Bombast]

KoalaBrownie, on 04 July 2018 - 12:30 AM, said:

And yet in a forum poll last year, only 53% of 199 respondents agree with your statement
https://mwomercs.com...age__mode__show

53% said they wanted it removed. That's just over half. 25% said they want to keep it around. That's a fourth.

It's the most hated mode in the game.

Anyway, Escort is terrible and should be removed. The VIP is buggy and can get stuck, and pretty much every map it occurs on is a hopeless mess. Just to give a few examples:

Crimson Strait - Basically forces both teams into one 'zone,' usually the saddle, with the winner mostly being determined by whether the attackers can hold a large enough firing line until the 5-6 minute mark. If the attackers have 3 or more players who get bored and wander off, they lose. If they don't, they win. How fun.

Grim Plexus - Tied for worst Escort map with Rubellite Oasis. Escort matches are entirely focused around a single sensor node.

Rubellite Oasis - Just trash. Map is skewed heavily in the attackers favor - There's very little the defenders can do but try and hold it together and hope the enemy team throws.

It's a bad mode, and I suspect you know that.

Edited by Bombast, 04 July 2018 - 11:27 AM.

[KoalaBrownie]

Bombast, on 04 July 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

53% said they wanted it removed. That's just over half. 25% said they want to keep it around. That's a fourth.

It's the most hated mode in the game.

So more people play Solaris and Faction Play on a daily basis than Escort?

Bombast, on 04 July 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

Anyway, Escort is terrible and should be removed. The VIP is buggy and can get stuck, and pretty much every map it occurs on is a hopeless mess. Just to give a few examples:

Crimson Strait - Basically forces both teams into one 'zone,' usually the saddle, with the winner mostly being determined by whether the attackers can hold a large enough firing line until the 5-6 minute mark. If the attackers have 3 or more players who get bored and wander off, they lose. If they don't, they win. How fun.

Grim Plexus - Tied for worst Escort map with Rubellite Oasis. Escort matches are entirely focused around a single sensor node.

Haven't played Escort on either of those maps recently, but here's a new question, how does Escort forcing a fight in a particular location differ from Domination?

Bombast, on 04 July 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

It's a bad mode, and I suspect you know that.

Nope. The only bad mode is the one without objectives: Skirmish.
It doesn't add anything that isn't already found in every other game mode and the lack of objectives encourages the use of heavy mechs and just staying in one big boring group.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 04 July 2018 - 11:52 AM.

[Prototelis]

KoalaBrownie, on 04 July 2018 - 11:47 AM, said:

Nope. The only bad mode is the one without objectives: Skirmish.
It doesn't add anything that isn't already found in every other game mode.

********. Skirmish is the only game mode in which map control is not only the strongest factor in winning, it lets you pick where to control the map. As much as you cry about muh tactucs its the only game mode that doesn't force you to fight in a specific location and actually use tactics that aren't run into the red firing line to stand in this laser square.

Poking is a tactic. Turtling is a tactic. Coordinated aggression is a tactic. Breaking line is a tactic. Skirmish the only game mode that lets you do all of these things at the same time.

Terra therma can be gamed hella hard on skirmish if you take the caldera. It is the only game mode that offers you this option, and that caldera is hands down the best position to fight from in the entire game.