172 replies to this topic

[FRAGTAST1C]

Michal R, on 08 July 2019 - 09:33 AM, said:

I love Nascar topics.
What is basic military tactics?
To flank enemy.
What are you doing when you nascar?
Flank enemy.
Who win?
Team who do it better.
Nascar = Flank
There was WW1 when there was trench fights and what happen?
Absolutly nothing. 10 metres forward in one battle and milion killed.

Fire line doesen't work.

And pro tip.

Mechs can walk and shoot. This tip is for LRMs babes. Share armor, use LRMs at medium range, be a part of the team.

*sigh* Again, flanking isn't the problem. Giving up high ground in the hopes of flanking and not shooting any enemies while "getting into position" is the problem and THAT is NASCAR. If you're flanking, then that thing is called Flanking. You don't need to rename what already has a name.

[General Solo]

Yeah buts thats players fault not flanking or nascar.
I mean they won't even take the ramps to High ground on Rubellite Oasis 8 from ten times
7 from 10 times if I'm using Voip

Dem Playas
Nascar is just like all dem other excuses (Lrmtard, atmtard, sniper not honourable, you shot my legs you coward etc etc) why they played bad

[Prototelis]

Protip: High ground isn't the end all be all. Sometimes its prudent to move somewhere else.

The most basic and easiest way to win is to create more targets than you are presented with.

[The6thMessenger]

Prototelis, on 09 July 2019 - 01:46 AM, said:

Protip: High ground isn't the end all be all. Sometimes its prudent to move somewhere else.

The most basic and easiest way to win is to create more targets than you are presented with.

I don't know man. That depends though, because LOS works both ways -- if you could see other guys , chances are those other guys see you too, and they WILL fire upon you.

That's why flanking them where return-fire is less likely to happen is part of the appeal. This constant flanking, basically one long ******* circle-strafing is the result.

[Prototelis]

Think about it this way; How easy is it for a Slepnir, a Fafnir, or an Atlas to engage enemies at the mid level from the top of HPG?

If Team A is employing a control strat; how useful is the mid of mining for Team B?

[The6thMessenger]

Prototelis, on 09 July 2019 - 02:42 AM, said:

Think about it this way; How easy is it for a Slepnir, a Fafnir, or an Atlas to engage enemies at the mid level from the top of HPG?

If Team A is employing a control strat; how useful is the mid of mining for Team B?

Well obviously you barely control the map if you're just holed up in a single central location. That being said, my concern is that of the vulnerability of a position. I'm not arguing whether high-ground is or isn't good, rather my concern is being in a position where you could see a lot of your enemies all at once.

The atlas, with it's low-slung weapons would probably have problems, same thing with King-Crab if it was arm-weapon focused -- kinda why the Kaiju seems rather best of all King-Crab performance wise.

[Prototelis]

Best king crab is 6ac2 + 2x Rocket Launcher 20

Pound them from range; then engage secret weapon on the first thing in range lol.

[Lykaon]

Michal R, on 08 July 2019 - 09:33 AM, said:

I love Nascar topics.
What is basic military tactics?
To flank enemy.
What are you doing when you nascar?
Flank enemy.
Who win?
Team who do it better.
Nascar = Flank
There was WW1 when there was trench fights and what happen?
Absolutly nothing. 10 metres forward in one battle and milion killed.

Fire line doesen't work.

And pro tip.

Mechs can walk and shoot. This tip is for LRMs babes. Share armor, use LRMs at medium range, be a part of the team.

thievingmagpi, on 08 July 2019 - 09:36 AM, said:

there's no such thing as flanking if the whole team is doing it LUL

Flank is a reference to the sides (and occationally rear) of an enemy formation. You can "flank" with everyone as long as the enemy position is static. The problem with NASCAR being described as "flanking" is NASCAR is an attempt to hit the rear of a mobile enemy force that already knows that you are manuvering to attack the rear. So no flanking occurs what occurs is pursuit of a fleeing force that is overtaken and destroyed in detail by the victorious pursuing force. Do take into account that in MWo BOTH sides are doing the exact SAME thing.

Essentially NASCAR in MWo is a predictable failure to execute a flanking manuver that becomes a pursuit being attempted simultaneously by both teams against each team.


I loved this part though.

QUOTE
"There was WW1 when there was trench fights and what happen?
Absolutly nothing. 10 metres forward in one battle and milion killed.

Fire line doesen't work." END QUOTE

And how do you suppose the million were killed hmm? did they trip? choke on goobers?

They were killed by FIRING LINES!

What didn't work in WW1 was CHARGING firing lines.

The failure in tactics was the ones getting killed continued to charge a firing line without thought of outcome or alteration in tactics to account for the firing line's superior defensive capabilities against a headlong charge.

What happens in MWo NASCAR? everyone just keeps turning left and moving forward without consideration of likely outcome. Historicly as you have pointed out a strong counter to a headlong charge is a firing line after all it worked out great in WW1.

Seriously...and I am being called the idiot here?

Edited by Lykaon, 09 July 2019 - 10:49 AM.

[Nightbird]

The only fools here are the ones that don't optimize their actions around what other people do, and stubbornly refuse to change while complaining for other people to change.

This is a lesson for real life as well.

[Jman5]

Michal R, on 08 July 2019 - 09:33 AM, said:

Nascar = Flank
There was WW1 when there was trench fights and what happen?
Absolutly nothing. 10 metres forward in one battle and milion killed.

Yeah, and it's worth pointing out that both sides tried desperately to out flank and encircle one another in World War 1. In 1914 the Allies and Germans repeatedly attempted to flank each other from the North. Neither was able to outpace the other. Eventually they hit the North Sea and could go no further. Without anywhere else to go both sides had to dig in and we got the Western Front.

There is a very good reason why Competitive leagues do Conquest instead of Skirmish. When both sides know what they are doing it can be difficult to out flank one another. This can lead to a positioning race and stalemates. If you go watch the comp games from the early days a ton of them were absolute snoozefests because neither side wanted to be the ones charging into the entrenched firing line.

Edited by Jman5, 09 July 2019 - 12:07 PM.

[Lykaon]

Nightbird, on 09 July 2019 - 10:45 AM, said:

The only fools here are the ones that don't optimize their actions around what other people do, and stubbornly refuse to change while complaining for other people to change.

This is a lesson for real life as well.

So the plan is to prop up stupid and never ever point out that stupid is in fact stupid no matter what?

If everyone is an idiot then no one is an idiot.

And essentially adaptation and inovation isn't a factor and in effect success is determined by what side sucked the least.

I actually can not argue against this concept it's very millennial in it's thinking. No one can take blame if everyone is awful.




I get the concept of following the masses and adapting strategy to succeed within the idiocy being perpetrated but, See if you can follow me on this.

At some point a person with a small degree in proficency in observational skills and predictive thinking can conclude when everyone is doing something that will without a doubt fail. And for me this is just a painful circumstance to be in. The team is halfway through the first rotation and I can see it's not likely to work out well, one rotation later the kills are stacked 3 against.

And apparently you can not convince people that pursuing a failing action isn't a good idea and at that point you should just stat pad and just do well for yourself. screw teamwork screw adapting to meet a change in circumstance just get your damage and KMDDs don't even hope that maybe just maybe you can direct a team out of a failing spiral just "optimize your actions" for the impending loss.


In regards to "high ground" I played a match recently on HPG. The win conditions were incursion.

The enemy took the top and had a solid firing line. Poking the top was always resulting in bad trades for my team. One of our mechs would crest the ramp and get plastered by 2-3 of theirs. But no matter what the actual objective was the team just kept failing at poke trades on the high ground.

The objective had nothing to do with taking the high ground. The objective was destroy the enemy and/or destroy the base.

Destroying the enemy was unlikely because they had the superior defensive formation and location. We could leverage the secondary win condition and attack the base and force the enemy to abandon the superior formation and position.

But,no...

They just would not stop. it was like watching people smash their faces into a brick wall while I was pointing at an open door.

Idiocy...plain and simple idiocy. So I opted to just do as much damage as possible before I got stomped 9 vs 1 . I did manage to earn a match score over 250 so...I did better than most I was the bestest idiot on the team that day because I "optimized my actions" it didn't make the experience any less painful watching 11 other players simply not grasp the situation or react to a spoonfed solution to try and reverse the downward spiral.

[Prototelis]

TL;DR

Learn to adapt.

[Nightbird]

Lykaon, on 09 July 2019 - 08:13 PM, said:

So the plan is to prop up stupid and never ever point out that stupid is in fact stupid no matter what?

No, but trying to hold back a river is an even higher (or is it lower) level of stupid

Edited by Nightbird, 09 July 2019 - 08:31 PM.

[Dauntless Blint]

Nightbird, on 09 July 2019 - 10:45 AM, said:

The only fools here are the ones that don't optimize their actions around what other people do, and stubbornly refuse to change while complaining for other people to change.

This is a lesson for real life as well.

I agree although it puts swaths of non optimal builds and chassis in the bin and leaves you with near meta only or you're a Darwin award winner. (Boring)

Some people truly don't care about being competitive if it's forcing what's intelligent to build.
Even if you try asymmetric or anti meta if the build has some fun ideas that don't always work reliably but are cool to toy with or great when the right situation arises.

(intelligence has nothing to do with people handicapping them selves for "fun" builds.)

You can get good enough that decimating enemy players feels hollow and cheap with a meta build... then you turn to weird builds or builds for fun because you understand the basic mechanics of the game and you want to try and break the "rules".
(Sometimes if you can move in the opposite direction of the heard there is greater reward, it usually also comes with more risk) but luckily in this game we get to die hundreds of times trying to find a little bit of gold or even just play a different one.

Edited by Dauntless Blint, 09 July 2019 - 08:45 PM.

[Prototelis]

So you're bad on purpose too?

[Nightbird]

fun = not trying to win = why complain about nascar?

[Dauntless Blint]

Wrong and wrong. Seeing as you are too dumb to understand.

Not bad on purpose, just use bad builds and try and break rules and still try and win, because you can't understand where the fun lies in that.

Too many people associate build quality with how "good" a player is. It's rubbish. The point is nascar (+cookie-cutter maps) break the more fringe builds. Heaps of average players get their match to match stats buffed simply by using a build & chassis that carries them.

I'm trying to think of an example that makes sense to you. It is a greater feat to defeat a superior team of meta mechs with a ragtag bunch of weird builds and tactics then to do it with everything the meta dictates.

Edited by Dauntless Blint, 09 July 2019 - 09:13 PM.

[Prototelis]

Thats correct; I don't understand the fun in throwing the game for 11 other people.

[Dauntless Blint]

Prototelis, on 09 July 2019 - 09:11 PM, said:

Thats correct; I don't understand the fun in throwing the game for 11 other people.

Is it throwing the game, not using a meta build?
No it's not.
You keep conflating the idea with sabotage. Your so angry about the idea people don't have fun the same way as you. I find by winning with harder to win builds the game is more rewarding. It's like winning with flare when you beat guys with arguably better tools. You obviously played that much better just to stay competitive let alone win. (It's only quick-play after all)

I get that your thirsty.

Edited by Dauntless Blint, 09 July 2019 - 09:51 PM.

[Prototelis]

Oh so you lose for fun. Got yah.