24 replies to this topic

[Deamhan]

Simply put. Don't.

Why?

Because you are only cheating yourself and everyone else out of winnings. Honestly, you get the winning bonus regardless of how your team wins, so long as it does.

If you fight and win by killing the other team, you will earn much more reward. This also goes for if you are the losing team. As the losing team that fought till the last man standing, you will still earn much more than if your base is rush capped.

Hell, as the losing team, you can earn more reward losing by fighting than you can winning by cap rushing.

Edited by Deamhan, 23 December 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[PANZERBUNNY]

It's a waste of time.

Cap rush with very little combat gets you like 30-45k. maybe.

It's stupid. People stop doing it to force other teams to do it.

Those games aren't worth the load time.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 23 December 2012 - 05:45 PM.

[De La Fresniere]

Indeed. You get better rewards by fighting... and it's also a lot more fun than running across the map and standing in a square, watching a gauge slowly go down.

You want to "steal" a win because your team was massacred? Fine.
You want to tickle the base to split the enemy team? Fine.

But you're not doing anyone a service by going for a cap win right away. Capping just ends a match prematurely.

[Alfred VonGunn]

Only reason to cap in Assault now is in a game you just stomped the other team where there is a single light or otherwise shotup mechhgiding to protect his Stats and you don't want to search for him

[One Medic Army]

Didn't you get the memo?
Winning is all that matters.
Not having fun.
Not making CBills or EXP.

WINNING IS EVERYTHING!

[/sarcastic rant]

[MagicHamsta]

Me am also never accused of cap rushing as me main an Assault. (If an Atlas can cap your base, you be doing something wrong.)
However, me will still win a few matches with a cap even if me get a "measly" ~30k out of it.

Why?
1) Because as an Assault mech pilot who actively seeks out the main enemy force & chooses the path to the cap THROUGH them (Me do this because the average pub be cowardly and not very bright. Besides, me would rather get a decent fight instead of watching them derp off behind me...)
*Tis also why me has a near 80% Win/loss ratio while me has a rather low 4.3 K/D.
If me still survive & make it to the enemy base, you're darn right me won't get off. (Only exception be if they put up a good brawl & has to get to cover outside of the cap.)

2) At a mighty ~57 kph & as me has to demolish your defensive line, me certainly earned the right to park my rear on the cap & if you can't get back in time to stop me, you be doing it wrong.

3) Because winning and gaining ~30k be what me was getting with nearly every match pre-economy patch. (Atlas + Artemis SRM & only 3 tons of ammo me always refilled meant me had a ~70-110k repair & rearm bill after nearly every match.)
*And now me has a huge boost in income now that me make & can keep 100k+ after every match.

4) Me see it as a way to penalize those who be too scared to fight me. (Tis like a way of giving them a taste of how much monies me earned prepatch.)

5) Chasing after a light or med mech actively running from me be a real pain in the paw.

[Farix]

Deamhan, on 23 December 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:

Simply put. Don't.

Why?

Because you are only cheating yourself and everyone else out of winnings. Honestly, you get the winning bonus regardless of how your team wins, so long as it does.

If you fight and win by killing the other team, you will earn much more reward. This also goes for if you are the losing team. As the losing team that fought till the last man standing, you will still earn much more than if your base is rush capped.

Hell, as the losing team, you can earn more reward losing by fighting than you can winning by cap rushing.

Actually, I would earn more XP via capping than I would flailing around in a PUGstomp. You don't get XP for damage after all and Capping XP is worth far more than the single kill I may luck out on.

[Vermaxx]

As I said in the other thread: if you ignore a basecap you will lose the game and get locked into whatever salvage you had up until then. That is a choice you make.

Threatening the base is still an incredibly valid tactic, because unless the team went for an eight man cap they don't actually WANT to win by cap. They want people to straggle in and get shot to hell. It is a great distraction tactic.

We turned one around tonight. Swarmed back to our base, killed three or four people, then went on to win. You pick whether you ignore it or not, and HOW you respond.

With the pay the way it is now, only idiots are using it as a real win attempt. I admit there are probably a fair number of them. The rest are trying to split your team. You don't have to fall for it, but you will probably get paid a lot less in salvage as compared to countering it decisively.

[Weeble]

3 reasons players cap in Assault:

1) Casual players don't go to forums or read patch notes. It's going to take awhile for them to realize the reward system has changed.

2) Some people aren't very bright.

3) Stat whores want to improve their W/L without threatening their K/D (See #2)

[Gladewolf]

Weeble, on 23 December 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

3 reasons players cap in Assault:

1) Casual players don't go to forums or read patch notes. It's going to take awhile for them to realize the reward system has changed.

2) Some people aren't very bright.

3) Stat whores want to improve their W/L without threatening their K/D (See #2)

4) What Vermaxx said

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Problem is that bases in Conquest serve little to no purpose in games. They were suppose to add tactical play and encourage splitting up for more bases and defending them. Instead it's still just a zerg/blob fight that determines the entire outcome. I think that out of several dozen matches, I've seen maybe TWO actually have the base captures change the outcome.

[One Medic Army]

Agree on that, the resources accrue too slowly and bases cap too slowly in Conquest for the size of the map.

[Zynk]

Capping will always try to do it because I win you lose and I'm happy.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

One Medic Army, on 23 December 2012 - 09:13 PM, said:

Agree on that, the resources accrue too slowly and bases cap too slowly in Conquest for the size of the map.

If maps were much bigger, as this mode should have, then things would have been different. You'd actually have to spread out to secure more points and defend them. A mindless blob zerg would lose to points even after crushing divided enemies, which is how Conquest should work. But since maps are tiny on here, this isn't the case. You can easily zerg 1 base in full force, crushing anyone in the way, then take <1min to walk to the next one. There isn't enough distance between bases to make the points mean anything. You could speed up the ticker, but that's just a sloppy solution when the maps should just be enlarged instead. I suggest they build upon the maps they've already made in order to grow them. Then they could spread the bases out more, and make this mode work a lot better.

[CompositeGNFNR]

Bluten, on 23 December 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

If maps were much bigger, as this mode should have, then things would have been different. You'd actually have to spread out to secure more points and defend them. A mindless blob zerg would lose to points even after crushing divided enemies, which is how Conquest should work. But since maps are tiny on here, this isn't the case. You can easily zerg 1 base in full force, crushing anyone in the way, then take <1min to walk to the next one. There isn't enough distance between bases to make the points mean anything. You could speed up the ticker, but that's just a sloppy solution when the maps should just be enlarged instead. I suggest they build upon the maps they've already made in order to grow them. Then they could spread the bases out more, and make this mode work a lot better.

Agree with this, although I do believe they plan on expanding the maps.

[Weeble]

I'm pretty sure OP was referring to Assault but the topic swerved off into Conquest at some point. Vermaxx listed the tactical reasons to cap in Assault while I went negative with the reasons non-tactical players cap.

Let's be very clear we are talking about a base rush where contact with the enemy is avoided. The object of the game is to win. If it doesn't say "Victory" on your game recap screen- you didn't do it right

I don't want Assault to become a CBill grinding mechanic- time/CBills min/max. Instead of a cap rush, a suicide rush by all 16 players. I prefer a little strategy when I blow stuff up.

Edited by Weeble, 23 December 2012 - 10:32 PM.

[Nutlink]

Both game modes are pointless at the moment. Until they come up with a REAL game mode, they should just drop both of them and put in TDM. What's the point of either of them if you get next to nothing extra for winning and absolutely nothing for capping?

[Duncan Fisher]

BOTA49, on 23 December 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

Both game modes are pointless at the moment. Until they come up with a REAL game mode, they should just drop both of them and put in TDM. What's the point of either of them if you get next to nothing extra for winning and absolutely nothing for capping?

What they really need is some simple fix like only being able to start a cap after a certain time (3 minutes, 5 minutes, idk). Capping NEEDS to be in the game to serve as an alternate victory condition to complete destruction. Unless you want to wait 15 minutes every time the losing team has one light mech left alive who doesn't want to run out to his death.

[Felix]

Well, look at it this way.

Why not abuse the absolute **** of ECM?

It was put in to ruin peoples fun, so use it as such. Nothing more fun than rushing a speedy mech under the cover of ECM and all but invisible to the enemys point and ruining everyones fun.

Have fun brawling for 2-3 minutes before the match ends.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

BOTA49, on 23 December 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

Both game modes are pointless at the moment. Until they come up with a REAL game mode, they should just drop both of them and put in TDM. What's the point of either of them if you get next to nothing extra for winning and absolutely nothing for capping?

I like to think of them as placeholders or works in progress, but sadly, they will probably never change. Hopefully in the future however we get actual attack/defend scenario based modes with real bases that feel like they serve a purpose other than to just draw a square on the ground. I'd love to see actual base turrets or combat vehicles in the game trying to hopelessly defend against enemy Mechs. Give little tanks things like Flamers, Machine Guns, or Small Lasers. Give missile turrets some SRMs or LRMs. But there's no A.I. or NPCs of any kind here. You can't even find any people running/driving around, shoot trees, crunch cars. It feels like a sterile boring place to be. They took a MW title and didn't put anything relative to MW actually in it other than what the players are driving. With that factored out, it's just another generic multiplayer. When you played other MW titles, vehicles and turrets were all over the place. Not everyone could afford a Mech, or thought every single thing of value needed Mechs for defense and nothing else. A.I. controlled turrets were logical for defense grids, and smaller sized combat still existed. Not everyone had a Mech, or used only Mechs. Vehicles/turrets were just as common in these games as the Mechs. So, all that said, where's the tanks in this MW title? Where the LRM turrets that are going to pour missiles on us for standing out in the field like a dummy? Where's the dropshops going to fire PPCs/Gauss' at us in order to try to defend itself? No helicopters for us to shoot down either? All this stuff adds flavor and immersion to a game. There's none of that here, however. None of that, sir. So I will keep waiting... and hoping...