777 replies to this topic

[Pandamcpanda]

You can ignore me all you want, your initial post is still just a whine about how you dislike the play-style of other players in a public game. Your inflexibility to adapt to other peoples tactics, and your complete lack of knowledge about other games in general shows in your posts, and makes anyone listening to you silly at best. I'm 100% sure as soon as i called you out in wow you tried to come up with a quirky and intelligent response and just realized, well gee, i really wasn't the best player, but there's no way to save face here so I'm just going to ignore him now. Go play the game and stop whining.

[MustrumRidcully]

Rejarial Galatan, on 23 January 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

This could have been completely avoided if PGI wasnt so abusive to the Battletech Genre.

You know, I am more than happy to say that the MW:O devs screwed up a lot when converting Battletech to MW:O, but -if we are talking tactics, we can't talk about the imaginary world where we have tech or rules that would have made our tactical mistakes into non-mistakes. If you can't watch your back in MW:O, you have to account for this in your tactics.

And if someone had been moving around the ridge and scouted from the flanks or via the tunnel, that team might have known what to expect, and be able to deal with the sneaky ********. But they didn't, and this tactical mistake cost them the match.

[Rejarial Galatan]

You speak well Mustrum, but, taking into account, every single Mech Warrior title prior to this one has had canon specific 360 radar as standard, like our fusion reactors, such tactics were not viable or possible w/out proper electronics to counter the radar. here, PGI deliberately designed a system that spits in the face of the legacy of this franchise to make such tactics mind numbingly simple and common place. I am arguing about something that should not be, and should not be accepted, just because it was the worst design choice possible.

[MustrumRidcully]

Rejarial Galatan, on 23 January 2013 - 11:26 PM, said:

You speak well Mustrum, but, taking into account, every single Mech Warrior title prior to this one has had canon specific 360 radar as standard, like our fusion reactors, such tactics were not viable or possible w/out proper electronics to counter the radar. here, PGI deliberately designed a system that spits in the face of the legacy of this franchise to make such tactics mind numbingly simple and common place. I am arguing about something that should not be, and should not be accepted, just because it was the worst design choice possible.

Sorry, I am already too busy fighting against the broken-heat-system-and-weapon-balance-system windmill. I don't want to add yet another hopeless cause to my daily efforts.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

You is in Frozen City with the group, walk towards frontline because the Scout yells that he has a Raven seen in the cave, you're at the crest, and you realize, once the enemy concentrated his fire just for you ... you are alone, because the entire rest of the team ran back to the cave

[Bad Brad Keselowski]

Mentality has definitely changed.

In a recent game (Frozen City) when there was heavy LRM fire by 2 boats over the ridge keeping my team at bay, I charged forward and shut them down (because they started panicking) and stopped the fire so my team could move on. Bloodthirsty as they were, they went for the kill and didn't bother me (I had to be close because of minimum LRM range) and tore my back armor off while killing the boats.

When I was like WTF team? I got the answer (by founders, what made me kinda freak out a bit) that I was stupid to run into LRM boat fire.

Edited by Bad Brad Keselowski, 24 January 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Void Angel]

... I can think of no possible reason for this topic on Battlemech tactics to have been moved to the "Off-topic" forum... Thanks, random ninja moderator. That... that was swell.

[Void Angel]

Bad Brad Keselowski, on 24 January 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

Mentality has definitely changed.

In a recent game (Frozen City) when there was heavy LRM fire by 2 boats over the ridge keeping my team at bay, I charged forward and shut them down (because they started panicking) and stopped the fire so my team could move on. Bloodthirsty as they were, they went for the kill and didn't bother me (I had to be close because of minimum LRM range) and tore my back armor off while killing the boats.

When I was like WTF team? I got the answer (by founders, what made me kinda freak out a bit) that I was stupid to run into LRM boat fire.

Yeah, people can be... interesting... in their tactics at times. I had some Dragon pilot actually jump off a cliff near the rock arch in Forest Colony and land in front of me so he could shoot at my target - directly in my line of fire, and mid-laser beam to boot. I spectated the same guy running in to hug his next target, running directly at the circling enemy instead of maneuvering at a distance. He blocked up to two teammates from firing at nearly any given time - and blamed their bad aim for his stupidity. Most people aren't that guy, though - and it is to prevent them from becoming that guy that I put work into guides and tactical treatises like this one.

[Bad Brad Keselowski]

It's a complete mistery to me why this constructive post by the OP to new players has been moved to Off topic (other words: the trash bin).

I'd like, at least, an explanatory statement by the mod who did this.

[Phoo Phighter]

For Void: In pug's you just have to accept that there is only so much you do to coordinate the group.

Here is my initial experience with hardcore PUG team work. In MW4 a clan/guild setup a server (wish this could be done here). The server was well run and there were always players. The guild always played as a team and they were on comms. They allowed visitors to play against them on the other team. Often one or two members from the clan would come over to the visitor team and lead and coordinate the team.

The games usually ended with the clan winning and the visitors getting their butts kicked...over and over again. The good thing about this was that it was obvious it wasn't due to luck, or individual skill...you could see them moving as a team. Most visitors got pissed off at the clan and left and never came back. But I and a few others were determined to beat the ********!

I started to understand that they were SHOWING people how to coordinate and play MW4 as a team...sure they had an advantage in the comms but it wasn't overwhelming because some of the PUG players were pretty good. They were demonstrating that "if you want to beat us, you better play as a team!"

I started leading, communicating in text chat, coordinating movement, etc. until we finally won a few drops. We didn't win because the whole team was coordinated, but enough of us worked as a team to make a difference. In MWO I think that if at least four players play as a team they have a good chance of winning.

My point is that some people are ready to learn how to play as a team...some just aren't there yet, they are just running around shooting stuff and that's OKAY. You can only do so much with a text based chat communications...if some whackers aren't playing as a team and you communicate with them and they still don't, then you've done all you can do...and that's something to be proud of.

Don't feel frustrated.

Cheers,

~Foo FIghter~

[Void Angel]

Phoo Phighter, on 25 January 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

For Void: In pug's you just have to accept that there is only so much you do to coordinate the group.
~Foo FIghter~

Well, yeah, I know. My entire point in this post is to raise the awareness of people and encourage them to cooperate in a meaningful way. In any of the cases I listed, the problem was that people were basing their tactics on uncertainty to the point that they were becoming ineffective - even to the point of fielding a crappy 'mech designs. I actually have another post (it's in my signature) concerning overall tactics and cooperation. The principle (and the same reason I used strategy macros for Battlegrounds in WoW) is that if you get enough people to follow the plan, it doesn't matter what the rest do.

In any case, thanks for the encouragement - I appreciate it.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Bad Brad Keselowski, on 25 January 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

It's a complete mistery to me why this constructive post by the OP to new players has been moved to Off topic (other words: the trash bin).

I'd like, at least, an explanatory statement by the mod who did this.

<sits his beer down on the inside edge of the hatch on his Atlas> the OP was not constructive at all, and it is fitting that a MOD moved this rather less than constructive thread to off topic.

[Void Angel]

In what way was I not constructive by telling people to work together instead of being hesitant? In fact, when have you even tried to defend your angry diatribe? Now you squat in my thread taking cheap shots and trolling. Please stop and go away.

Your statement isn't even logically consistent!

If your unsupported claim that I'm not "constructive in any way" were actually true, it would be appropriate to close the thread - not move at thread specifically on tactics to the most out-of-the-way place on the forums. Either the thread is constructive (which it is) and should not have been moved, or it is not constructive, and should have been closed (as I have seen mods do with other threads.) Either way, you're wrong.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Void, to be fair, your OP consisted of a long diatribe calling what are, even by Sun Tzu's standards, very viable tactics, nothing but cowardly actions. This boils down to you dislike that play style and attacked it, which is not constructive.

[Chavette]

Not a tactic? It's a way of life for some.

[Rejarial Galatan]

there is this old saying: it is better to know when to quit the battle and live that to stay and die needlessly. OR if you prefer the other oldie: discretion is the better part of valor.

[Void Angel]

Rejarial Galatan, on 26 January 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

Void, to be fair, your OP consisted of a long diatribe calling what are, even by Sun Tzu's standards, very viable tactics, nothing but cowardly actions. This boils down to you dislike that play style and attacked it, which is not constructive.

To be fair? How is accepting your unsubstantiated, venemous invective (the rebuttals of which you have never answered) "fair?" I listed examples of negative battlefield tactics, and explained why they are bad ideas; I went out of my way to explain that

Void Angel, on 18 January 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

The people doing the things I mentioned aren't Bad, Selfish People, in most cases. They're just allowing fear (not just of getting their 'mech shot up, but of failure to help the team) to govern their actions to an unwise extent.

Meanwhile, your "constructive" entry into this thread began thus:

Rejarial Galatan, on 22 January 2013 - 11:11 PM, said:

Okay, first off, you know nothing of which you speak. What you call cowardice, I call: tactical retreat, smart playing, common sense, non-lemming bull rush behavior.

Just who the heck <so wish I could use the word I WANT to use here, but, what ever> do you think YOU are to decry ANYONE of a play style that is NOT YOURS? It is idiotic at best to bull rush into a fight and get torn to bits because of it. There is a time honored saying, that applies DIRECTLY to you! Discretion is the better part of valor." which, means: if it is going to kill you to engage in a fight you cannot win, then, NOT engaging is the best choice, it is not cowardice, it is a viable, tactical move on the player's part. Oh, and uh, you this guy, from like 500 BCE in China? Name: Sun Tzu? He has a word or two on this:

and went downhill from there. Your response is a diatribe; my post was not. I posted a specific rebuttal of your objection, and you ignored it and continued to use Sun Tzu's name as an appeal to authority - even though you have not answered my specific rebuttal to your claim - that Sun Tzu's book on ancient warfare 2,500 years ago somehow disagrees with the simple principle that you shouldn't be cowardly in battle. Even if Sun Tzu did disagree with me (he doesn't; see the bottom of Page 1,) his specific tactical advice may not be valid - see for example his advice for laying siege to or enduring a siege in a city; likewise his logistical references, etc. But none of that matters since you've barely taken notice that any objection to your invective has been made.

[REDACTED]

Finally, for pete's sake, "Discretion is the better part of valor?" You're quoting FALSTAFF! The comic relief cowardly bumpkin knight from the plays of Shakespeare! He made that claim to rationalize pretending to be dead instead of fighting in a battle. Perhaps I'm being overly picky here, but come on - are you totally immune to irony?

Edited by Viterbi, 31 January 2013 - 07:45 AM.
Removed directed language

[Ursh]

I agree with the OP, and I love the name "Coward's Ridge", because it's an apt description. You should throw in "Coward's Caldera" as well, because of the number of people who will sit below the rim even if their team is pushing over the top.

[Tesunie]

Let me say that cowardice is not a tactic nor strategy. Withdrawing though. The op is not talking about withdrawing to a better position but hiding to avoid damage and/or refusing to get into the fight/not moving to get into range/visual for sniping. He basically is saying that people need to preform their role, whatever that might be.
Scout/harasser/spotter - to gather information and attack vulnerable targets, backstab, disrupt enemy formations, anti-light and assault protection.
Long Range support/ sniper - to remain in the farther back ranks of the forces and provide fire support using spotting information and scout intel to move into safe positions. To provide cover fire for the forward elements and provide additional heavy weapon support for lighter armed units.
Close Range Brawler - The forward elements of the force designed to take and deal damage. The heavy armor and brusers. They are the mechs designed to kill quickly but are slower and more vulnerable to faster units out maneuvering them. They rely heavily on intel from scouts to be properly position themselves due to their slower speeds.

And he never said to rush to your death. I'm a Cicada pilot most times. Let me tell you that I run as a scout and harasser. I'll check the tunnel if no one else has. I'll use that tunnel to launch an attack on bases (conquest) or their backsides to disrupt their formations and target LRMs boats. Being in this role, I tend to find that my allies "cowardice" can get me killed as they don't push forward when I'm stopping the LRM rain and forcing the backs of the enemy to face them.

I've also had no problem scouting that ridge to get intel for the team and not die. Maybe take some damage, but it isn't suicide to scout the ridge. Heck, I can normally charge over, get behind them, and even run back over the ridge still alive.

One trick is to know when to run, charge or stand your ground. The expression "Discretion is the better part of valor" can apply if you intend to rejoin the fight at a more opportune time. Rushing in to die is dumb (and not what the op is about).

As for all the Sun Tez quotes, those are all poorly chosen and irrelevant to MW:O. They all are referring to avoiding a fight or by defeating a foe without having to fight. This is a game completely revolving around combat. You can not avoid the fight and win the game. Run away till a more opportune moment presents itself is not what those quotes are talking about. Those quotes all say to avoid a fight when possible, but TO FIGHT AND FIGHT TO WIN WHEN YOU NEED TO. I have never read Sun Tez, and you don't need to for a good grasp on tactics and military doctrine/stratagies. Team work, comunication and people doing what they can in their role will help you win. Being a scout hiding in you assault specialist shadow does not help the team. Being LRMs and charging the foe to get close is stupid. Setting a mech whose design is to be a mauler as support is a bit wasteful (especially if a Catapult that is in a lighter weight class can do it better).

All of the ops points where well founded and true with good points. He might have stated it in a fashion that wasn't clear, but his remarks have been well done to refine his points (even if he loved the strawman expression and used often unknown of less used words). On the otherside, bad quotes from Sun Tez that aren't relevant doesn't support you argument, which might be well founded but poorly expressed. The op isn't saying that a sniper should charge, but that a good sniper should be always moving to get into a better position. A scout should get intel, but not stand still out in the open nor hide and remain ineffective. There is always somewhere you can check as a scout. Even upon your own death you can still report your findings.

But I think the point is to have every action have some positive results for your team. If you aren't helping in some way, then you are hurting the team.

[Vanguard319]

Void Angel, on 23 January 2013 - 10:45 PM, said:

Don't worry; they will be. =) I seriously recommend that you consider upping your speed as a light chassis, though. Particularly with today's patch removing much (though not all) of the lag shields, you're going to see a lot of fast lights, so you'll need to be able to keep up with them in order to fight their specialized light hunters. If you do choose not to go that route, just tell the team your Raven is slow right now - if they have any brains they'll understand when you stick close to the team.

Truthfully, I'm not too worried about my speed at this time, Like I said, I willingly traded max engine size for increased sensor range, even when the other side has ECM, I tend to pick them up before they spot me. In essence, by the time they know I'm there, I've already directed the rest of my team on them, withdrew to a more defensable position, and switched my own ECM to counter mode. Speed is good, but information can be more valuable.