Sneeking, you go right on experimenting with the game. You'll develop your piloting skills and rise above the elo ranking where silly people shoot you for imagined offenses, and up with those of us in the grown-up world. =)
That being said, the best thing to do when you're in their backfield and you see a disconnect (he's probably not afk) is to burn off his arms, one leg, and side torsos to get the most damage out of your match. =) If you're really being ignored, you can burn off all the armor on exposed locations before you kill him - all from the cap point.
31
777 replies to this topic
#382
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 06 November 2013 - 04:18 PM
Well, if you're capping or something. If the enemy is coming after you, burn out his cockpit and run. =)
#383
-
-
- Rage
- 3,586 posts
Member
- Locationwest OZ
Posted 07 November 2013 - 02:39 AM
im in it first and foremost for the fun factor, I arrived here as a result of exploring failed options to getting mw2 with gbl expansion running under win7 x64. purely because back in the day MechWarrior, gbl and commanche with the overkill expansion disks on my totally amazing (for the time) 486dx lol was the stuff of legend among friends who visited our house. so I don't see myself been a capper 
id kamikaze first.
id kamikaze first.
#384
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 07 November 2013 - 11:41 AM
Capping by itself isn't fun - but winning is more fun than losing, all else being equal. You should never cap unless it's needed to win - because frankly, if we were just wanting to cap rush, there are many fine racing games we could be playing instead. Super Mario Kart comes to mind.
On the other hand, you can (and should) screw with the enemy and create opportunities for if the match goes south by stepping on the cap for a while to split their forces. If you see people coming after you, just run and lead them on; the longer they're out of the fight, the longer your team has the advantage. If you get totally ignored, then either cap it out or step off with just a little remaining - depending on if your team is up or down on kills.
On the other hand, you can (and should) screw with the enemy and create opportunities for if the match goes south by stepping on the cap for a while to split their forces. If you see people coming after you, just run and lead them on; the longer they're out of the fight, the longer your team has the advantage. If you get totally ignored, then either cap it out or step off with just a little remaining - depending on if your team is up or down on kills.
#385
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 37 posts
Member
Posted 11 November 2013 - 10:07 AM
US-Army Field Manual FM 100-5: Operations (1993)
The Nine Principles of War (pp. 2-4)
1. Objective:
"Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective."
2. Offensive:
"Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative."
3. Mass:
"Mass the effects of overwhelming combat power at the decisive place and time.
[...] Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass. To mass is to hit the enemy with a closed fist, not poke at him with fingers of an open hand."
4. Economy of Force:
"Employ all combat power available in the most effective way possible;
allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts.
[...] No part of the force should ever be left without purpose.
When the time comes for action, all parts must act.
The allocation of available combat power to such tasks as limited attacks,
defense, delays, deception, or even retrograde operations
is measured in order to achieve mass elsewhere at the decisive point and time on the battlefield."
5. Maneuver:
"Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power."
6. Unity of Command:
"For every objective, seek unity of command and unity of effort."
At all levels of war, employment of military forces
in a manner that masses combat power toward a common objective
requires unity of command and unity of effort.
Unity of command means that all the forces are under one responsible commander.
It requires a single commander with the requisite authority
to direct all forces in pursuit of a unified purpose.
Unity of effort, on the other hand, requires
coordination and cooperation among all forces even though
they may not necessarily be part of the same command structure
toward a commonly recognized objective."
7. Security:
"Never permit the enemy to acquire unexpected advantage.
Security enhances freedom of action by reducing vulnerability to hostile acts, influence, or surprise.
[...] Risk is inherent in war; however, commanders must not be overly cautious.
To be successful, commanders must take necessary, calculated risks
to preserve the force and defeat the enemy.
Protecting the force increases friendly combat power."
8. Surprise:
"Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared."
9. Simplicity:
"Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure thorough understanding."
Leadership (p. 2-11)
"The most essential dynamic of combat power
is competent and confident officer and noncommissioned officer leadership.
Leaders inspire soldiers with the will to win.
They provide purpose, direction, and motivation in combat.
Leaders determine how maneuver, firepower, and protection are used,
ensuring these elements are effectively employed against the enemy."
Characteristics of the Offense (p. 7-1):
"Surprise, concentration, tempo, and audacity
characterize offensive operations and are components of initiative."
Retrograde Operations (pp. 11-1):
"A retrograde operation is a maneuver to the rear or away from the enemy.
It is part of a larger scheme of maneuver to regain the initiative and defeat the enemy.
Its purpose is to improve the current situation or prevent a worse situation from occurring.
Its objectives are to gain time, to preserve forces, to avoid combat under undesirable conditions,
or to maneuver the enemy into an unfavorable position."
I hope you forgive this wall of text,
but I thought it more prudent to quote some proven doctrine
than to write up some gibble gubble of my own.
By the way quite a few of those principles were learned from the Germans,
especially that of Concentration of Mass, they called it "Schwerpunktbildung"
Timidity is indeed not a tactic ;D
P.S.: In the whole document the term "retreat" only occurs three times.
The Nine Principles of War (pp. 2-4)
1. Objective:
"Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective."
2. Offensive:
"Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative."
3. Mass:
"Mass the effects of overwhelming combat power at the decisive place and time.
[...] Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass. To mass is to hit the enemy with a closed fist, not poke at him with fingers of an open hand."
4. Economy of Force:
"Employ all combat power available in the most effective way possible;
allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts.
[...] No part of the force should ever be left without purpose.
When the time comes for action, all parts must act.
The allocation of available combat power to such tasks as limited attacks,
defense, delays, deception, or even retrograde operations
is measured in order to achieve mass elsewhere at the decisive point and time on the battlefield."
5. Maneuver:
"Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power."
6. Unity of Command:
"For every objective, seek unity of command and unity of effort."
At all levels of war, employment of military forces
in a manner that masses combat power toward a common objective
requires unity of command and unity of effort.
Unity of command means that all the forces are under one responsible commander.
It requires a single commander with the requisite authority
to direct all forces in pursuit of a unified purpose.
Unity of effort, on the other hand, requires
coordination and cooperation among all forces even though
they may not necessarily be part of the same command structure
toward a commonly recognized objective."
7. Security:
"Never permit the enemy to acquire unexpected advantage.
Security enhances freedom of action by reducing vulnerability to hostile acts, influence, or surprise.
[...] Risk is inherent in war; however, commanders must not be overly cautious.
To be successful, commanders must take necessary, calculated risks
to preserve the force and defeat the enemy.
Protecting the force increases friendly combat power."
8. Surprise:
"Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared."
9. Simplicity:
"Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure thorough understanding."
Leadership (p. 2-11)
"The most essential dynamic of combat power
is competent and confident officer and noncommissioned officer leadership.
Leaders inspire soldiers with the will to win.
They provide purpose, direction, and motivation in combat.
Leaders determine how maneuver, firepower, and protection are used,
ensuring these elements are effectively employed against the enemy."
Characteristics of the Offense (p. 7-1):
"Surprise, concentration, tempo, and audacity
characterize offensive operations and are components of initiative."
Retrograde Operations (pp. 11-1):
"A retrograde operation is a maneuver to the rear or away from the enemy.
It is part of a larger scheme of maneuver to regain the initiative and defeat the enemy.
Its purpose is to improve the current situation or prevent a worse situation from occurring.
Its objectives are to gain time, to preserve forces, to avoid combat under undesirable conditions,
or to maneuver the enemy into an unfavorable position."
I hope you forgive this wall of text,
but I thought it more prudent to quote some proven doctrine
than to write up some gibble gubble of my own.
By the way quite a few of those principles were learned from the Germans,
especially that of Concentration of Mass, they called it "Schwerpunktbildung"
Timidity is indeed not a tactic ;D
P.S.: In the whole document the term "retreat" only occurs three times.
Edited by Talsha, 11 November 2013 - 10:26 AM.
#386
-
-
- The Pest
- 2,655 posts
Member
Posted 11 November 2013 - 10:46 AM
Guys, stop picking Void apart. His post was well thought out, and very well intentioned! I for one salute your effort sir.
As for the light mech argument that seems to have cropped up-Void did not mean go racing over the top into a close contact race-about-athon!
In my ravens on Frozen city I typically edge out to the far right in I start with tunnel on my left. I'll go far enough forward to be able to see clearly the far side of coward's ridge and the centre of that position. From that position I can provide TAG and ppc fire to keep enemy ECM shut down. I'll often fade back and pop up into cover to provide that benefit without being focused.
I usually WON'T go in the tunnel as I feel it's suicidal if you meet enemy in there. Multiple enemy guns+tight cramped space=dead Raven in my book. What I do do however, is position myself far enough around to be able to see the entrance clearly and give my team a good 15-20 secs of heads up. I then usually ppc them to drag them further round the back, leading them out for my team's lrms to hammer.
So when Void says "poke over the ridge" I don't think he meant it literally. I think he meant it in terms of vision and field of view for y'know, SCOUTING.
Scouting, does not mean run up to enemy team and say HI. Good scouting means not being spotted whilst gawking at them and telling ALL your friends:)
As for the light mech argument that seems to have cropped up-Void did not mean go racing over the top into a close contact race-about-athon!
In my ravens on Frozen city I typically edge out to the far right in I start with tunnel on my left. I'll go far enough forward to be able to see clearly the far side of coward's ridge and the centre of that position. From that position I can provide TAG and ppc fire to keep enemy ECM shut down. I'll often fade back and pop up into cover to provide that benefit without being focused.
I usually WON'T go in the tunnel as I feel it's suicidal if you meet enemy in there. Multiple enemy guns+tight cramped space=dead Raven in my book. What I do do however, is position myself far enough around to be able to see the entrance clearly and give my team a good 15-20 secs of heads up. I then usually ppc them to drag them further round the back, leading them out for my team's lrms to hammer.
So when Void says "poke over the ridge" I don't think he meant it literally. I think he meant it in terms of vision and field of view for y'know, SCOUTING.
Scouting, does not mean run up to enemy team and say HI. Good scouting means not being spotted whilst gawking at them and telling ALL your friends:)
#388
-
-
- The Hammer
- 3,711 posts
Liao Mercenary
Posted 11 November 2013 - 11:04 PM
Training Instructor, on 06 November 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:
Waiting out the match timer is something that only happens in competitive tournaments, not in casual play. Because casual players, by and large, care about the action first and the win second.
Have seen it happen in High ELO pugs where almost all team are made of High ELO pugs or pre-made groups.
This was in cause where the only ones attacking were the poptarts while the brawlers start their fight probably only on the 10th minute.
#389
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 11 November 2013 - 11:38 PM
Which is another way of saying, "this is really rare."
I also have to caution anyone referencing "high-Elo" as a justification for a position on a couple of levels: First, no one reading this has any way to verify anyone else's skills. Second, high elo is by definition a very small fraction of the player base, and this guide is intended for general consumption. Finally, and important in relation to the first two, small groups of people who primarily play each other will be more susceptible to the Thomas Theorem than the general player base.
I also find myself reminding people that organized play will be different than the PuG environment, and that I do not advocate any specific tactics here - because the tactical environment will change based on real and imagined situations within the game. As an example of this, my 12-man is seeing a LOT more all-poptart leapfrogging teams since the improved indirect fire modules came out. The advantage IDF modules give over brawlers (who must generally concentrate in order to focus fires and advance) has made these teams very hard to beat - until the next change alters the battlefield yet again.
I also have to caution anyone referencing "high-Elo" as a justification for a position on a couple of levels: First, no one reading this has any way to verify anyone else's skills. Second, high elo is by definition a very small fraction of the player base, and this guide is intended for general consumption. Finally, and important in relation to the first two, small groups of people who primarily play each other will be more susceptible to the Thomas Theorem than the general player base.
I also find myself reminding people that organized play will be different than the PuG environment, and that I do not advocate any specific tactics here - because the tactical environment will change based on real and imagined situations within the game. As an example of this, my 12-man is seeing a LOT more all-poptart leapfrogging teams since the improved indirect fire modules came out. The advantage IDF modules give over brawlers (who must generally concentrate in order to focus fires and advance) has made these teams very hard to beat - until the next change alters the battlefield yet again.
#390
-
-
- The Hammer
- 3,711 posts
Liao Mercenary
Posted 12 November 2013 - 12:09 AM
Void Angel, on 11 November 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:
Which is another way of saying, "this is really rare."
I also have to caution anyone referencing "high-Elo" as a justification for a position on a couple of levels: First, no one reading this has any way to verify anyone else's skills. Second, high elo is by definition a very small fraction of the player base, and this guide is intended for general consumption. Finally, and important in relation to the first two, small groups of people who primarily play each other will be more susceptible to the Thomas Theorem than the general player base.
I also find myself reminding people that organized play will be different than the PuG environment, and that I do not advocate any specific tactics here - because the tactical environment will change based on real and imagined situations within the game. As an example of this, my 12-man is seeing a LOT more all-poptart leapfrogging teams since the improved indirect fire modules came out. The advantage IDF modules give over brawlers (who must generally concentrate in order to focus fires and advance) has made these teams very hard to beat - until the next change alters the battlefield yet again.
I also have to caution anyone referencing "high-Elo" as a justification for a position on a couple of levels: First, no one reading this has any way to verify anyone else's skills. Second, high elo is by definition a very small fraction of the player base, and this guide is intended for general consumption. Finally, and important in relation to the first two, small groups of people who primarily play each other will be more susceptible to the Thomas Theorem than the general player base.
I also find myself reminding people that organized play will be different than the PuG environment, and that I do not advocate any specific tactics here - because the tactical environment will change based on real and imagined situations within the game. As an example of this, my 12-man is seeing a LOT more all-poptart leapfrogging teams since the improved indirect fire modules came out. The advantage IDF modules give over brawlers (who must generally concentrate in order to focus fires and advance) has made these teams very hard to beat - until the next change alters the battlefield yet again.
High ELO players are people who win generally a whole lot more than then they lose. There are various ways to have reached this level. I am throwing our an assumption.. Anyone with win loss ratio of 2.0 or above should be around the high ELO level..
Note this does not mean they are super unbeatable gods or something..
I have seen some one claims (with evidence) to have a KDR or 9 and win loss ratio of 6, still lose horribly when he is solo pugging with a bad team.
What I just saying when many High ELO players somehow get matched up in a pug 12v12... The situation becomes very similar with a true 12 man, 12v12... Where there could be a lot of waiting about until the whole match an be decided in 30s - 1min in one huge brawl of mechs killing each other.
Edited by ShinVector, 12 November 2013 - 12:10 AM.
#391
-
-
- CS 2021 Gold Champ
- 6,852 posts
Member
Posted 12 November 2013 - 12:37 AM
Shade4x, on 06 November 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:
So basicly what your saying is that if you "feel" everyone is going to be a *****, you will hold back, because it "could" be a failure, because if 50% (not sure where you got that number) of the charges fail it "could" be "costly". Am i getting this right?
No that's not correct. You misunderstand. It is an 'if' question. It is other people not being clear about whether there is an issue. It would be them with the feels. Which prompts me to question again> Is timidity actually an issue in PUGs?
So it is not what I 'feel', it an unanswered question which needs to be addressed to determine the validity of the tactic.
Quote
It sounds a lot like justifying cowardice in a video games based on bad assumptions of possible bad scenario's guaranteeing that the charge will fail. This is what void angel was talking about. What Percentage of the time does the team lose because an assault mech starts a charge, and everyone flakes out on him?
I don't see it as an issue, it's very easy to exploit that mistake and it is very low risk to do so. ie If an assault rushes over alone he should usually die pretty quick with minimal effort even in PUGs.
Quote
If your alive in the back unable to engage then you might as well be dead. 9.5/10 times the guy in the back does under 100 damage and gets 0 kills, the only exception to this are good LRM boats. Thats called a liability.
Quote
You sound like your trying to be smart and failing. Your basicly saying if pushes fail because people are timid, then don't push and wait for there team to fail a push. That strategy would only work if A) you have total control over your team and every agree's not to push. 
the enemy doesn't pull off a successful charge OR flank, and C) your enemys fails a charge where your in position to take advantage of it.
the enemy doesn't pull off a successful charge OR flank, and C) your enemys fails a charge where your in position to take advantage of it.Those criteria are the nearly the same things that need to happen for a push to work. It's the double standard being applied to all scenarios propsed in the thread. This is why void has to resort to cherry picking scenarios to make his argument valid. All of them are biased to put the cohesive crack shot khrone berserkers on the pushing team and weakneed remidials on the other side. If all things are equal the case cannot be made.
Again, the only question that needs to be answered>
Are failed pushes and timidity a big problem in PUGs?
Quote
A 20 page topic thats been on the front page since july? Sounds to me like your REALLY bad at assumptions. This explains your strategy's and why no competent person would consider them valid.
heh, yeah, it might hint at the answer to a rather useful question.
Quote
Which if sucessfully assulted almost ALWAYS wins the match. Your basicly trying to defend the "sit still" "tactic" in warfare. Well, i'll give you this, you are brave to go against the fundamental basics of military strategy since the 1700's. Man, we should totally still build castles!
lol what a qualifier.
I guess might as well just go and say that it almost ALWAYS loses the match when a push fails, You're basically trying to defend the rambo atlas over rtardridge and walking into the kill zone tactic. Come on lol.
And funnily enough castles in MWO would be impregnable
Quote
what this? a glimmer of hope? besides contradicting your statement a few sentences ago, yes the first sentence is right. People can go around them. However all other statements are wrong.
It is not a contradiction.
Quote
There is no fluidity in rigidly walking back and forth in a small area let alone standing their. The only reaction you have is to shoot stuff you have.
Reactionary does not mean seeing someone and shooting them, it means changing your plans and/or routes based on what you, your team, and your enemy are doing.
Reactionary does not mean seeing someone and shooting them, it means changing your plans and/or routes based on what you, your team, and your enemy are doing.
Moving is essential to good positioning. Good positioning is reactionary. Things happen and you have to adapt on the fly if you want to stay at the top. Some times camping the enemy base is the best position possible XD.
Quote
You cannot win matches standing around waiting for the enemy to attack. At some point you have to move tword the enemy. If you wait till it is safe, then your useless on the field.
You basically let your team do all the heavy lifting, while you come in, steal a kill once in a while, and pretend your good, while your team fights outnumbered. I really hope you play locusts exclusively. What a waste of tonnage.
You basically let your team do all the heavy lifting, while you come in, steal a kill once in a while, and pretend your good, while your team fights outnumbered. I really hope you play locusts exclusively. What a waste of tonnage.
How about add me in game and find out.
Edit: I think I broke the forum with too many quotes XD.
Edited by Ghogiel, 12 November 2013 - 12:42 AM.
#392
-
-
- Bad Company
- 267 posts
Member
- Location36th Dieron Regulars
Posted 12 November 2013 - 01:33 AM
Attacking over the ridge? Really?
If you have no good commanding plan, I wouldnt follow you too (like scouts broke the enemys fire line). Since there are few better tactics possible, at this map.
Just shouting go over the ridge, wouldnt make me do so. Because I dont follow player which think to have a good plan, but players who play smart. If you dont know the players and qualitys in PUG games allready, then you have hard time to get their thrust.
If you have no good commanding plan, I wouldnt follow you too (like scouts broke the enemys fire line). Since there are few better tactics possible, at this map.
Just shouting go over the ridge, wouldnt make me do so. Because I dont follow player which think to have a good plan, but players who play smart. If you dont know the players and qualitys in PUG games allready, then you have hard time to get their thrust.
#393
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 37 posts
Member
Posted 12 November 2013 - 06:23 AM
HarlekinEO, on 12 November 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:
Attacking over the ridge? Really?
If you have no good commanding plan, I wouldnt follow you too (like scouts broke the enemys fire line). Since there are few better tactics possible, at this map.
Just shouting go over the ridge, wouldnt make me do so. Because I dont follow player which think to have a good plan, but players who play smart. If you dont know the players and qualitys in PUG games allready, then you have hard time to get their thrust.
If you have no good commanding plan, I wouldnt follow you too (like scouts broke the enemys fire line). Since there are few better tactics possible, at this map.
Just shouting go over the ridge, wouldnt make me do so. Because I dont follow player which think to have a good plan, but players who play smart. If you dont know the players and qualitys in PUG games allready, then you have hard time to get their thrust.
Going over the top?
#394
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 12 November 2013 - 08:32 AM
AGAIN, I am not advocating "attacking over the ridge," except in the very general sense of "getting to the other side and attacking, rather than hiding ineffectually by your favorite sniper hole." Demonstrating that you have not understood a discussion is an excellent way to request that your opinion be discarded.
Edited by Void Angel, 12 November 2013 - 08:34 AM.
#395
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,188 posts
Member
- LocationKnee deep in mechdrek
Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:23 PM
Talsha, on 11 November 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:
<Army words>
Timidity is indeed not a tactic ;D
P.S.: In the whole document the term "retreat" only occurs three times.
Timidity is indeed not a tactic ;D
P.S.: In the whole document the term "retreat" only occurs three times.
FTR, X being good, doesn't mean that just because Y isn't as good, or even is bad it ceases to exist. Replacing the cheese in your sandwich with mud is a bad idea, but it doesn't stop being a sandwich just because you did it.
Also, I would argue that what you quoted is more strategy than tactics. Take the base and use it to guard the oilfield is strategy, sending two platoons to the west side of the base etc is tactics.
Also, by much of the logic here, an ambush or base defense is never a good idea, because you aren't being aggressive and taking the fight to the enemy.
As to the lack of the use of the word "retreat", that means little if anything. You can call it "maneuvering to preserve forces" or a "retrograde action" or the old stand by, "falling back", but it's still a retreat. Oh and like most things, it isn't always a bad thing. It's like saying killing a person is wrong. It's a nonsense statement since there isn't enough information. Self defense is the best example of a situation where it wouldn't be wrong. Tragic, perhaps, but not wrong.
#396
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,188 posts
Member
- LocationKnee deep in mechdrek
Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:38 PM
Void Angel, on 12 November 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:
AGAIN, I am not advocating "attacking over the ridge," except in the very general sense of "getting to the other side and attacking, rather than hiding ineffectually by your favorite sniper hole." Demonstrating that you have not understood a discussion is an excellent way to request that your opinion be discarded.
Just for the sake of argument, what if someone was hiding effectually in their favorite sniper hole?
Different strokes for different folks. Where else should a lone wolf player go but PUGs? If they want to charge over the hill and die in a "blaze of glory", at least in their own mind, why shouldn't they? If they want to hang back and "mop up", why shouldn't they? (Because they will get faceplanted by the enemy team, but that's another story.) Their game, their rules.
Anyone who doesn't like it should seek out a 4 man team, and work to build a 12 man. If more did that, then the 12 man queue wouldn't be so empty all the time and the PUGs would have more time to themselves. It's not like it's hard. Join a House, make some intarwebz friends and add them on MWO. Not saying you have to add them on Facebook and give them your home number, it's MWO for crying out loud. They turn out to be douchebags, them dump them.
I just think we should work to help players be better, but telling them they are playing wrong rarely goes over well.
Disclaimer, it's after 0130 here, so I am not in full possession of my faculties, nor is this intended as a rant against Void or anyone else. Just trying to debate the issue and it's ramifications. This is about how stupid those Taco Bell Doritos tacos are right?
#397
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:04 AM
Effective shooting is fine, as I've said in the thread. =) It's when people get so damage-averse that they harm themeselves and the team that you run into problems. The same with suicide charges. Sometimes you just make mistakes, and that's that - but if a mentality or attitude is causing you to make mistakes, it's time to alter or discard it.
Also, this really isn't a case of mere preferences - no one here is playing by themselves; they're part of a team. It may be a regular group of friends, a 12-man group (hopefully also of friends,) or a bunch of random strangers, but while I may drop by myself, I never play alone. It's true that everyone has the right to make their own choices (even their own mistakes,) but it's equally true that saying, " it's their game" denies the reality of the situation. We're all on a team, and we should all try to win together. For example, rushing the enemy team and trying to tag them all before you die so you can disconnect, get assists, and move on to the next 'mech to farm c-bills is wrong. Are you technically allowed to do it? Sure, but it's really not ok. The first choice anyone made here is to play a team game, and we have a certain obligation to use our right to make choices to the benefit of the team - because after all, we did choose to play.
Also, this really isn't a case of mere preferences - no one here is playing by themselves; they're part of a team. It may be a regular group of friends, a 12-man group (hopefully also of friends,) or a bunch of random strangers, but while I may drop by myself, I never play alone. It's true that everyone has the right to make their own choices (even their own mistakes,) but it's equally true that saying, " it's their game" denies the reality of the situation. We're all on a team, and we should all try to win together. For example, rushing the enemy team and trying to tag them all before you die so you can disconnect, get assists, and move on to the next 'mech to farm c-bills is wrong. Are you technically allowed to do it? Sure, but it's really not ok. The first choice anyone made here is to play a team game, and we have a certain obligation to use our right to make choices to the benefit of the team - because after all, we did choose to play.
Edited by Void Angel, 17 November 2013 - 10:06 PM.
#398
-
-
- 334 posts
Member
- LocationRoseburg
Posted 22 November 2013 - 07:07 PM
Well there is a difference in deception and timidity.
You can give the enemy a false sense your forces is retreating or you can make yourself seem falsely weak then you can surprise them in a deadly ambush. Luring predators in a death trap and making them become prey. This is Deception tactic.
Timidity is just another form of cowardace.
You can give the enemy a false sense your forces is retreating or you can make yourself seem falsely weak then you can surprise them in a deadly ambush. Luring predators in a death trap and making them become prey. This is Deception tactic.
Timidity is just another form of cowardace.
#399
-
-
- The Marauder
- 7,136 posts
Member
- LocationParanoiaville
Posted 22 November 2013 - 07:27 PM
True - although it's difficult to do that in a PuG, because of the communication issues. This thread is less about specific tactics and more about general principles, though. The tendency to hang back and let other people take the risks (often because you've been burned before, or your 4-man doesn't trust PuGs) can snowball into a universal refusal to take necessary risks. Damage is like water - you can drown in a flood, but getting a little wet won't kill you. The problem is that many people feel like there's a fire hose around every corner, and creep along accordingly. The match then tends to be determined by who brought the most sniper 'mechs, or who had the most solo players get bored and charge alone, etc. - and not who actually maneuvered and attacked the enemy best.
Edited by Void Angel, 22 November 2013 - 07:28 PM.
#400
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,188 posts
Member
- LocationKnee deep in mechdrek
Posted 22 November 2013 - 07:39 PM
Void Angel, on 15 November 2013 - 12:04 AM, said:
For example, rushing the enemy team and trying to tag them all before you die so you can disconnect, get assists, and move on to the next 'mech to farm c-bills is wrong. Are you technically allowed to do it? Sure, but it's really not ok.
Actually, that is not only against the CoC and can get you sanctioned, but it also won't work. If you discon, you don't get any more assists etc. You have to hang around the match for it too count.
You are allowed to discon after dying, and it can make you more money by launching another mech but if I think we are winning, I hang around if i did decent damage hoping to get those assists. Heck the other day I almost disconned immediately thinking my LRMs had done squat and I got a kill right after dying due to LRMs still in flight hitting someone.
Void Angel, on 22 November 2013 - 07:27 PM, said:
True - although it's difficult to do that in a PuG, because of the communication issues. This thread is less about specific tactics and more about general principles, though. The tendency to hang back and let other people take the risks (often because you've been burned before, or your 4-man doesn't trust PuGs) can snowball into a universal refusal to take necessary risks. Damage is like water - you can drown in a flood, but getting a little wet won't kill you. The problem is that many people feel like there's a fire hose around every corner, and creep along accordingly. The match then tends to be determined by who brought the most sniper 'mechs, or who had the most solo players get bored and charge alone, etc. - and not who actually maneuvered and attacked the enemy best.
Yep, and it will sound facetious and condescending, but bear with me, Welcome to intarwebz gaming!!
Seriously, yes it's a team game, and skill/tactics are both useful, but PUGing in MWO is like dumping sand in your living room and cracking open a beer and pretending you are at the beach. You get sand in your toes while getting drunk just like a real beach, and you can watch babes in bikinis on TV, but it's not the same thing.
So arguing that people should do this and that is really just trying to bail a boat with a spoon. I feel ya, and I am right here with you trying to help newbies not turn into noobs (long term players who still act like newbies), but let's face it. we are horribly outnumbered and most of them don't know they aren't Gen. Patton reborn.
That all said, the only really viable tactic in a PUG is just follow the Atlas, and try to support the mob. If they rush, you rush. If they piddle around, you either piddle around or try to start a rush.
3 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users
