777 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

The point is that people can abuse the system for purely personal gain - but even if it's not punishable, it isn't right.

As for the futility of telling people to do the right thing - well, it's not futile. I don't need every player to read this thread, and I don't need to convince everyone who reads it. All I need is to convince enough people to shift the player culture - I only need enough people to do the right thing so that benefits of doing the right thing can be felt. The player base is still small enough to accomplish that. Sure, there's always people who just misbehave because they always wanted to be bullies or delinquents, but are too much the coward to do it without the internet to shield them. I'm not going to "fix" those people, and I don't try to; but most players aren't that way. The ones that do pay attention and want to improve their play can benefit from guides like this one - and they're the ones I'm writing to.

Edited by Void Angel, 09 May 2014 - 07:17 AM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Fair enough, and I wasn't trying to discourage you from fighting the good fight. Might have come off as more confrontational than I meant.

Might be a bit irked at the morons who tell me to stop capping and help fight when I am in a Locust. I am helping, I am trying to get some ***** to chase me, bout the best you can expect!

[Shade4x]

Ghogiel, on 12 November 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

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?

No you basicly said that if you don't feel like a charge is going to win, you won't charge. That leaves everyone hanging and ensures the charge to fail. This assumes you always have the right answer, which shows your argoance, stupidity, and lack of humility all in one. Making up questions that have nothing to do with the point at hand is a great way to attempt to derail the converation. I'm assuming its because you recoginize the weakness in the points you tried to make.

Quote

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.

Which is why you should never let an assault mech charge alone. Glad you see my point.

Quote

That's just silly. Unable to engage is an irrelevant point and pointless observation. You could be anywhere and that would be true. And LRM boats not being able to engage would net them sweet nothing just like every other mech not engaging.

There is this thing. it's called positioning. if your sitting back of the back of the line, and refusing to move you in effect have made yourself unable to engage. You are intentionally making yourself useless. There is a difference between being jumped by an ECM spider when you have no BAP and purposely sitting in the back where your least effective.

Quote

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.

Ok situations reversed, you have 12 crack shot snipers, and 12 remidial brawlers who use cover to move in. Then its down to who does more dps, and who can take more hits. My money is on the brawlers every time. They simply will do higher dps, are generally made for dps, not burst dps, and brawling doesn't require the aim that long range snipeing does. I can come up with many brawler builds that can pull 50 points alpha's and fire them 6-8 times before over heating. I can't do the same with snipers.

Quote

Again, the only question that needs to be answered>
Are failed pushes and timidity a big problem in PUGs?

Yes, hence the 21 page thread on them. Have you even played this game?

Quote

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.

But it doesn't. A failed push involves several mech's retreating and then regrouping. You can regroup after a failed charge. You can't regroup when the enemy sucessfully charges you. Why? Because they are where you were. To regroup you need to have a place to regroup to, and since the line is broken, and they are chasing down mech's, there is no where to run. On a failed charge, the enemy must charge to prevent regrouping, otherwise you can just run back to the original position.

Quote

It is not a contradiction.

Yes it is.

Quote

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.

no its not. Good positioning is based on assumptions and information. Good positioning is being in the right place to take advantage of the enemy's mistakes. That is reactionary. Case and point, sitting back at the base is a bad position, if the enemy over extends, you still can't do anything. Positioning yourself behind a building when that enemy over extends allows you to come from behind and kill him.

Quote

How about add me in game and find out.

Sure... if your as bad at this game as your posts, should be easy to beat you in a game.... oh wait, i think you had yet another minor oversight. We can't fight eachother in a match if we are in the same group. why would i want to play with someone that obviously is going to leave me exposed and hanging, and has flawed logic? Tell you what, when you get to my ELO, if you ever do, then we can compare damage, kills and all of that. Right now i'm leveling a bunch of mech's and trying out some crazy builds, so maybie i'll drop down far enough to see you

P.S. Void, i wasn't defending you, i was defending the logical point you made. I appologise in advance if twinkle toes here posts again. Just know that i'm enjoying this debate, the same way i enjoy playing unreal 3 on god mode.

[Void Angel]

Debates require reason on both sides, man. At least consider my blood pressure and the damage to my sanity from wanting to point out that "weakneed" isn't a word, that "remedial" has only one "i," and that "Elo" is not an acronym!

Ghogiel has only a distant, abusive relationship with the truth; consider how he keeps on accusing me of his own sin - applying a double standard. He's even adopted that argument, now I brought it up. It's "his now," and I've been "cherry-picking" to get by all along - as if all I'd offered were silly stories about how rushing is best. This thread isn't even about "Rush every timez!!!1one!1!" But why revisit an argument I won? It's an exercise in futility.

"To give truth to him who loves it not is only to give him more plentiful reasons for misinterpretation." Ghogiel isn't going to be convinced, because he's too emotionally invested in his opinion to even acknowledge points against him. I appreciate the bumps, but having a troll come slobbering out from under its bridge every ten days just isn't going to produce useful discussion - it'll just lend itself to the impression that there's some legitimate controversy about the idea that being too cautious is a bad thing.

Edited by Void Angel, 23 November 2013 - 07:04 PM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Void Angel, on 23 November 2013 - 07:03 PM, said:

Debates require reason on both sides, man. At least consider my blood pressure and the damage to my sanity from wanting to point out that "weakneed" isn't a word, that "remedial" has only one "i," and that "Elo" is not an acronym!

"To give truth to him who loves it not is only to give him more plentiful reasons for misinterpretation." Ghogiel isn't going to be convinced, because he's too emotionally invested in his opinion to even acknowledge points against him. I appreciate the bumps, but having a troll come slobbering out from under its bridge every ten days just isn't going to produce useful discussion - it'll just lend itself to the impression that there's some legitimate controversy about the idea that being too cautious is a bad thing.

1. I hear you. I miss the good old days when people online (I say online because that's what it was, BBSs etc) didn't mind their spelling being corrected because it helped them learn English (given that it wasn't their fist language). These days people on the intarwebz can't even spell "Internet" much less know what it is.

2. Where is that quote from? I have a feeling it needs to go up on my FB page

[Void Angel]

The quotation is of George MacDonald. I've always liked it. =)

[Shade4x]

Nicky, Void, here is what i do, and i have had great success with it.

1) if you want to charge, type it in team chat, then charge.
2) at the beginning of the match ask who's got brawlers
3) let all brawlers know that when you charge, you won't leave them hanging and to charge with you
4) If playing with a friend, have him agree with you in chat, and back you up.

Generally i found that people are scared little (censored word), and are more afraid of being left out in the open alone with no support then a higher chance of winning and crushing the enemy. This is why MWO has become a giant sniper fest with shadow hawks jump jetting in at 100kph to steal a kill on a mech you just spent half your armor coreing. When people know they will have some back up, they tend to play more aggressively and will commit to a charge.

Also i am not against legit snipers or LRM boats taking up positions and doing what they are designing to do. The problem is when you got a highlander with a standard engine shooting 1 ER large laser at a dual gauss Jagger, it ends only one way. Never mind his AC/20, SRM's. Those guy's should be flanking or charging. I see a lot of builds like that now a days. 90% close range, and 1 ER LLAS. thing is, you become a very well armored hero locust at that point.

[Void Angel]

I've done the same thing myself. If someone actually gives direction, many people will follow their lead. Just be sure not to rage at the people who inevitably refuse to follow the group. You will (seriously) make everyone stupider.

[Ruhkil]

My 2 cents on this is that you have to be able to seize on opportunities as they present themseles. Earlier today i was playing a rather heavy match with mostly assaults and heavies with a sprinkling of mediums and few if any light mechs. I forget the name of the map but it was the one where the Theta cap point spawns in the middle of a basin that the ridge peekers usually spend the whole game poking each other over.
my mech ilya muromets x4 med las x2 gauss

almost immediately we lost 2 mechs to lrm fire and our offense stalled behind cover. Every single one of our guys lost their nerve because of the 12v10 lrm shitstorm dynamic. Every once in a while an enemy heavy would pop out of cover and get a lock for his missle boats one particularly nasty enemy was a x2 gauss jager that was really good at not appearing on the same patch of high ground twice.

like the OP said you have to move to win. I saw that if they were able to just pick away at us we would lose 2-3 more mechs before killing one of theirs and it would have been 12-7 thats a loss either way. I saw an opportunity found a building that would block the LRMS that was halfway between our line and the enemy. the LRM boats on the other team all wasted their missles on that building while i killed an enemy victor. my team seeing an opportunity charged forward behind me and annhilated 6 enemy mechs. I lost 20% of my health by taking a risk and turned around a losing situation.

If i had hidden we all would have died

[Void Angel]

Good job! I'm glad both that you took the risk, and that your team supported you. I get some teams that are so set into their "this is the meta" sniper habits that they would have left you hanging. Well done.

[wanderer]

Pssh. My Atlas carries two big LRM racks...because it means what I'm shooting at gets shot at earlier. Often. And while I'm tearing into it with laser fire and my TAG designator is guiding the salvos in.

Now, if you're going to sit at 900m and try that? You're a failure. 500m or so, letting your armor do it's job while you remorselessly pour missiles and lasers into your target? You're doing it right.

When direct engagement over terrain is stymied, one goes around the obstruction, not down it's throat or hiding behind it.

[Void Angel]

Yeah... I used to do something like that. Before the ECM hardpoint nerf and LRMageddon (the fallout; I was taking a break and missed the actuall OP period) I had a hybrid Atlas that worked well as an all-range powerhouse. It was fun, and effective. I think I finally settled on 2 ALRM20s, an ERPPC, and a Large Laser to help discourage lights. I'd smack around anything I could see with LRMs and Laser/PPC fire from that same ~500m sweet spot. Lights and mediums who came after the "LRM boat" found that I wasn't helpless close in, and anything bigger I saw coming and plastered with LRMs. I didn't hide behind the team and blind-fire my lrms all day, so I was still providing the battlefield presence that's part of what a properly run Atlas brings to the table - it is to this day my favorite Atlas build.

I don't think it would work today.

The reason it wouldn't work (other than that I can't fit the launchers and ECM in the same torso) is that typically a third of any given enemy team is poptarting; of those that aren't, half are snipers or dakka 'mechs, with a few fast strikers and/or brawlers to round out the mix. These numbers are for illustration purposes, but you get my drift - lots of jump sniping and dakka. With LRMs being weaker in the aftermath of LRMageddon, the ERPPC being nerfed back into sanity, and jump snipers beating LRMs during the standoff phase, my old LRM-centric build just won't cut the mustard, even with 12 tons of heavy beam cannons as backup.

That being said, a lot of people are splashing LRM launchers back onto their Atlases these days, in order to have something to do during the sniper phase, and supplement their firepower while they close. It's a perfectly valid strategy, whether or not it's "the" optimal way to build the chassis, and I'm not trying to discourage them (or you) from those kinds of build. What I am trying to discourage is people using the "hide and hope" method with Atlases, or any 'mech - like you said, if you're using your Atlas' LRMs at 900m, you're Doing It Wrong. Similarly, as discussed ad nauseum early in the thread, an Atlas is a crappy missile boat (or sniper,) and shouldn't be built as such.

[DAYLEET]

Offence is the best defence. How many times ive seen my team start a push only to run at the first sight of opposition and try to join with those 2 mech alone on the otherside of the map because it's safer there at that moment in time. Well they just ensured the team would lose by spliting up group, removing armor absorbing damage from the front line and much needed firepower. Many times i wonder why people bother playing this game at all.

[Void Angel]

Intelligent offense is the best offense, though. Still, it's better to blindly charge the enemy than to huddle like a flock of frightened sheep as the wolves prowl the edges and drag people bleating into the night.

[orsonic]

Q: Whats the easiest way to make an assault mech move in reverse ?

A: shoot it



I agree about the timidity ... focused aggression is a key element in victory , and the close in brawl situations are such a blast , literally .

No more cowering in the valleys ! Take it to them and over the top , to victory !!!

[Wrathful-Khan]

So sick of seeing 6-7 guys in heavies and assaults just huddling in some corner of the map literally doing nothing while people die.

Also sick of when i'm in my cicada or xl-jager and the brawler mech with me decides hes not moving until I take point and check the ridge/alley/corner. Must I always do the dirty work? I'm happy to do my share, but must it ALWAYS be me in my little squishy mech?

Edited by Indiandream, 31 January 2014 - 05:43 AM.

[Vidarok]

Perhaps it would be best if you let people play the game the way they want.

[1453 R]

Pardon me, Vidonik.

This is the Guides and Strategies section of the forums. it's a place specifically intended for people to post ways in which their fellows may improve their games. "Play the way you want" is not the way this section works; it is intended for players who wish to play better.

perhaps it would be truly best were we to make every possible effort to convince people that cowering behind a rock getting lurmed and dakka'd at until such time as the enemy has a comfortable lead with which to charge in is not, in fact, a winning strategy, hm?

[Nikkoru]

I have a different take on this than the OP.

Humans are very simple creatures at their core. They follow rewards, and they avoid penalties. This is sometimes called the stick and carrot.

In game design, player's behavior can be easily predicted by the way the game structures its sticks and carrots. If a game rewards a certain kind of behavior, it will become more common. If you penalize other behaviors, they will become less common. There will always be a few rogue individuals who will do whatever they please regardless of rewards and penalties, but by and large most gamers will follow the carrots and avoids the sticks the game lays out.

So, onto my point:
Players behave timidly because that is what the game rewards. The structure of the game's reward system is to blame, not the players themselves. Currently the game penalizes anyone who is the tip of the spear, so no one wants to be the tip of the spear. If the game rewarded agressive behavior more, then we would see more of it.

It's as simple as that. Rather than wasting time trying to blame and shame players into changing their behavior, I think a far more productive approach would be to come up with ideas about how the kind of behavior you want to see can be encouraged by alterations to the game design.

If you want to change the way people act, chance the placement of the sticks and carrots.

Edited by Nikkoru, 31 January 2014 - 08:58 AM.

[Wrathful-Khan]

Victory is the carrot. Losing is the stick. At least for me. I'll do what it takes to win, even if that means being the guy making the risky run up the flank, or the guy cresting the hill to lay a base of fire.

You say the game rewards timidity.

I say the game rewards fast reading of the play, good positioning, movement and initiative.

In addition: playing as the "tip of the spear" as you put it can sometimes net 4 or even more kills - sounds like a tasty carrot to me.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Edited by Indiandream, 31 January 2014 - 09:26 AM.