Jump to content

Timidity Is Not A Tactic

Guide Balance Tactics

777 replies to this topic

#481 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 16 September 2014 - 07:56 PM

Maybe; but consider - whining and insulting people is so much easier on voice comms, too.

However, you're quite right; it's better to fix the problem, not the blame - no matter how tempting it may be, particularly when you told people what to do and what would happen if they didn't, and it all still happened anyway.

#482 Colonel Jaime Wolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 127 posts
  • LocationPhilippines

Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:03 PM

I know this is old but I agree with the statement that an Atlas should not be in a fire support role with LRMs. I tried it with the DDC + ECM thinking it would be nice to have an indirect fire combo with that stealth gizmo but I had more success with triple SRM6 and getting in the enemy's face with a good team backing me up.

I used to run an Atlas RS with 4x medium pulse lasers, the command console, BAP, and 2x LRM15 + artemis. Well. it sucks. This is my crummiest atlas build and I'll revise it for more aggressive play.

#483 Obscillesk

    Rookie

  • Sergeant
  • 9 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:15 PM

This is a solid post, and I'd like to add the only way for the habits outlined to go away is for those who are aware of the problems to communicate. And that bit about ALWAYS supporting your team, thats damned important. I've seen tactics I knew were going to fail end up succeeding, because the enemy team was scattered all over the map rather than responding properly to a poorly thought out assault. I've wisely shut my damn mouth and just gone with what seems to be the plan, rather than look like one of those dumbasses who predicts the outcome of the match when its 1-0 or 1-1. The more dissenting voices to a plan, the more confusion happens once someone notices deviations on their minimap.

#484 White Bear 84

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,857 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:22 PM

View PostVoid Angel, on 16 September 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:

That's post-modernism for you - but you're absolutely right. Even if the orders are stupid, either support the team anyway or ignore them - but in either case shut up. Unless you think you might be able to offer, quickly and without rudeness, a better way, you'll just annoy your team and make them play stupider.. er. It's actually a proven fact that ticking people off impairs their judgement; so whatever you do, don't get into fights in chat.


I remember one game where I was in a firestarter, perched on the corner of the tunnel area in forest and was giving commands to the team - they actually listened and we won; I had seismic so knew where all their mechs were & thankfully no one was stupid to tunnel rush or doing anything else stupid. Got some good thanks at the end too & a couple of friend requests.. ..now that is good form.

None of this STFU noob/NO!/I dont have to listen to you *because my mom brings me cookies* bs..

#485 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 21 September 2014 - 10:38 PM

It's always nice when that happens - but even when you have trolls, snapping back at them isn't helpful to you. As tempting as the possibility is. Best thing I've found is to try and encourage people to stay together, focus fire, and keep moving, with perhaps additional advice for the more specialized maps. If people listen, great! But if they're determined to ignore you, browbeating them will simply make their reasoning ability even poorer. ;)

#486 Senator Blutarsky

    Rookie

  • 8 posts

Posted 27 September 2014 - 09:26 PM

Communication is obv the key but in the pug games people just don't say much. You might get a comment or two at the beginning but then it's "d4 lots" at best. Perhaps someone should be forced to take company command? Xp for communication? MWO is a reasonably slow paced game there really isn't much of an excuse for not taking a couple of seconds to write something out. And yet even the experienced players in pug games rarely do.

Their are tons of LRM and gauss/pc sniping builds in the game at the moment so probably too many teammates trying to hang back and offer fire support for what would be tactically optimal. To be honest though another culprit for timidity has to be the gospel that the team needs to stick together. The murderball is not a good tactic ! Blocked lines of site and often single file when you start to push. Also horribly easy to flank when the guys up front are immobile and lined up trying to snipe downrange.



#487 Kodyn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Pest
  • The Pest
  • 1,444 posts
  • LocationNY, USA

Posted 28 September 2014 - 03:19 AM

Sometimes communication just doesn't matter, unfortunately. I sometimes end up playing late night/early morning hours, eastern time, and I seem to get a lot of people who are just either too tired to bother, or don't speak any english, so they just ignore everything, and do the exact opposite. It's extremely rare to find a match in which a team actually listens to the person trying to lead, whether they're being nice or not, I just enjoy it when it happens, and look forward to company drop nights within my unit for actual teamwork and comms.

Of course my elo is likely rather low, so the pool I have to choose from as far as teammates is more than likely newer players, or lazy players who refuse to get better...so perhaps I just need to take it up a few notches myself and try to get into a higher elo bracket.

#488 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:15 AM

A lot of the communication issues are caused by laziness, or just post-modern narcissism. Players dropping solo often just don't care about the team enough to even warn it that they just got murdered by a flanking force of Dire Wolves - even though doing so would dramatically reduce the chances of a loss and help ensure they get more c-bills from the match, even if they're just disconnecting to drop again.

View PostBlutarksy, on 27 September 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

Their are tons of LRM and gauss/pc sniping builds in the game at the moment so probably too many teammates trying to hang back and offer fire support for what would be tactically optimal. To be honest though another culprit for timidity has to be the gospel that the team needs to stick together. The murderball is not a good tactic ! Blocked lines of site and often single file when you start to push. Also horribly easy to flank when the guys up front are immobile and lined up trying to snipe downrange.

Now, I've had this conversation a few times now, so hear me out. You're absolutely right that staring downrange with no one watching the flanks, or trundling into the enemy team single file leads to Bad Things and Shame. But those are bad uses of grouping, not an indication that grouping is a bad tactic. Unfortunately, grouping works better than splitting up, on balance, because of the cumulative effects of focus fire.

If you split up - say, to flank around a large bit of terrain - the enemy gains local fire superiority against your elements in contact. This makes them more likely to damage your teammates, or push into you before your flanking element is in position. If they have an ECM scout somewhere doing his job (a rarity, I know) they can identify the flanking attempt and simply roll over whichever element they choose. Of course that doesn't always happen - you can have great results with flanking - but without voice communications it happens enough that people choose to group up for a reason. It's not a random tactic that all "the PuGs" decided on because they were bad. =)

All that being said, I totally agree that many of the tactics people use while grouping are... imperfect. Just because it's better not to split up, you don't have to all hug the D-DC, or huddle behind the same rock. The only thing you need to do is be close enough to each other to offer and receive supporting fires. There's a right way and a wrong way to do everything.

But then, that's Another Thread. B)

#489 Senator Blutarsky

    Rookie

  • 8 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM

There is some good stuff in that thread too. Perhaps assaults should default to being lance commanders?

As a new player I will say that there is plenty to read about on map strategy and build design but really only these 2 threads in the forum that deal with tactics. A shame considering that small unit tactics are probably the most useful as far as how to win a pug match. Strategy is mostly useless as pug maps and teammates are random. Mech choice and loadout is almost useless as mech class composition is fixed within the team and your loadout is locked in. All the time you spent tweaking and perfecting your mech is mirrored on the opposing team so that's a wash too. I don't buy the kinda lazy consensus that it isn't worth the trouble given that there are language/willingness/disconnect barriers to effective tactics. In theory they affect both teams equally.

MWO is tactically a simplified version of real combat because you know exactly how strong the enemy is and where they are as they spawn across from you. As far as oversimplified tactics go the worst thing that can happen to you is that you get surrounded, taking fire from all sides. Close second is you get flanked and are now taking fire from two sides. Initial contact in pug matches is almost always ranged indirect fire. You're both behind cover almost by definition or else you would have fired on each other earlier so its usually ineffective fire. Fire and maneuver doctrine is to hold (hopefully) suppressing fire at the initial skirmish line while part of your team moves to try and flank. In most cases it's do it to them before they do it to you. If you're in a tight group initially this is difficult to organize but if your lance's are advancing with some modest horizontal spacing it will happen naturally. As far as small unit tactics the default lance construction is not too far off the mark as you've got a solid mix of capabilities. A tight group just seems to invite getting surrounded. Line of sight with the lance next to you would be optimal but is admittedly hard on some of the maps. Being spread out is bad only if it is to the extent that you can't support one another quickly, otherwise it is pretty much what you're supposed to do.

Anyway I wonder if you could issue some quick team messages at the outset that would give you better odds than simply saying, "stick together" "rally D4"

Perhaps something like: "stick with you lance", "heavy & medium should flank the assault"
Seriously I wonder if just forming a long horizontal line of mechs would be a step up tactically for most pug matches.

#490 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 28 September 2014 - 03:30 PM

Well, a quick skim over the first few pages of both my threads will tell you how divisive tactical discussions can be - people assume that their tactics are the best, so they either assume that you agree, or argue vehemently over minutae.

Similarly, there's a disconnect over what terms mean, particularly when a specific meaning of a general term is beneficial to the person making an argument. I've had people insist that "staying together"always has to mean, "clumping together under a single ECM umbrella so that no one has room to move or maneuver. That... was not what the very general "stay together" was meant to say, but my opponent tried to insist on it, in order to catch me out in a "contradiction" of his own devising.

The problem with adopting standard flanking tactics for cav and infantry in MWO PuG matches is that they require a degree of team cohesion, unit composition, and coordination that's unrealistic to expect in a PuG environment. If your elements separate beyond close-set mutually supportive positions, you end up with a window where a push by the enemy against either element can result in that element's defeat in detail. A well-coordinated team with good tactics and cohesion can see it coming and adapt, but PuGs are not a well-coordinated team with good cohesion; they've all been burned by their teammates too many times.

The communication problem also cannot be overstated; given that it's impossible to rapidly communicate complex information to the team, you need a low level of dispersion as a tactical control measure. The more separation you have between your elements, the lesser your control over them; lack of communication also lessens tactical control - and that's even before the disruptive effects of discipline (or rather, its lack) come into play. It would be nice to be able to advocate a more robust doctrine of maneuver tactics, but unfortunately the inability of PuGs to drop together in subsequent matches limits my ability to informally train people to recognize good tactics on the field.

When I start out, I usually just say, "Stay together, focus fire, and keep moving," unless the map is Terra Therma - then it's, "Stay away from the giant bowl of heat and failure; set up a kill zone or rotate around the outside." But I digress; my point is that anything more complicated than that will start to shut down peoples' brains for various reasons - or even encourage The Stupid to argue.

#491 IraqiWalker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 9,682 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:05 PM

View PostBlutarksy, on 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

There is some good stuff in that thread too. Perhaps assaults should default to being lance commanders?


Lights would be better suited for it honestly. They're the ones that usually have the most intel available to them, plus the luxury of hiding under ECM/behind cover, and analyze the field for better orders. When I ran 12 man drops for my unit, I usually commanded from a COM-2D.

#492 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:02 PM

View PostBlutarksy, on 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

There is some good stuff in that thread too.

Aw, thanks!

Setting up anyone to command by default wouldn't be a good idea, though. It would trivialize the role and very likely encourage players to ignore it more than they already do.

Edited by Void Angel, 28 September 2014 - 09:03 PM.


#493 The Driver

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 43 posts

Posted 30 September 2014 - 02:02 AM

excellent post. I totally agree, unfortunatly, I think its impossible to convince players mid pug of their shortcomings so I hope many people have read and learn from this.

I abhor timidness in all its forms. thats why I play mainly lights.



I even watch back videos like this, kick myself and think to "Why didnt i shoot the Dragon Slayer as my team's LRMs hit?" (to mask my presence but up the damage on him)

#494 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 30 September 2014 - 08:17 AM

You're absolutely right that remonstrating with people in-match won't really help - that's why I made this thread, along with Follow the Fracking Atlas, in my signature. If I can reach enough people, I can effect some change in some Elo ranges, at least. That's really all I can hope for, but it's worth the effort of trying.

#495 K0M3D14N

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 212 posts

Posted 30 September 2014 - 09:34 AM

The biggest problem in my opinion with trying to set up a flanking element in PUG drops is really the inability of the rest of the group to understand when their position has been compromised and when they need to give ground. I've seen way, way too many PUG groups sit in their firing line and be swarmed by superior tonnage and numbers, then whine about how ineffective flanking is and how a murderball is the only way to succeed.

It's perfectly reasonable and acceptable to abandon a position and relocate if it becomes compromised before your flanking element is in place and ready.

#496 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 30 September 2014 - 09:37 AM

It's because of the lack of communication; otherwise, it'd be a wash between the defender realizing they need to retreat, and the attacker realizing the defender is vulnerable. But weight of fire doesn't need verbal explanation, so an aggressive attacker can achieve suppression against the defending team, and then it's down to herd mentality - the defenders all watch each other to decide what to do next, and no one takes action until it's too late.

#497 ShinobiHunter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,009 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 30 September 2014 - 05:41 PM

View PostMadLibrarian, on 16 September 2014 - 07:10 PM, said:

Just going to throw another tip in the jar. Don't wait for your team to do all the stuff you're going to whine about later. Talk early, often, and as specifically as possible so you don't have to whine after you die.

Whining and insulting people doesn't inform them for next time, it just teaches them to whine, insult, and blame their team too. Teach people tips nicely, and tell the whiners to play in the group queue.

Honestly though, the bigger problem is that voice comms aren't built in.

+1

A like just wasn't enough for this one.

Good thread, now if only I could get all PUGs to read it...

#498 epikt

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 1,482 posts

Posted 29 November 2014 - 03:28 PM

Bump! for great justice!

This post is superb, thank you.

#499 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,116 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 30 November 2014 - 01:01 AM

Aw, thanks! You win the grammar award for using "superb" in a sentence!

#500 Drazyx

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 35 posts

Posted 04 December 2014 - 01:37 AM

PLEASE people, stop running away from the front line at the beginning of the match! stop abandoning your lance to join 7/12 other mechs to have a bite to eat behind a cliff off to the side somewhere, not contributing at all.

the best team is the one that acts as a unit, spreading teamwide firepower vs specific armour targets, BUT still effective if the mass firepower is spread over a few targets, compared to firepower that is spread loosely.

this is not a game of SWAT, your team mates are hardly there to help you in any way. This game relies on quick thinking and rewards productive firepower, all guns to bear with much shock and awe, always working at something. Peeping over hills trading hits and shuffling around several other friendly mechs whilst shooting eachother in the back does not help one another out. Do your own thing next to your friendlies, but do not trade positions, dont hide behind eachother, help one another out by burning down a target faster to increase their survivability.

speed is a weapon, a buff, a strategic asset. flanking and repositioning ARE options dontchaknow...........

im glad to see they put in a points counter for current rewards gained during the match, perhaps it gets some people putting on their try hard pants when they see it flowing in on the spot.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users