#481
Posted 16 September 2014 - 07:56 PM
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
Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:03 PM
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
Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:15 PM
#484
Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:22 PM
Void Angel, on 16 September 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:
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
Posted 21 September 2014 - 10:38 PM
#486
Posted 27 September 2014 - 09:26 PM
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
Posted 28 September 2014 - 03:19 AM
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
Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:15 AM
Blutarksy, on 27 September 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:
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.
#489
Posted 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM
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
Posted 28 September 2014 - 03:30 PM
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
Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:05 PM
Blutarksy, on 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:
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
Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:02 PM
Blutarksy, on 28 September 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:
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
Posted 30 September 2014 - 02:02 AM
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
Posted 30 September 2014 - 08:17 AM
#495
Posted 30 September 2014 - 09:34 AM
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
Posted 30 September 2014 - 09:37 AM
#497
Posted 30 September 2014 - 05:41 PM
MadLibrarian, on 16 September 2014 - 07:10 PM, said:
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
Posted 29 November 2014 - 03:28 PM
This post is superb, thank you.
#499
Posted 30 November 2014 - 01:01 AM
#500
Posted 04 December 2014 - 01:37 AM
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.
7 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users