AGN: Community Clash Recording TXR and MERC vs NNG and TGWW - Page 4

necrate · 2013-09-26, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by snafus

I wish to propose that we enact a new rule of only allowing one squad of air per team to be active. This is by no means an attempt at watering down the tactical options of the matches but actually giving more.

I just wanted to note that this does not make any sense. The same options available with the limitation are also available without it. This makes the new set of options a subset of the old options. Then note that without the limitation you could potentially have one more Liberator than with the limitation. This makes the options available under the proposed limitation a strict subset of the old.

This could be a potential separate ruleset that they could implement for outfits who want stricter rules on force makeups or are looking for a different kind of combat than otherwise possible. I don't know if they would want to make the effort to enforce this rule because it would require many details and plenty of overhead.

PredatorFour · 2013-09-26, 01:50 PM

If your a top ace fighter pilot who is willing to put the time in you SHOULD hands down shit on a mediocre pilot who is half arsed at flying his fighter. None argument IMO.

Nexus is interesting as you can have a massive air battle in the skies whilst the ground troops march underneath, i think it will make for some great strategies and fights.

Violin · 2013-09-26, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by necrate

I just wanted to note that this does not make any sense.....lolwut?

I just wanted to note that what Snafus said made a ton more sense than whatever you just rambled on about.

Hats off to NNG and TGWW for bring home the W for the VS. Looking forward to a chance at a match on the Nexus looks like a blast.

TorinPS · 2013-09-26, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by snafus

I wish to propose that we enact a new rule of only allowing one squad of air per team to be active. This is by no means an attempt at watering down the tactical options of the matches but actually giving more. By enacting this one squad of air only teams will have to implement the best squad make ups of LIB to ESF ratios. This will also encourage a more consistent air fight during the match as your platoon will be able to supply you with ESF for the entire match.

I see this as further disadvantaging the side with a lesser skilled air squad. If you are allowed 12 people in the air at any given time, and your 12 people cannot compete, you outright lose the air battle. You don't have the option of putting 24 people in the air to try to counter it, you just lose the air battle. And IMO, 12 people in the air is still more than plenty to handle 48 people on the ground. 1 Liberator is still ample to hold down a spawn when they don't have to worry about air threats. Basically this turns all air vs air battles into strictly a matter of skill and the 'right' air squad loadout. (lib/esf balance) Not that this is particularly bad, it just gives even fewer options to outfits with less experienced air squads.

snafus · 2013-09-26, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by TorinPS

I see this as further disadvantaging the side with a lesser skilled air squad. If you are allowed 12 people in the air at any given time, and your 12 people cannot compete, you outright lose the air battle. You don't have the option of putting 24 people in the air to try to counter it, you just lose the air battle. And IMO, 12 people in the air is still more than plenty to handle 48 people on the ground. 1 Liberator is still ample to hold down a spawn when they don't have to worry about air threats. Basically this turns all air vs air battles into strictly a matter of skill and the 'right' air squad loadout. (lib/esf balance) Not that this is particularly bad, it just gives even fewer options to outfits with less experienced air squads.

And that is a fact that cannot be avoided until they fix base design. But by reducing the air wings to one squad it still leaves the ground to have some semblance of a chance to succeed even without air superiority.

Yes a squad of aircraft can still dominate on the nexus, but it brings it down to a point where ground can at least move up on one side of the map if your air focuses A2G. Currently the Nexus is purely decided by air combat. There are no other tactics to win on this map pure and simple.

We as a community need to set a standard to limit the zerg factor of air other wise it will be the only combat to happen at competitive levels. It is completely unacceptable that the infantry or ground fight is the back seat compared to the air fight. We have to find a way to balance this out otherwise you wont get the viewership by simply watching air zergs duke it out for 10 mins. Followed by the winner camping the loser with libs for the remainder of the match.

Sledgecrushr · 2013-09-26, 02:45 PM

Under the current conditions Snafus has a fine idea. By limiting air in the nexus this should lead to a more enjoyable well rounded viewing experience.

Lepalose · 2013-09-26, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by TorinPS

I see this as further disadvantaging the side with a lesser skilled air squad. If you are allowed 12 people in the air at any given time, and your 12 people cannot compete, you outright lose the air battle. You don't have the option of putting 24 people in the air to try to counter it, you just lose the air battle. And IMO, 12 people in the air is still more than plenty to handle 48 people on the ground. 1 Liberator is still ample to hold down a spawn when they don't have to worry about air threats. Basically this turns all air vs air battles into strictly a matter of skill and the 'right' air squad loadout. (lib/esf balance) Not that this is particularly bad, it just gives even fewer options to outfits with less experienced air squads.

But this explains why it gets out of hand. Pulling 24 aircraft to deal with 12 so that you can dominate the air would work, yes. But then pulling 36 aircraft to deal with 24 is more effective too.

So then why not just put 44 people in aircraft and have 3 infiltrators on the ground to do the ghost capping? Because honestly in the current state, that is a stronger force then actually dedicating any more forces to ground battles.

But some of this is broken mechanics currently on Nexus. When you are not in the base hex of one you own, you cannot spawn back at any other base. That means lots of redeploys to the WG, pulling resources again to get to somewhere new. Oh, and if you don't have the air superiority? Then you are going to be attacked coming out of WG. Galaxies will definitely die, sunderers most likely as well. So your mobility is extremely limited. Combine it with the lack of spawn beacons & squad deploy, it quite simply means that either you control the air or you spend most of your resources trying to get to a location you need to be from WG.

Moreover, because air dominance allows for easier mobility, in combination with this issue with spawning at bases behind you, you cannot set up a defence - that means basically to defend bases like Nexus Secure essentially becomes an attack against your own base.

Further, to answer everyone saying we pulled sporadic AA, I would argue multiple times in both my squad and in another squad did we have people go full AA. Did we have resources for Skyguards & AA MAXes everytime? No, definitely not. AA grounder missile just can't make up the difference against skilled pilots. Indeed, AA ground based units were simply a deterrent against the air, and completely ineffective. But the issue is that while this AA is needed, it is a huge resource pull. This means that if you lose the air, not only have you lost air resources (the most effective resources against fighting air), you also burn all other resources doing deterrence.

To speak of the base design, there is essentially one base (Nexus Omega/Alpha) that largely limits air's effect on the game. All other bases require infantry to move with almost no cover from air from point to point. For example, Bitter Gorge can basically be completely dominated by air as the points are basically exposed to it. Defending becomes less about engaging other infantry forces and more about scrambling to avoid air-to-ground fire on your way to point.

In addition, there is literally no where you can protect sunderers from air at most bases. That means if you do not have air dominance, you get one shot to hold point if attacking.

These reasons stated (poor and limited spawn mechanics, AA as a deterrent for these sized battles, open base & map designs that allow air to dominate ground forces) I believe that my hyperbole of 44 air, 3 infiltrator strategy could actually be viable in the current state of these matches, with the current form of the Nexus, with the balancing of weapons.

Is this a complaint? Well, partially. I love all aspects of PS2 gameplay, and I feel that allowing air to be the only deciding factor in these matches would be poor for highlighting all the other kinds of gameplay that PS2 offers. That said, air battles are epic and air dominance should have an effect on battles on the ground.

Of course, this could flow into a discussion about weapon-platform balance that we could also have, particularly about the multi-purpose role of all aircraft in the game, but I will leave that for another time.

Rolfski · 2013-09-26, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by TorinPS

What you're suggesting is like saying some friends who fool around and play basketball after work together should be able to have a meaningful and fun time against an NBA all-star team. Nope.

Actually yes, because these casuals are playing on the same daily basketball field/server as the NBA players in this game. If you let these NBA stars completely destroy every casual that enters the basketball field, then guess what? Casuals will stay away and your basketball game becomes a ghost town, just like air is atm in the game. They designed basketball leagues for a reason you know.

If you design a game where you put casuals/mediocre players in the same environment as uber-skilled hardcore pro's/no-lifers (mind you, not every game does that), than you better come up with mechanics that ensure everybody will have a good time or this game will die out.

Originally Posted by necrate

Because this game is not about single duels, but rather quite the opposite, it makes sense that a group of top pilots could perform as well as a group of good pilots with 20% more numbers.

This is somewhat true. If anything, the current air game has forced players to stick together. On an individual 1 vs 1 level, which is often the case on off-hours, you still won't stand a chance vs a top ace though. There's simply no room for lone-woving any more in the air, which is not good. You hear even top pilots complaining about it.

I would say 30-40 hours of flying (against other pilots! not rocket podding) is sufficient to make you a decent pilot.

Not on my server. I've spend double that amount in my mosquito (fair to say, it includes rocket podding) but the moment I lift off on Miller, some Artorius, Justicia or MattiAce type will instagib me within a minute after arriving on the battlefield, guaranteed. Needless to say, I stopped any serious flying ages ago. Any game that forces you into some boring training (VR/PTS) environment for serious hours in order to have even remotely fun, has design issues. No matter how you look at it.

Originally Posted by snafus

I think you guys are getting a little out of hand trying to use the Nexus fight as an argument for over all aircraft balance in PS2. Fighting on the Nexus is night and day difference then your usual play on live server. And you should not take what happens there as evidence of anythings power in the live game.

I disagree. Like other games, competitive play functions as a microscope for balance issues and PS2 is not any different in this regard.
Nexus so far has painfully shown how broken the air game is (be top ace or be gone) and artificial rules like your proposal might actually end up being necessary to keep the competitive game alive for the time being.

Aarth · 2013-09-26, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by Rolfski

Actually yes, because these casuals are playing on the same daily basketball field/server as the NBA players in this game. If you let these NBA stars completely destroy every casual that enters the basketball field, then guess what? Casuals will stay away and your basketball game becomes a ghost town, just like air is atm in the game. They designed basketball leagues for a reason you know.

This is a show match, they didn't align the relative skills perfectly and can't. In order to do that you need an extensive set of matches to show who fits in what leagues. It would be like Das Anfall or Future Crew going up against a similar sized infantry crew, if that crew is mediocre it will be a blow out. We aren't proposing that only a subsection of infantry 12 v 12 are the only amount allowed to fight any any one point on the map are we? The point is 12 top pilots will still blow out 12 semi prepared pilots. We can not force the game to equalize skill between two evenly numbered groups, that more then anything will ruin a game long term.

Rumblepit · 2013-09-26, 06:39 PM

We knew going in what air dominance meant on nexus , Everything...No need for armor, no need for infantry, and no need to capture any bases. Once you have the air you own the map. Its that simple.

We were short pilots going in,but we had a backup plan. Well until the rules were changed at the last min per request of NNG and TGWW. We could have brought in a bunch of pilots from Connery to help out with the air that we knew they would have ,but we dont roll like that. It also was stated in the rules that this wasn't allowed.

We played by the book ,and we lost to NNG ,TGWW ,and the pilots they brought in from other outfits on Matherson.

At the end of the fight I said Good Game. Knowing what i know now I retract that statement.

Why bother making rules if you dont enforce them?

Plasmaszap · 2013-09-26, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

We played by the book ,and we lost to NNG ,TGWW ,and the pilots they brought in from other outfits on Watterson.

?

Not sure if trolling or completly of the track.

Waterson pilot ? Seriously ?

Dreadnaut · 2013-09-26, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

...until the rules were changed at the last min per request of NNG and TGWW. We could have brought in a bunch of pilots from Connery to help out with the air that we knew they would have ,but we dont roll like that. It also was stated in the rules that this wasn't allowed.

We played by the book ,and we lost to NNG ,TGWW ,and the pilots they brought in from other outfits on Watterson.

Rules changed at the last minute? What rule was that?

Are you referring to the Squad Beacon rule? We were told we would have beacons and that about 10 players from each outfit would get bumped to BR 10. Then we were later told that beacons were broken and could not be used. We changed our plans to accommodate for no beacons and had 2 days to prepare and cert'd Ejection Seat Libs with plans on how to drop people etc.

DAY OF the match, they tell us, "Oh btw, beacons now work". We planned for 2 days on how to operate without beacons, so I voted 'no' on allowing beacons.

What pilots did we use from Waterson? Enlighten me. Or are you referring to Mattherson?

If you think that what you saw is any different from what you'll see in a top tier MLG match you are quite mistaken. Our air force is very very good, but I have no doubt there are better.

Wanna know what rule I asked for everyone to agree on before the match that got shot down?? "No A2A missiles".

We wanted a skilled fight in the air, and we were told no by the TR side. That's ok, my guys didn't want lockons and no one had to even be told not to use them. Had anyone pulled lockons I would have booted them from the platoon.

Rumblepit · 2013-09-26, 07:27 PM

lol my bad,,, that was a typo,,,, I meant to say Matherson.... Do you want to name the pilots you brought over? and explain why you broke the rules? Or are you going to deny to it?

Last min change was spawn beacons,,,, you guys didnt want them at the last min so we couldn't use them.

We were told that we were allowed the have 10 players with beacons when they went over the rules. May not seem like a big change ,but to a infantry outfit in a air game they mean everything.

FYI when you search for outfit stats you can see which players joined on what dates

TorinPS · 2013-09-26, 07:33 PM

Phrygen of BWC posted something along this exact same lines not 15 minutes ago, and I'll post here exactly what I posted there:

"I think you're hideously misrepresenting what is going on. You do realize that like 90% of the people in TGWW play 2 or all 3 factions, right? You do realize that those same people are also in QRY?

Same group of people make up multiple outfits on multiple factions. NNG asked TGWW to team up with them, and we did. TGWW and QRY are very similar in player composition. If QRY competes, you're going to see like 90% of the same people.

QRY isn't gone, but some of the key players (Naterian, Corewin, Rudelord, Thundahawk) have been playing other games lately, and came back to PS2 to play something competitive.

TGWW/QRY/Mattherson Pilots have been recruiting for many months now. You may not realize it, but this has been in the works since MLG 'came onto the scene', in hopes of making a seriously elite air group for competition.
What happened last night was a realization of that effort. We didn't recruit people last minute from other factions/outfits, we simply got everyone to log on at once and play in RCCC, something we've been planning and working towards for a long time."

A group of about 30 really good pilots and Liberator gunners have been playing together for many months now. A lot of us play all 3 factions, some just 2. We're in the same outfits on other factions as well. We've been planning and working with each other, recruiting towards this effort for 3-4 months. We didn't just snag some people from other factions/outfits to make some ringer squad for RCCC. We've been playing together and building up to this, in order to do exactly what we did: bring a critical mass of great air players to the competitive scene.

We did that. We didn't break any rules, these people have been with us all along. It is pretty lame that you use some misinformation fed to you by who-knows, in order to throw some mud on what was otherwise a good match.

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

Last min change was spawn beacons,,,, you guys didnt want them at the last min so we couldn't use them.

It is not that we didn't want them, it is that we had no one who could use them. Everyone was under the impression that SOE would be able to level 10 people from NNV to level 10, so they could use beacons. At the last minute, SOE said they couldn't, which left NNG with 0 people who could drop beacons. As a result, RCCC, not 'us' ruled that it was only fair to not allow beacons. Next time, things will probably be different, people will have time to level up before the match, and it won't be a big deal. But if beacons were allowed, it would have been something that you guys had, and you guys only.

Rumblepit · 2013-09-26, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by TorinPS

Phrygen of BWC posted something along this exact same lines not 15 minutes ago, and I'll post here exactly what I posted there:

"I think you're hideously misrepresenting what is going on. You do realize that like 90% of the people in TGWW play 2 or all 3 factions, right? You do realize that those same people are also in QRY?

Same group of people make up multiple outfits on multiple factions. NNG asked TGWW to team up with them, and we did. TGWW and QRY are very similar in player composition. If QRY competes, you're going to see like 90% of the same people.

QRY isn't gone, but some of the key players (Naterian, Corewin, Rudelord, Thundahawk) have been playing other games lately, and came back to PS2 to play something competitive.

TGWW/QRY/Mattherson Pilots have been recruiting for many months now. You may not realize it, but this has been in the works since MLG 'came onto the scene', in hopes of making a seriously elite air group for competition.
What happened last night was a realization of that effort. We didn't recruit people last minute from other factions/outfits, we simply got everyone to log on at once and play in RCCC, something we've been planning and working towards for a long time."

A group of about 30 really good pilots and Liberator gunners have been playing together for many months now. A lot of us play all 3 factions, some just 2. We're in the same outfits on other factions as well. We've been planning and working with each other, recruiting towards this effort for 3-4 months. We didn't just snag some people from other factions/outfits to make some ringer squad for RCCC. We've been playing together and building up to this, in order to do exactly what we did: bring a critical mass of great air players to the competitive scene.

We did that. We didn't break any rules, these people have been with us all along. It is pretty lame that you use some misinformation fed to you by who-knows, in order to throw some mud on what was otherwise a good match.

It is not that we didn't want them, it is that we had no one who could use them. Everyone was under the impression that SOE would be able to level 10 people from NNV to level 10, so they could use beacons. At the last minute, SOE said they couldn't, which left NNG with 0 people who could drop beacons. As a result, RCCC, not 'us' ruled that it was only fair to not allow beacons. Next time, things will probably be different, people will have time to level up before the match, and it won't be a big deal. But if beacons were allowed, it would have been something that you guys had, and you guys only.

Did they not say only OUTFIT MEMBERS ARE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE? So what your telling is ,because you guys play with these people in a alliance it makes it ok for you to break the rules???

We were all told on the same day that beacons were allowed, the next day we had our guys on test getting br 10 so we would have our beacons. Which are a very tactical tool for infantry to have. So because you guys are slackers we were denied a very important part of our infantry tactics.

call it what you want, call me a poor sport, at least I play by the rules.

We are in a alliance too ,TTA . There are tones of pilots in our alliance that are much better in the air than me ,and if I knew it was ok to bring any player on our server than I would have been happy to sit back ,and give my spot to one of many ace pilots on Connery.But we play by the book, and if this was a real competitive match you would have been disqualified for cheating..... Thats all im saying...

You brought in players from other outfits after you were told not to. You dicked around until game day ,and never got beacons for your guys ,and you screw us out of ours because your slackers...

I wonder if the RCCC would rule it unfair that you guys brought in players from other outfits?

You broke the rules set by RCCC.