Re: This needs to stop!

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 03-25-2008, 04:04 PM

The way tickets are done should be different but theres no point moaning at the players about that

I'd like there to be some level of bleed always. On a Qwai stalemate situation like that, both teams could decide to wait the timer out, ie. defence only
That'd be so stupid and I guess admin would just foreclose the match which means China would have won but most people would be disappointed if thats how games were decided.

Instead China is bored, they attack when they dont have to and lose because of it perhaps that is the cause of the bad feeling.

If tickets and win/loss decides whether you enjoyed the game or not you will end up frustrated because its not perfect and you shouldnt judge yourself based off just numbers

I just want each map to include at least one grand showdown /firefight ,after that Im satisfied we at least put up some sort of fight

**Elwenil** · 03-25-2008, 04:17 PM

I respectfully disagree. If it gets down to a waiting/defensive match, then it is a a test of both teams resolve and tactics. I don't agree that every game has to be action packed every second. Even in matches with fierce fighting, I am quite happy to sit back and defend a flag or point that gets no action at all if that's what it takes. If a team can dig in and hold their ticket lead defensively, then it is their duty to do so. It is completely up to the team with the ticket deficit to attack and try to regain equal footing or an advantage. If they don't do it, or can't accomplish it, then it is no one's fault but their own. It's a case of the best team winning, regardless if you agree with the outcome or tactics used. Besides, it's not realistic to risk your advantage and attack when there is no strategic need to.

**Skud** · 03-25-2008, 04:20 PM

Lol...

if you ask nardini and i to switch, we usually do.

EDIT:

I agree with disposable below: To win through guile, not force, is the best win of all.

BTW: Mix0lydian and I pulled out a win on Kufrah by Just defending both flags after being down 50+ tickets. We didnt attack Refinery: Just defended. Yes, it took probably 10 extra minutes, but we won by 30 tickets in the end...

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 03-25-2008, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Elwenil

I respectfully disagree. If it gets down to a waiting/defensive match, then it is a a test of both teams resolve and tactics. I don't agree that every game has to be action packed every second. Even in matches with fierce fighting, I am quite happy to sit back and defend a flag or point that gets no action at all if that's what it takes. If a team can dig in and hold their ticket lead defensively, then it is their duty to do so. It is completely up to the team with the ticket deficit to attack and try to regain equal footing or an advantage. If they don't do it, or can't accomplish it, then it is no one's fault but their own. It's a case of the best team winning, regardless if you agree with the outcome or tactics used. Besides, it's not realistic to risk your advantage and attack when there is no strategic need to.

This is directly from the TacticalGamer Primer:

3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine, regardless of the level of advantage, if any, it gives over the opposing team.

What the US did Sunday night to win Qwai followed the primer exactly and it was played the right way, regardless of the opinion of a select few on the Chinese side of the match.

Delta*RandyShugart* · 03-25-2008, 05:24 PM

Disposable is right on,

Qwai on sunday night is a perfect example of this tactic because it is a tactic and a succesful one (I tried the similiar tactic last night on al kufrah but failed).

Defense is highly underrated. A lot of players underestimate the power of defense and sunday night showed that, the chinese team i presume was dug in at processing while the USMC were dug in at mine....why should the USMC attack processing and lose their tickets when the chinese were on the offensive?
Defending mine as the "alamo" is a great way to show teamwork and coordination.

Remember sometimes the best defense is the best offense.

Would u have told the Marines at khe sanh to just attack khe sanh village and then move towards hanoi? no, they were under siege and defended until they were relieved. (i know in months after khe sanh was abandoned but they fought off the attacking VC).

**kilroy0097** · 03-25-2008, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

what????????? we aren't even in PR and already you are whining about the teams being uneven????????

Ha ha ha. No really. Hate to be the devil's advocate in this case but someone had to ask the question. While most complaining of balanced teams is in fact whining and bitching, there have to be a few cases where it's a legitimate request. Not bitching, not whining, simply a request from one team to allow the game to be balanced from the beginning. Not in the middle nor the end when one side is losing but at the beginning before the tickets even start dropping.

**BigGaayAl** · 03-26-2008, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

...

Instead China is bored, they attack when they dont have to and lose because of it perhaps that is the cause of the bad feeling.

...

Well, I also played on the US side. I had the only squad left at processing before it was taken. While we got help quickly from Nardini's squad, it was too late, as we had loft our bunker. Then we retreated to mine as we couldn't fight a whole team with one squad, even if we kept trying for the rest of the round.

Now to the point of my post,
it was pretty clear to the Chinamen imo that we weren't going to attack processing at all, after 10 minutes of pure defense. The tactic that China shoudl have used to get the win is quite obvious to me then. They should have mounted a careful attack with 95% of their force, first encircling mine, and then turning it into a giant death trap. I am quite sure they would have won that way, as I've seen it done before.

I think China was attacking us very well for most of the game, but not in an organised fashion, relying on skill and squad level tactics. If they would have HAD good organisation, they would have pummeled us into submission at the mine. We were essentially boxed in. The us had superior organisation across the whole team, and that won it in the end.
In RTS they talk about micro and macro. The us-side won on macro.

**Dick Blonov** · 03-26-2008, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by BigGaayAl

They should have mounted a careful attack with 95% of their force, first encircling mine, and then turning it into a giant death trap.

Indeed. I was manning the TOW humvee. Got to mine with 3 missiles on board. Only one armored vehicle showed up. The HAT got him. I never fired a shot.

Originally Posted by ForGlory&Pain

I C/O'd that round.

We lost Qwai because we had armor sitting around unmanned the entire map, and the few peices that did get used were not used effectively or in any sense of cohesiveness. I was begging for armor crews.

Kudos to you Glory. You could not have done more.

DB

**ForGlory&Pain** · 03-26-2008, 10:07 PM

When those 2 apcs rolled up unimpeded to take out that bunker at mine, that was pretty much game over. I was running around yelling for people to spawn to help defend it, but in the end it was just me and on other squad up there. Once you regained that flag back without losing anyone in the battle that was pretty much the turning point. I was suprised how easily we took mine, but sadly, we didnt defend it.

I would have grabbed a hat/lat/spec/engi/anything myself if I could have, but being command I was kit limited.

**Ghost Dog** · 03-27-2008, 08:50 AM

All +rep Dirtboy for this thread... I completely agree with all of his statements.

Sunday night Qwai was boring in the end, but we did what we had to do and that 's all I can say.

**dcrum25** · 03-27-2008, 04:42 PM

Well said Dirtboy, you are truly a leader among leaders my friend.

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 08-18-2008, 06:59 PM

* bump *

Addded comments about bullying other players.

**thegreatnardini** · 08-18-2008, 07:56 PM

If I see or hear about regulars berating other players/regulars in teamspeak or in game it's an immediate ban. If I see regulars reporting people for no reason it's a kick/ban. I am getting very tired of the attitude of some of the regulars, and it needs to stop. This is supposed to be a community of mature gamers, not a place where you can make fun of people, or hog assets. If someone takes your jet ask them nicely to give it back, or invite them to your squad. Who knows, maybe they are new and will appreciate you allowing them to use it. The admins aren't personal babysitters, they are there to make sure the server runs smoothly, try fixing little things like that personally first, it will make things much better for everyone

. If things continue to escalate, however, we will certainly be there to help.

**Mathew75** · 08-18-2008, 10:52 PM

i agree alot with the abusive !report

**creepin** · 08-19-2008, 09:17 AM

I never locked squads.

Usually i never type owned or anything similar, might just shout it in VoIp when i knifed someone...

I never switch teams when i already spawned on one army, just at the beginning, when i see some nice guys i want to play with i switch over there (not only for tg members, i know a lot of non-tg good players i love to play with).

Usually when there's someone else who wants the same asset i'll just invite him in my squad. and then we switch.

Bullying... I only bully pwn3ge lol

just my 2c

Thread Tools

Display