Alderaan Warzone: If you're Losing DON"T CAP!

[Hyryu]

I honestly would not have thought of this strategy. I can understand the logic but it just seems odd to give up, ever. I was in a Civil War game where we will getting killed due to a couple of amazing healers on the other team. As soon as we were able to take both out, we were then able to kill the DPS's and cap both side turrets. We ended up barely winning but it looked like we were toast. If we wouldn't have dragged out the fight we would have lost.

 

Some could look at this and say that we could have just lost quickly and got in another game, I would rather fight to the death though.

[Koenig-O-Riain]

Makes me smile the "winners" decided to show up and post.

[LenrocNewDawn]

Makes me smile the "winners" decided to show up and post.

 

Looks like your losing in this thread why don't you just abandon it instead of wasting your fail sarcasm on us? We are a lost cause to you as we are the PvPers that want to PvP not to stand around exploiting for medals.

I wonder, if reincarnation after death would be a proven fact, what would you "winners by forfeiting" do?

Edited April 11, 2012 by LenrocNewDawn

[iiell]

Do not listen to the advice of the OP.

 

Thanks!

[Tyrven]

QFT.

 

If you all give up too, don't all defend Snow. 8 people defending 1 node is the dumbest thing you can do. Move off the node and allow them to 3cap you if the game is already a loss!

 

The only possible way to 3 cap in Civil War is if the opposite team disconnects.

You would be surprised at how bad and dumb some players are. Mix in the fact that some poorly written bot programs are starting to pop up and a hopeless match can swing to a win quickly.

[Bramage]

QFT.

 

If you all give up too, don't all defend Snow. 8 people defending 1 node is the dumbest thing you can do. Move off the node and allow them to 3cap you if the game is already a loss!

 

The only possible way to 3 cap in Civil War is if the opposite team disconnects.

 

I rarely rage quit a WZ, and will charge an entire team, just to melt. Im ok with that. I did however RQ yesterday when I saw 4 guys sitting at the one cap we had. Score was 210 to 250.

 

After I left, I received a whisper: We were grouping to take mid.

 

My bad Sorry guys

 

Sl'im

[SweetOldBob]

Is the actual issue raised by the OP very likely, and if so, would the cost all that great?

 

In the scenario he describes, the game is far enough along for there to be no reasonable chance of winning, yet the team that's behind is effective enough to be able to cap another turret and delay the game.

 

In the WZs I've played, when my team is getting its butt kicked and folks start hanging out at our only turret, winning another turret is daunting and does not happen much at all.

 

And if the game is delayed, how much can that be? Let's say you hold one turret, the opponents are ahead by more than 2 to 1, and then some doofus of a teammate stealth caps another turret. So presuming you can hold it for any length of time, the difference is one enemy turret wearing you down instead of two. I don't know the rate of fire; it seems like about 5 points per turret every 3 seconds or so; so worst case we're maybe talking about five minutes vs. two and a half? In other words, 150 seconds delaying the end of the game and the award of medals???

 

For me, the excitement of trying to hold on to 2 and thinking about 3 would make this really interesting. And if anyone finds it boring, he could use the opportunity to walk to the fridge and get a beer.

[sian_gali]

Thanks to people like the OP, in 1.2 there is a mechanic built in giving the other team perks based on how fast they win. So.... play hard up to the end or save everyone else the trouble and don't q. It does matter in 1.2.

[Narcosis]

this thread 4tw, i hate people wasting my time by taking turrets back if we're mathematically going to lose. In fact, if they only have 2 turrets, but the win in hand, I encourage the opponents to take #3 as well.

 

Ohaider Slither. If the game is out of hand I prefer to keep one turret and then dance!!

[Ster-Ling]

Having never quit a WZ, I don't really know, but I presume that quitting puts you back in the queue, not directly into a fresh WZ (and even if it did, the chances of that one being a win are not assured). So, instead of giving it a valiant attempt in the face of "certain" defeat, people would rather stand around fleet for several minutes.

 

And the reasoning is that commendations and dailies go faster this way? Leading to faster acquisition of gear?

 

OK. Well, perhaps it is faster. A little bit faster, mind, not the 10-20% faster that some are saying in this thread. Probably more like 5-10% faster, since quitting (again I presume) puts you back in the queue with no rewards for time spent in the "hopeless" WZ.

 

So the person who quits may have full BM gear when the person who doesn't quit still has a couple pieces to go.

 

(Not a big deal in my opinion. But I'll concede that the "quitter" may have some *temporary* advantage in game mechanics over the "Braveheart.")

 

However, it is worth noting that the "Braveheart" will soon be geared just as well as the "quitter". Maybe after another day or so spent playing. While the "quitter" has *forever* squandered the opportunity to learn some lessons that the "Braveheart" may have taken away from a comeback win--or even a *near* comeback win.

 

I know this is going to fall on deaf ears when it comes to the "quitters." The more rational of them will just dismiss the notion and claim that just reading Sun-Tzu is the same as seeing the principles in The Art of War come to life, or actually *making* them come to life in SWTOR.

 

And they'll be quick to dismiss the value of these experiences, and simply chalk them up to the opposing faction all disconnecting, or some "miracle" 1/1000 happenstance.

 

But that isn't what turns WZs around. Having come back to win from more than a dozen "impossible" defecits in CW and Huttball, I can tell you that learning to apply principles like DECEPTION (disguising your true objective, appearing strong where you are weak, appearing weak where you are strong), INTIMIDATION (making enemies fear to lose objectives you are not actively pursuing, making enemies fear to attack objectives you are not actively defending) and CONFIDENCE (being assured of your own abillities and those of your allies)--these are the tools which "beat impossible odds."

 

(And the "odds" as they are discussed by the "quitters" are not even statistical odds at all; they are just the "odds" they percieve in their minds.)

 

At the end of the day, the "quitter" may be in full BM a day or two earlier, but he will NEVER have experienced some of the subtle keys to winning WZs that the "Braveheart" has witnessed. So in the end, the "Braveheart" may well be the better pvper, the more likely winner, at least in objective-based play.

 

And that's saying nothing of the fun the "Braveheart" may have had playing the unlikely hero.

[Astarica]

It's fairly implausible to gear up faster by quitting when you consider the fastest way to gear up is:

 

1. Win quickly (you don't have control over this).

2. Lose quickly (you definitely can make this happen).

 

So, if you're really a quitter, it'd still be better to simply do nothing to ensure your side loses quickly, as opposed to just quit and have nothing to show for it.

 

You might in theory be able to do the 'win 3 WZ' dailys faster, except if you quit too early you might miss out on a game that eventually gets turned around. Even if you assume that you only quit when it is totally obvious winning is not possible, remember that you're not the only person in the world who is aware of this. If you quit and join a different game, it is most likely you joined another game on the side that is losing badly. However, if you play the game until its end, your next game should at least start with an even team. Note that if you just lost a game badly in a same faction fight, it is entirely possible those super awesome guys turn out to be on your team the next game since you're all queued at roughly the same time, so you can consider you've a 50% chance of winning the next game if you play one game to its conclusion, because that's the chance you end up on the same team as the winner. It won't work if the winner is opposing faction, but at least for Empire same-faction games are the norm, not the exception.