Which of these "aid new players strats" would you rather be on the receiving end of?

[Monumenta]

However, Monumenta, what you said was that people should be reported for "please do not 3 cap." That is clearly what you said and you characterized it as cheating. This is of course completely crazy (see superbowl cheating reference). If you want to report people for chat bullying, that is another issue entirely and depends on what they said. However, reporting people for "please do not 3 cap" is forcing your own will on others. To most of us, it is a clear abuse of the report system.

 

Fair enough, I still think organizing in this way is cheating but maybe you're right and chat bullying is what I have the problem with and what should be reported.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Monumenta

[sartt]

Lately there has been a discussion on how a superior team should "help" the new players in their games.

This discussion has revolved mostly around the Domination game type and how you should not 3 cap the opposing team, that you should give them a satellite so they gain extra requisition.

 

This week my team has been testing a new approach instead, as many others have mentioned on the forums there are many reasons why I think simply giving the enemy team a satellite is the wrong approach.

 

Before I detail both strategies and what I think they both accomplish I would like to break down exactly how requisition is gained in the Domination game type, so you can see for yourself how little requisition is actually gained from simply defending the entire game. (I would like to point out that winning the game is always optimal in terms of requisition and that defending is an essential part of winning domination so I'm not telling everyone to never defend again)

 

Requisition earned in Domination by Objective:

 

The two numbers that follow are Free to play requisition / Subscriber requisition

Completing the Battle: 100 / 150

Victory Bonus: 100 / 150

Battle length: for every 5 seconds = 1 / 1.5

Kill/Assists: Per kill/assist = 5 / 7.5

Objective Captures: Per Objective Capture = 90 / 135

Objective Defense: per 3.5 Objective points = 1 / 1.5

Turret Kills: Per Turret killed = 10 / 15

 

 

The Strategies being discussed below are for extremely one sided games in which the superior team wants to help the newer players on the opposing team out instead of spawn camping them.

 

I'd also like to point out that in no way should anyone think they have to do these ever. This is just a discussion for players that do want to opt into strategies to help new players out.

 

 

Now onto the different strategies.

 

Giving the enemy team a free satellite for the whole game (Not 3 capping) :

 

So the point most people keep making is that this strategy gives newer players a safe place to just wait it out and gain requisition for the duration of the game.

 

Pros of this strategy:

- Players learn how to stop in a single spot for an entire game and wait. Maybe they have time to experiment with their abilities and key binds to see what feels right.

- Players gain requisition for just waiting.

- Players can attack other satellites if they wish to test themselves against the enemy team but can always retreat to their satellite to recharge and try again.

 

Cons of this strategy:

- It's very boring for everyone involved.

- The requisition gain isn't very high as demonstrated by the breakdown above. To give you an idea the current record for highest Objective defense is 735 which in earnings equals only 210 / 315 requisition.

- Players don't learn how to attack or defend satellties.

- Players might feel like they are being pitied if they don't know whats going on.

 

 

3 Caping all satellites, then backing off to let the enemy turn one red. Then retaking it. Rinse and repeat. (Swaping control of Satellties)

 

The point of this strategy is to teach new players how to take satellites while also giving them huge bonuses to requisition.

 

Pros of this Strategy:

- Players on the enemy team get huge bonuses to requisition even though they are losing the match. To give you an idea of the amount in one game it's very feasible to swap a satellite 5+ times and even at 5 times that gives you 450 / 675 requisition.

- Players learn how to capture satellites.

- No ones bored because the superior team has to keep retaking the satellites every time, so there is a lot more fighting.

 

Cons of this Strategy:

- The score at the end of the game looks more one sided because they didn't just get to hold one satellite for free all game.

- Players will die more because the superior team will be killing them to retake the satellite.

- The team that's losing might feel like they are being toyed with and could get very frustrated.

 

 

My question for everyone on the forums is if you were on the inferior team in a Domination game which strategy would you rather the superior team you are fighting adopt?

- Not 3 capping and just handing you a satellite

- Constantly allowing you to Cap a satellite and then retaking it

- Or you would rather everyone always play as hard as possible even if it means spawn camping

 

 

Thanks in advance for everyones help!

Its really very easy, they need to have a open world space map where you can fly around and shoot things like missions and what not.

[Nemarus]

Generally it is hard to arrange swapping.

 

It's safe to say, from a cat-herding perspective, that letting the enemy team have a node is much easier to arrange.

 

Slightly more difficult, but still rather easier to arrange, is to let a team have a satellite, then tell your friendly team to attack the satellite but not capture it.

 

This does a few good things:

 

1) It lets veteran pilots fight and kill things

2) It teaches new players that staying on the satellite is very important, both to keep it and to use its LOS for defense

3) It gives the new players both defense requisition and damage/assist requisition as they defend

4) By putting some of the veteran pilots on "mock offense" it leaves the veterans' own satellites more vulnerable, meaning the new pilots might make an offensive play of their own and not get shut down so hard

 

Things you have to watch out for:

a) Don't intercept new pilots as they are returning from spawn to "their" satellite

b) If you cap "their" satellite, flee.

c) If they make an offensive play on a veteran satellite, let them turn it before you bring in the cavalry to crush them

[MiaowZedong]

Just for myself, if I'm on the receiving end of it and unable to carry to any extent, I'd prefer to be able to flip a sat back and forth. But I predict actual newbies would rather be able to sit on a sat instead; both because getting them to actually take advantage of the open sat will be difficult, and because they'll get discouraged when they see how heavily they are outclassed, instead of having a quiet game as would happen if they are allowed to sit on a sat all game.

 

I'd be surprised if you didn't see more ragequits with the second option.

. A few servers have consistent queue pops, but that number seems to be on a steady downward trend. Do you really want to take a stand against efforts to reverse that?

 

Despon

In fairness, we can't do any more than slightly slow that. The game is overall losing population, and the neglect of GSF from the devs just makes things worse for our minigame.

Edited August 28, 2015 by MiaowZedong

[Drakkolich]

Really enjoying the back and forth going on, I was sure there would be some strong opinions on the post!

 

I'm seeing a lot of people talking about how hard it is to arrange this, all we do is say "our premade is holding B after a 3 cap, when A or C turns red we will retake it" in ops chat. We've tried this strategy a few times now and in every single game we've had to recapture 3+ satellites and in most 5+.

 

At worst it turns the game into a 4v8 for the enemy team, because we will just take ourselves out until they cap something.

 

 

To address Monumenta's concerns directly, all we are really doing is taking our foot off the gas until they capture a satellite. Which in my mind is just going easy on them, if going afk until they get points and then attacking is cheating that's kind of a wierd definition.

I'm curious if you think what we did this game was cheating? Here is the video of us using this strategy.

 

Now players yelling at others for not adopting one of these strategies is absolutely ridiculous. NO ONE SHOULD BE FORCED TO PLAY A GAME ANY OTHER WAY THEN THEY WANT EVER. In a few games some players didn't want to let the enemy capture satellites and that's absolutely fine.

 

 

 

Anyways loving all the opinions but guys remember that I asked if you were on the inferior team which strategy you would rather the enemy team used on you.

 

While I myself am usually in the camp to just play the game and use an inferior ship vs new players, some of the opinions I'm hearing from players that have played against my team repeatedly have started to sway me.

[tunewalker]

are you still playing on bastion? lately havent seen you there, not on much mind you but still.

[Drakkolich]

are you still playing on bastion? lately havent seen you there, not on much mind you but still.

 

No I haven't I've been told the queue's are very slow and with Harbinger being ridiculously fast it's much more streaming friendly. Come by mumble once awhile and find me if you're looking for me.

[tunewalker]

No I haven't I've been told the queue's are very slow and with Harbinger being ridiculously fast it's much more streaming friendly. Come by mumble once awhile and find me if you're looking for me.

 

thanks, I am really thinking I need to move to Harbinger for everything....

[Cyanothis]

personally I prefer the option of having a satellite as it gives people a place to earn comms but also its less demoralising (imho).

 

The problem with this is two fold:

 

1) it has the unintended consequence of people only sitting on that sat as they don't want/cant venture away from it

2) it can lead to a 3 cap scenario when people get bored.

 

Once a team is 3 capped it leads to the next problem of spawn camping. They only have one place to spawn (ignoring Denon) and so the fights tend to end up moving to those areas, once a team is on top and sitting outside a spawn point but beyond capital turrets range its very hard for the camped team to do anything at all.

 

The other problem with trying to adopt either strategy is controlling the others in a match. I often/mostly fly with pilots in my guild so that's easy, I can tell them not to do XXX and they'll listen, but the other players I cant control. I can ask in /ops that they leave a satellite or move away from a spawn area but no guarantee they'll listen.

What I then get is people jumping to conclusions thinking that its the "premade" part of the team that are responsible, its not always true.

 

Ultimately its a pvp game and you cant control others actions, if people give up and immediately camp one satellite with no intention of doing anything but sitting there I understand that the opposing team will get bored and go looking for a fight.

[Monumenta]

Another point I'd like to make is that I've seen this whole search for how to baby new players into playing more matches turn people off of GSF. I've seen players both new to Swtor or just new to GSF, both in my guild and in gen chat on fleet, have stated that GSF is a game full of micro-managers and win-trading, I know we've been over the whole cheating thing but you have to recognize how a new player could misinterpret an effort like you describe as win-trading if they don't know the game very well.

 

Seems to me the obvious solution would be for these dominating premade teams to break themselves up and join the queue solo, maybe even some go to the other faction to queue, maybe everyone fly new ships as well or try dog fighting with your bombers if you think you outclass them so much. If you are so concerned about your superior firepower and skill demoralizing the noobers I can't fathom why you would continue to stay together as one unit?

 

Seems breaking up the band and flying under-equipped ships would be given some thought long before you are on here talking about organizing in this way, I guess that's just me. I think developing tactics like the 3 the OP details takes the fun out of the game for everyone, I don't see why anyone would queue up for a game feeling they most likely can't play as intended.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Monumenta

[MaximilianPower]

Another point I'd like to make is that I've seen this whole search for how to baby new players into playing more matches turn people off of GSF. I've seen players both new to Swtor or just new to GSF, both in my guild and in gen chat on fleet, have stated that GSF is a game full of micro-managers and win-trading, I know we've been over the whole cheating thing but you have to recognize how a new player could misinterpret an effort like you describe as win-trading if they don't know the game very well.

 

Seems to me the obvious solution would be for these dominating premade teams to break themselves up and join the queue solo, maybe even some go to the other faction to queue, maybe everyone fly new ships as well or try dog fighting with your bombers if you think you outclass them so much. If you are so concerned about your superior firepower and skill demoralizing the noobers I can't fathom why you would continue to stay together as one unit?

 

Seems breaking up the band and flying under-equipped ships would be given some thought long before you are on here talking about organizing in this way, I guess that's just me. I think developing tactics like the 3 the OP details takes the fun out of the game for everyone, I don't see why anyone would queue up for a game feeling they most likely can't play as intended.

 

My guess is that the micro-managing/win-trading complaints are specific to your server. I've never seen either. Well, periodically a field general will pop up trying to direct his team, and occasionally people do complain about those guys. But usually they're just laughed off, or ignored. The most common complaints I've seen are around juggernaut premades relentlessly grinding noobs into dust.

 

Re: the bolded - I think a lot of us do some or all of these things. I know I do. I try to solo queue, I hop factions a lot. Most of my alts have at least one sub-optimal ship on the bar (like a double-torp vomit breaker) when the pedal doesn't need to be mashed to the metal.

 

But re: grouping, there are valid reasons. When pops are slow (which is typical) the queue is harsh to solo players with lots of mastered ships. That's part of the algorithm; Drak has another post somewhere explaining this. Groups always get priority, then players with less complete hangars, and then lastly the full-hangar/mastered guys. So those of us who have played a lot risk missing the scarce pops when solo queueing.

 

Yes, one could roll a new alt and start from scratch - which, again, many of us have done - but that gets tiresome after a while.

 

Point is, grouping lets us reliably get into games. I think most people find it more fun, too. So OP's tactics are intended to allow these groups to continue flying, yet avoid the roflstomps that turn off the opposition and potentially wreck the queue.

[caederon]

you have to recognize how a new player could misinterpret an effort like you describe as win-trading if they don't know the game very well.

Since I don't play other PvP games aside from GSF, and have never once heard the phrase win-trading uttered by someone in GSF chat, I had to look it up to make sure I understand the concept... because at face value it didn't seem remotely related to what we have proposed here. So I turned to Urbandictionary, truly a desperate measure I know but anyway it says:

Win Trading is a practice common in games with ranked leaderboards. Essentially, one party agrees to lose in a ranked match, leading to records of 500 wins to 0 losses, and a guaranteed spot on the top of the ladder.

So, first, we do not have a ladder or ranked leaderboard. Second, nobody is 'agreeing to lose' here. There are many GSF matches made where there is a 100% chance of a weak team full of inexperienced players losing. There is no doubt, and no chance that under normal conditions, the weak team will win.

 

The strong team, in this proposed set of behaviors, is not agreeing to throw the match for the benefit of the weak team. It is in fact trying to create a more dynamic, fun game experience that rewards the doomed team for being smart and capable enough to at least cap an undefended satellite, and helps them build their ships via more req so they can compete more ably. It also helps the strong team since they don't have to just sit out the whole match doing nothing, which is very unappealing to people without a lot of time to play.

 

Seems to me the obvious solution would be for these dominating premade teams to break themselves up and join the queue solo, maybe even some go to the other faction to queue,

I feel safe speaking for pretty much every veteran on this board in saying: we do this already. All the time.

 

maybe everyone fly new ships as well or try dog fighting with your bombers if you think you outclass them so much.

We do this already. Against raw players, it does not help. We have had whole events called Stock Night where we fly stock ships against each other and often, geared inexperienced-to-intermediate pilots end up sorted into the matches and still get blown away, because experience is that much of a factor. When the opposing team of players is full of people who have not progressed beyond 'fly in a straight line even while being shot to pieces' level flying, it does not matter what ship you fly against them.

 

If you are so concerned about your superior firepower and skill demoralizing the noobers I can't fathom why you would continue to stay together as one unit?

Personally, I solo queue far more than I group, but there are many legit reasons to stay in one unit.

 

First off, many people find it fun to fly with their friends and practice team coordination.

 

Secondly, on a server like Harbinger, if you are solo queuing, there is a good chance you'll be sorted onto a team of inexperienced players and set against a good premade + several competent-to-very-good players. Having a group, even one that is not on VOIP but just consists of good players, is a bit of insurance against getting sorted into an unwinnable and miserable match.

 

Third, GSF is at its best on the rare occasions when two skilled premades per side face off against each other. If we had a custom matchmaking lobby or any tools to engineer these matches directly, we'd do it. But we don't, so we have to attempt simultaneously queuing to try to get sorted into good matches.

 

I think developing tactics like the 3 the OP details takes the fun out of the game for everyone, I don't see why anyone would queue up for a game feeling they most likely can't play as intended.

What fun is the team getting shut out 1000-0 having? Where is their enjoyment in that match coming from? When have you ever really appreciated being in a match where you were unable to earn even a single point? The winning side isn't having a whole lot of fun in them, either.

 

Despon

Edited August 29, 2015 by caederon

[Drakkolich]

Another point I'd like to make is that I've seen this whole search for how to baby new players into playing more matches turn people off of GSF. I've seen players both new to Swtor or just new to GSF, both in my guild and in gen chat on fleet, have stated that GSF is a game full of micro-managers and win-trading, I know we've been over the whole cheating thing but you have to recognize how a new player could misinterpret an effort like you describe as win-trading if they don't know the game very well.

 

I absolutely recognize this fact completely it's one of the reasons I've been so hesitant to implement any of these strategies in the past. In both strategies cons section I mentioned "being pitied and being towed with" as real problems both strategies could have. Those 2 cons are really my #1 concerns with doing anything like this.

 

As far as win-trading is concerned I'll never let myself lose ever. For me the #1 stat I'm concerned with is Win% I don't care about anything else. These strategies aren't to let other players win, they are just to give them a few extra points to get some more competition in the community.

 

Seems to me the obvious solution would be for these dominating premade teams to break themselves up and join the queue solo, maybe even some go to the other faction to queue, maybe everyone fly new ships as well or try dog fighting with your bombers if you think you outclass them so much. If you are so concerned about your superior firepower and skill demoralizing the noobers I can't fathom why you would continue to stay together as one unit?

 

For using inferior ships my entire team does this in almost every game where we think we "outclass" them as you mentioned. For example in the video I linked you I was flying a half mastered Clarion, Sanic was on his new Ocula he had just baught and I believe Seung-mina was flying a Sledgehammer, all very inferior ships. But as you saw we still just absolutely melted them, hell I'm even "clicking" Quads shots in the video instead of holding down the button to give him more time to react.

 

Now as far as breaking up the team to fight each other, we've been practicing coordinating and flying together since almost launch. Flying as a group is just how we fly and most players that go up against us can see how almost all our strategies are different then solo players because we lean on each other so much.

 

So for me atleast if it comes absolutely to the point where the only good matches I can find are against my own team I'll definitely just retire, because as it stands on The Harbinger we are finding great matches. Enemy premades are organizing just to take us down, which for us is amazing!

 

Seems breaking up the band and flying under-equipped ships would be given some thought long before you are on here talking about organizing in this way, I guess that's just me. I think developing tactics like the 3 the OP details takes the fun out of the game for everyone, I don't see why anyone would queue up for a game feeling they most likely can't play as intended.

 

Heres the thing about this statement though not every game warrants these strategies. We queue up as a team for the games where we fight another really good team. (Those games are awesome btw, pretty much why we love gsf is for those games)

 

We queue up for those amazing premade vs premade games, you're right though if every game I had to play these ridiculous help the players strategies I'd just quit.

 

Now if you mean why the enemies would queue up just to fight a team using one of these strategies on them then

I'd gather they would queue up to fight players on their level of skill and considering on Harbinger there are 3 games going at the same I'm pretty sure they are finding them, maybe not that often depending on how new they but I'm sure the games they do are really fun for them.

 

Because of how small the player base is and how much trouble the matchmaker has because of it everyone is just out there searching for those amazing games and we all have to trudge through some lop sided matches to get there. (If you're looking for examples of those amazing games I'm talking just look at the "Games of the Day" section on my YouTube page. I has tons of the games we look for while queueing as a group.

)

 

 

I hope I explained myself well enough, please continue to input your opinion in the discussion though I really like hearing all sides of the argument about this though.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Drakkolich

[Monumenta]

Well, it seems like you guys have it all figured out, as I'm sure you were convinced of before this thread even started.

 

If these tactics that you've now reported so many examples of using in any way could influence anything it would be noticeable by now, which this very threads existence proves it isn't noticeable btw, and you would already be able to see the results. I think you lot are in a stubborn and locked step march into the ocean of lower GSF populations like a bunch of lemmings, but I'm obviously in the minority against these tactics at least on these forums so I'll leave you guys to it. No need for you three to once again tell me I'm wrong, it's obvious you are unflappable in your conviction what you are practicing is the correct way to handle the situation.

 

Good luck.

[Drakkolich]

Well, it seems like you guys have it all figured out, as I'm sure you were convinced of before this thread even started.

 

If these tactics that you've now reported so many examples of using in any way could influence anything it would be noticeable by now, which this very threads existence proves it isn't noticeable btw, and you would already be able to see the results. I think you lot are in a stubborn and locked step march into the ocean of lower GSF populations like a bunch of lemmings, but I'm obviously in the minority against these tactics at least on these forums so I'll leave you guys to it. No need for you three to once again tell me I'm wrong, it's obvious you are unflappable in your conviction what you are practicing is the correct way to handle the situation.

 

Good luck.

 

I'm actually not convinced at all which is why we're testing them and asking players opinions.

 

I just started using these tactics this week, I've been of the opinion that we didn't need them for a long time. I actually really like your opinions on the subject and have said so many times. I'm very unflappable in my convictions that's why I put up these threads to hear opinions like yours. I'm just very surprised that you are the sole person arguing against them to be honest, I was sure it would almost be a 50/50 argument in the thread.

[Danalon]

Well, it seems like you guys have it all figured out, as I'm sure you were convinced of before this thread even started.

 

If these tactics that you've now reported so many examples of using in any way could influence anything it would be noticeable by now, which this very threads existence proves it isn't noticeable btw, and you would already be able to see the results. I think you lot are in a stubborn and locked step march into the ocean of lower GSF populations like a bunch of lemmings, but I'm obviously in the minority against these tactics at least on these forums so I'll leave you guys to it. No need for you three to once again tell me I'm wrong, it's obvious you are unflappable in your conviction what you are practicing is the correct way to handle the situation.

 

Good luck.

 

They're wanting to find out what way would be best to support newer players without themselves giving up their win/loss ratio. You suggest they should break up and fly against each other. They don't want to do that (which is perfectly fine) and now you're complaining? They want to help new players and you complain about them not helping enough.

I'm against statpadding by spawncamping in DOM games, because in my opinion that's just lame. But wanting others to break up a team in which they like to fly together and instead fly against each other is something completely different.

 

Also. We know of ONE premade on one server trying to help other players. How did you come to the conclusion the influence of their actions would be noticeable? How can this influence even be measured? No one of us has statistics of player numbers, there are no polls about how much fun players had in a match. Sure, it can't be proven that it has influence but I'm reltatively certain it's better than doing nothing.

[caederon]

I think you lot are in a stubborn and locked step march into the ocean of lower GSF populations like a bunch of lemmings,.

It baffles me why you think that an organized effort to ease new pilots into the game and allow them a chance to earn req will somehow make things worse, and that a cutthroat or lassiez faire attitude is the better course. If there was a compelling argument that it improves the game to make sure new players gain no req or meaningful experience from matches, I have yet to hear it.

 

I don't see how a game with a hostile, bewildering 'new player experience' can ever have much growth potential. In the absence of any official efforts to make it better, the only people left to do so are the players. We have few mechanisms at our disposal to enact any sort of change, this is potentially one of them.

 

I'm also of the opinion that if there is chat abuse going on (ie players berating you for 3-capping in GSF chat or whatever) that's also ridiculous and shouldn't be tolerated. If people on BC are stepping over the line on that then they should be reported if they're not reasonable.

 

If you get 3-capped or are on the receiving end of brutal one-sided matches, ask for advice from veterans and group with some better pilots so you can learn the tools to deal with it. I'm totally in favor of making the new pilot experience better, but they also have to take it on themselves to learn and develop the tools to compete.

 

Despon

[tunewalker]

To answer your initial question drak, I would prefer the second one, simply because If I were a new player I would want to be getting SOME requisition for my stomping, but that's just me and its been since the test server since I was a noob so not really understanding of their current situation Edited August 30, 2015 by tunewalker

[RickDagles]

I think option B is the best of the solutions you mentioned. But overall the best way to create good games is to try to even up each side with skilled players. If you are crushing it on pub side, switch a player or two over to imp side to shake things up.

[Ramalina]

So, I think probably the best thing to do would be get in game and start whispering pilots you've never seen before.

 

Pretty much everyone in this thread has too much experience to properly remember being a GSF noob, and what hazy memories we have are of a meta that was in some ways very different than the current one. Things are more balanced by far now, but that means that gear crutches that could help a new player back then (once they discovered the wonders of evasion) aren't nearly as powerful now.

 

From the veteran's perspective, rapid sat flipping is clearly the optimal choice. The thing is, that's based on a well developed understanding of the game and what's going on.

 

For a beginner, I suspect that, "they took two, but they're not good enough to take all three from us," or at least a situation that can be interpreted in that manner, is a bit more encouraging.

 

Of course there's also the approach of accepting that the 3 cap is inevitable, picking up a T1 scout with unlimited boost, and using rocket pods to play a map wide game of, "whack an undefended turret," until time runs out. Or a starguard if you're a stubborn strike-lovin' cuss like me.

 

So my money is on, "let 'em have one," but if you want to know what it's like for noobs, find a bunch of noobs and ask 'em. The worst they can really do is call you names in chat, so there's no reason to be scared of 'em really.

 

It may vary of course, but in general the noobs will be much more authoritative sources on the current noob experience than a bunch of grizzled vets sitting around and talking shop.

[havokhead]

Personally, I think option B is the better strategy of continuous back & forth capping but from my experience option A is more practical when dealing with noobs. Option B requires some coordination and knowledge of how domination matches work, which frankly, noobs lack. How many times have you abandoned sat C to give to the noob team only to have them continue attacking the fortified sat B for the rest of the match? Ya theory-wise option B, practically I'd have to go with A.

 

There have been many arguments about "what ifs", this wouldn't be happening if there was ranked, this wouldn't be happening if there was ladders or cross-server but that's not the situation at hand. The situation at hand is that Bioware followed up on a pre-launch promise of space combat used as a selling feature. They created a great little space combat mini-game then abandoned it with a "there ya go, enjoy" attitude more-or-less kicking open the back door and letting the kiddies out to play while they went back into the office to work. No supervision, no communication, no improvement, a simple "laissez-faire" point of view. So the reality is we, the GSF community, more or less police ourselves and playground politics is at work here too. There are the bullies, there are the older kids who want and foster more "fair and inclusive games" and those that get really good and just simply want to play at their leisure. The problem is there's only one playground we all share, the older kids and the toddlers, with no adult supervision. If we want to use it, we all have to get along or else it'll simply fall apart & no one will get to play. Personally, I like GSF enough to keep playing as is.

 

Drak touched a little on my attitude, if the game is obviously a noob match then I'll roll out a fun ship. Fun ships are...fun. Grab a T1 scout evasion build with D/F, EMP & power dive, see how long you can stay on a fortified sat before they get you. You can make the game fun for yourself simply by challenging yourself in an inferior ship. The T2 gs is my favourite fun ship, it has my favourite weapons on it but you can't use it in a serious competitive match where you'll be focused because the T2 gs can't survive focus. That doesn't mean it isn't fun to play.

 

The same goes for the support/command ships. Better players can boost an inferior team by using a T3 striker, repair probes & shield projector are very strong components in domination matches if you want to support players on a satellite. Some would argue that "the best way I can support my team is by killing the most opposition" yes, that is true, but at the same time you're not really nurturing new players, you're simply killing them. How many people have rolled a T3 scout with Tensor or Combat Command & Repair Probe with power dive? That ship can be lotsa fun too and super challenging while helpful to team-mates. If you're only idea of fun is to consistantly top the leaderboards as a stone cold killer then this play-style obviously isn't for you. I'm just saying, there are other ways for veteran players to still have fun and be helpful at the same time.

Edited August 30, 2015 by havokhead

[Monumenta]

I'm actually not convinced at all which is why we're testing them and asking players opinions.

 

I just started using these tactics this week, I've been of the opinion that we didn't need them for a long time. I actually really like your opinions on the subject and have said so many times. I'm very unflappable in my convictions that's why I put up these threads to hear opinions like yours. I'm just very surprised that you are the sole person arguing against them to be honest, I was sure it would almost be a 50/50 argument in the thread.

 

I don't think the beat them into oblivion crowd is going to join in a discussion like this so all you get is me and, not that I've changed my mind on these tactics but since you guys seem like, for the most part, a decent bunch, you've showed me that my problems are exclusive to my server.

 

I do agree with what someone stated above about getting actual new players opinions over seasoned vets, just as I don't think the bullies are going to post in this thread neither do I think new players are going to post in the GSF forum at all.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Monumenta

[Drakkolich]

I don't think the beat them into oblivion crowd is going to join in a discussion like this so all you get is me and, not that I've changed my mind on these tactics but since you guys seem like, for the most part, a decent bunch, you've showed me that my problems are exclusive to my server.

 

I do agree with what someone stated above about getting actual new players opinions over seasoned vets, just as I don't think the bullies are going to post in this thread neither do I think new players are going to post in the GSF forum at all.

 

Yep I agree completely I need to get some information from the newer players too, I just wanted to get as many sides as possible on the issue. The hard part is going to be figuring out the best way to approach new players on the topic.

 

I'm really scared that if we use lets say one of the strategies and then swap factions and as the players directly "So how did us letting you get extra points while you lost feel?" we will seem like the biggest jerks ever. If I just approach new players randomly they might not understand what I mean either.

 

As far as the bullies go I think it's everyone duty to tell them to let others play however they want. No one has the right to tell others how to play no matter whats going on. We can suggest, we can inform but we should never make someone play a certain way.

This is also how we should approach helping people with their ship builds, you should just explain why a certain component or upgrade can be better but also reassure people that if they want to play an inferior build for fun that's fine too. You can still let them know that if they chose the superior component they might win more but that's about it in my opinion.

[Ramalina]

You know Drak, pretty much any noob with more than 10 or 15 games has a probability of having received at least one crushing GSF defeat that approaches 100%. So you could ask noobs on your side, just after a win, when they might be in a more positive frame of mind.

 

Start out by telling them that the GSF community has a bunch of experienced pilots that want to make learning GSF better for new players so that they don't get discouraged and quit. Then get into your questions.

 

For SWTOR at the high end of skill, this is a pretty extraordinary conversation. In Raiding and in PvP the approach to new players is often along the lines of, "go read a guide and stop being a bad." "Hey, let's get together and help out the beginners," is typically something that you only see within guild for fellow guild members in an MMO.

 

So having that person at the top of the scoreboard drop in in and say, "Hi, pleased to meet you. Haven't seen you around, so if you're new to GSF I'd like to ask how we can help make the learning experience better for you," is a pretty amazing experience for a noob if they've had more than a few hours of exposure to your standard MMORPG.

 

Of course do this to hatchling noobs and they may imprint on you until you have a trail of little nooblings flying along behind you wherever you go, but that's not a bad outcome for the future of GSF I think.

 

We should all probably do more on that front. It really wouldn't take that much for GSF pilots to become the official, "most amazingly awesome community on SWTOR." It's not like anyone else is setting a high bar to compete with.

[tunewalker]

Yep I agree completely I need to get some information from the newer players too, I just wanted to get as many sides as possible on the issue. The hard part is going to be figuring out the best way to approach new players on the topic.

 

I'm really scared that if we use lets say one of the strategies and then swap factions and as the players directly "So how did us letting you get extra points while you lost feel?" we will seem like the biggest jerks ever. If I just approach new players randomly they might not understand what I mean either.

 

As far as the bullies go I think it's everyone duty to tell them to let others play however they want. No one has the right to tell others how to play no matter whats going on. We can suggest, we can inform but we should never make someone play a certain way.

This is also how we should approach helping people with their ship builds, you should just explain why a certain component or upgrade can be better but also reassure people that if they want to play an inferior build for fun that's fine too. You can still let them know that if they chose the superior component they might win more but that's about it in my opinion.

 

This right here does make me think about it further from their point of view. They dont know what's happening, if honestly if I was being "let to have" a satilite I might be sitting there thinking my team "needs to learn how to defend" which could make me extremely angry very quickly. With the 3 Cap and hold I KNOW that I didnt stand a chance, and with the 2 cap and let me have a 3rd I can tell very easily that my enemy team is LETTING me have this satelite.

 

Which means honestly the strat that's prefered is dependent on how much of a new player I am and how I am feeling on any given day. The 3 cap can sometimes make me feel... ok I just should not be playing right now, the teams on this side just dont stand a chance right now. The 2 cap honestly makes me feel the same way, but because I am able to recognize that they are giving me one will feel like I am being coddled and that will make me mad at the enemy team (this is me, I do not speak for all players or personalities) the last one though will leave me angry, but not at the enemy team, but at my team for not being able to hold stuff that we grab. Technically all 3 could lead me to going... its not worth it I dont want to play right now, but only 1 of them leaves me mad at the other team, and the other 2 leave me mad at my team. The 3rd makes me the most mad at my team, while also still making me want to play as I feel like I can be at least some what effective. The first makes me Mad at my team, but in a way that's kind of like rather then . While the Second one makes me :mad: at my enemy team because I HATE being coddled.

 

I have flown in lop sided matches when I WANTED to, been offered to switch sides and on some days I do, cus I cant handle it, on other days I dont because I want to do what I am doing, and on those days i never ask the enemy to go easy on me, if I suspect they are I will makesure to try to farm the person "going easy" on me in an attempt to FORCE them to take the fight to me and fight me at their best, but again I am a fairly veteran player, of PvP and games in general, even when I WAS learning back on the PTS this was still largely my attitude, I hate being coddled so while the 2 cap makes sense for some, for me its to recognizable as a coddle tactic so its one I am adimantly against, the other 2 are a different story, but as I am a new player I would not recognize the cap and recap strategy as a "coddling" but instead a failing of my team to defend, and possibly a failing of the OTHER team to defend, which that second part makes me think, maybe I got a shot in this thing and will cause me to stick around longer.

 

 

Tune's Mind: Coddle me... you dare coddle the Tunewalker..... not on my watch, you dont coddle me I coddle you, get over here and DIE!!!!

Edited August 30, 2015 by tunewalker