54 replies to this topic

[alpha78]

Came back to play over the last few weeks just to see how the game has changed and it's just too obvious the broken balance in some siege matches.

One player can make a huge impact on some games.  There is one player that I've run into a few times now that just stands on the base and waits for ships to shoot at.  I have absolutely no idea how he/she get's any enjoyment at all out of playing like that, but it basically screws whatever team he/she's on.  

Then there's the tech...  I was on a loosing team the other day and it was pretty obvious we were going to loose.  Then I realized there were no techs in the match so I ran one for our team.  Not saying I won the game for our team, but we did end up winning a game that we should have lost.  We controlled the AA from that point on.  The other team never put up a tech on their side and couldn't break our heavy/tech combo.  I think the score was double digits (62 or something) - 0.

All it takes is a slight imbalance to throw a game.  One or two players that either don't understand the mechanic or simply aren't good at all against a team w/ good players and it's just boring.  Campers/snipers (including preds) play a role in unbalanced siege games too.  When you need bodies in the AA and you've got 3 reapers hanging off in the distance picking at the other team on the AA and they've got 5 people in there, you're basically not going to have a good time.  It always becomes a 5 v 2 or 5 v 1 scenario at the AA and we all know how those odds play out.  Being on the winning side is boring on these games and being on the loosing side is just frustrating.

I know this has all been hashed out before and I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but just have to vent.

[StubbornPuppet]

I see what you're saying and I feel your pain.  However, just reading all of the different items you list as being potential causes for imbalance to the positive or negative of your team... I think it illustrates how complicated Siege can be, not really how delicate.  It's not like any of the things that you point out are an instant deal breaker or guarantee.

Techs are on a recent uptick in popularity but, even three matches last night, I was on a winning team that had no tech vs. a team which did.  I have recently also been on losing teams where we had a tech and the enemy didn't.  Sometimes it's about the skill (or lack of) of the Tech player, sometimes it's about the skill of the opposing players who know how to spot and take out the tech first.

I've seen snipers that were a complete waste of time and space and I've seen them that were smart and nasty at keeping their opponents from getting to the AA.

I've seen winning teams where it was all A class mechs... I've seen winning teams where it was all C class.  And, of course, the well mixed team with a little bit of everything.

What I think blows the balance on Siege is players - not the game mode.  A team has to be willing to play to win, not play for themselves (not to say that some players have become really good at playing for themselves and their own score but still win).  When you get two or three players on a team that are afraid to die... that's going to cost you.  But that's any objective mode on any game.

It's my experience that for every really one-sided match, there's two close ones and one incredible nail-biter.

ALSO I guess this is as good a place as any to talk about a real frustration in Siege mode:
Hey, when a player calls that they have enough EU and says "AA", that is everyone else's cue to go to the AA.  It is not a cue to rush back to the base to deliver your own EU so that you can get a piece of that score.  That is a really certain way to make sure your team loses - instead of there being 5 players waiting on the AA when your ship launches, there are only 2 or 3.  If everyone else had done what they ought to, forget about that full tank of precious EU and just gone to the AA, your team would be the one dominating it... but now you just lost a ship in about 2 minutes because you were more concerned that you wouldn't get score credit for delivering it - AWWW.

That said, I know it's not my right to tell other players how they should play or what their priorities should be.

[zorin1]

I don't like siege.  It just frustrates me a lot.  Mostly when you are on a team that does not know how to play the game.  Only time that I play it is when I am in with a group of people that I know.  Then you can have some good matches when both teams are working together as a team.

[alpha78]

You hit the nail on the head when you said it's the players, not the game mode.  That said, I think there could be some changes made to help mitigate that issue.  Part of this is simply a matter of team make up and part of this is game breaking imbalance.  I think the goal is to create a mode that results in close matches right_  The fact that there are a LOT (yes there are the occasional balanced matches) of 3000 - 0 end results should illustrate that there are some issues.  

My experience has been the opposite in terms of close/vs blow out scores.  I see far more blow outs than close matches.  I think part of that depends on time of day, what server you hit (I don't join specific servers, just hit siege and let it dump me in whatever) and partly whether there are any parties involved.  

Regardless, I get what you're saying.  I've seen all of these things too.  IME, though, I see a lot of one or two players fuzzy bunny around.  Sometimes it just makes you try that much harder and sometimes it's just pointless.

Regarding the call to AA.  One thing I do is keep an eye on where my team is, and when 3 teammates are dumping EU, a lot of times I rush to the base just so we can charge the AA as a group rather than go in 1 or 2 or 3 at a time.  You might be seeing some people just trying to regroup, vs trying to dump their eu for points.

Siege is by far my favorite mode, but I just wish there was a little more depth to it.  I've said this before (long time ago) that I wish there were some more angles to the mode to spread out the objectives and create more "mini-conflicts" within a match.  I believe the eu colleciton + AA control is designed to be that way, but usually w/ 2 eu trees, once a team picks a tree, they pretty much return to that each time.  I would honestly like it better if there was ONE eu tree.  It would change the whole dynamic of how the mode is played.

[StubbornPuppet]

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 06:10 AM, said:

You might be seeing some people just trying to regroup, vs trying to dump their eu for points.

Nope, I'm talking about people who rush all the way back and hop in the collector to get rid of 50 EU when the other guy (or two) have obviously already got it.  They are just being greedy and it will generally cost their team the ship, and possibly the game.

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 06:10 AM, said:

I believe the eu colleciton + AA control is designed to be that way, but usually w/ 2 eu trees, once a team picks a tree, they pretty much return to that each time.  I would honestly like it better if there was ONE eu tree.  It would change the whole dynamic of how the mode is played.

If your whole team always goes to the same EU tree, "They're doing it wrong."  Any more than two people collecting from the same tree is practically a waste of time.  My ideal strategy for 6 players on a team, it's best for 4 to go to one station and 2 to go to another.  Of the 4 players need 2 people focused on staying alive and collecting while the other two focus on keeping the enemy at bay.  The other 2 players need to focus on disrupting the other opponents ability to collect quickly.

For the most part, a team will instinctively go to the EU station to the right. That means that the safest bet is to have 4 players go to the right and 2 players go to the left.  It's honestly a proven human instinct:  In Soccer/Futbol, goalies mostly choose to jump and block to the right when they don't know for sure which way their opponent is going to kick.  In an emergency driving situation, most drivers will swerve to the right, whether it was the smart choice or not.  When you put people in a maze, they choose right turns far more often than left.  And so on...

[M4st0d0n]

1. Matchmaking is still awful. 400 global avg players makes it even worse. I'm from EU, if there's ONE siege game going on I'm lucky.
2. XP rewards for NOT playing the objectives, allows farming. If Siege is lost negate or divide all XP, or inflict negative XP for base damage, it's Pavlov's 101.
4. Erase track of killcount. If players wants to prove they're worth a high KDR they should go to a DM. nI'm tired as fuzzy bunny to play with a team of predators who're there only for kills. It's objective/team-based, trying to mimic TF2, then do it right.
3. No devs, no updates. All of this has already been discussed a thousand time on the forum.

[TwentyFirstPilot]

Direct your team. If your team is losing and you're watching them do so without comment, your team's score is partially your fault. If you can encourage your team to play better, by all means, do so.

I noticed that Siege became a lot more enjoyable once I started to direct, and encourage, my team.

[alpha78]

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Direct your team. If your team is losing and you're watching them do so without comment, your team's score is partially your fault. If you can encourage your team to play better, by all means, do so.

I noticed that Siege became a lot more enjoyable once I started to direct, and encourage, my team.

agreed, except I seem to get a lot of teams that don't speak my language.  Just saying it's hard to communicate w/ people when there's a language gap.

Edited by alpha78, October 16 2014 - 08:27 AM.

[TwentyFirstPilot]

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 08:27 AM, said:

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Direct your team. If your team is losing and you're watching them do so without comment, your team's score is partially your fault. If you can encourage your team to play better, by all means, do so.

I noticed that Siege became a lot more enjoyable once I started to direct, and encourage, my team.

agreed, except I seem to get a lot of teams that don't speak my language.  Just saying it's hard to communicate w/ people when there's a language gap.

I'll admit, that's a problem I hadn't considered. While some players on the US servers speak Spanish, most of them speak English.

[alpha78]

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 08:27 AM, said:

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Direct your team. If your team is losing and you're watching them do so without comment, your team's score is partially your fault. If you can encourage your team to play better, by all means, do so.

I noticed that Siege became a lot more enjoyable once I started to direct, and encourage, my team.

agreed, except I seem to get a lot of teams that don't speak my language.  Just saying it's hard to communicate w/ people when there's a language gap.

I'll admit, that's a problem I hadn't considered. While some players on the US servers speak Spanish, most of them speak English.

Yep.  I know a bit of spanish, but not enough to hang with them or communicate enough to be helpful.  Just enough to know when they're calling people names and what said names are. LOL

[TwentyFirstPilot]

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

alpha78, on October 16 2014 - 08:27 AM, said:

TwentyFirstPilot, on October 16 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

Direct your team. If your team is losing and you're watching them do so without comment, your team's score is partially your fault. If you can encourage your team to play better, by all means, do so.

I noticed that Siege became a lot more enjoyable once I started to direct, and encourage, my team.

agreed, except I seem to get a lot of teams that don't speak my language.  Just saying it's hard to communicate w/ people when there's a language gap.

I'll admit, that's a problem I hadn't considered. While some players on the US servers speak Spanish, most of them speak English.

Yep.  I know a bit of spanish, but not enough to hang with them or communicate enough to be helpful.  Just enough to know when they're calling people names and what said names are. LOL

I know a few ragers who only type in Spanish. It's completely hilarious when the entire server turns it into a guessing game.

Something something my mother_

[DoctorStein]

StubbornPuppet, on October 16 2014 - 05:44 AM, said:

What I think blows the balance on Siege is players - not the game mode.

Yep. Also, guys firing off a Battleship when the enemy has the AA secured and viciously defended. Nuff said.
Siege is my favorite game mode btw =3.

[StubbornPuppet]

I'm absolutely the guy to try to encourage and educate the team of what they need to be doing.  Unfortunately, that doesn't work as well as it should...  and what's worse is that the biggest violators of stupid fuzzy bunny like racing to the base to deliver EU that someone else has already called and who farm for kills instead of winning are high ranked players who know darn good and well what they should be doing.

[SS396]

StubbornPuppet, on October 16 2014 - 06:46 AM, said:

Nope, I'm talking about people who rush all the way back and hop in the collector to get rid of 50 EU when the other guy (or two) have obviously already got it.  They are just being greedy and it will generally cost their team the ship, and possibly the game.

Heres a problem I have, what good does it do to take a large load of EU to the AA with me and die_  It just makes it easier for the enemy capping the AA to gather up the free resources I left for them, so while you call that act of dropping eu selfish and greedy, I say that its trying to make sure that the EU that people have is not falling into the wrong hands.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

SS396, on October 16 2014 - 05:55 PM, said:

Heres a problem I have, what good does it do to take a large load of EU to the AA with me and die_  It just makes it easier for the enemy capping the AA to gather up the free resources I left for them, so while you call that act of dropping eu selfish and greedy, I say that its trying to make sure that the EU that people have is not falling into the wrong hands.

What if you learned when not to go collect a ton of EU you'll only have to take with you to the AA_  What if you kept your EU to the minimum you might need and can dump at the base before needing to run to the AA_

What if you... wait for it... planned_

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

BTW, waaay back, way on back when, couldn't been too much more than ten... I digress.  Back when, I proposed a 'jettison EU where I stand' button because the planning load was too great back then (for me at the time).

I don't need it anymore, but wouldn't fuss too much about having one.

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, October 16 2014 - 07:13 PM.

[SS396]

Call_Me_Ishmael, on October 16 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

What if you learned when not to go collect a ton of EU you'll only have to take with you to the AA_  What if you kept your EU to the minimum you might need and can dump at the base before needing to run to the AA_

What if you... wait for it... planned_

What if, what if, we can sit here all night and what if.  I guess if you actually knew how I played or asked me, then I could understand you making assumptions but when you just infer something from one post, well, thats just silly.

Even you contradict his post with your statement of "What if you kept your EU to the minimum you might need and can dump at the base before needing to run to the AA_"  His statement is that everyone that drops any EU at the base once he says go to AA, is greedy.  I simply stated that isn't the case and gave him a valid reason why.

[M4st0d0n]

EU monkeys loves monkey trees. Fact is, EU gathering and delivering is a form of competition inside your own team. How twisted is that for a game design_ Back in the days devs like Vana used to play in PUBs, and tell in game chat that people were not playing Siege properly. Well that's still true. But if you want people to play the objectives dont let them farm points when they're loosing. Dont wonder then why players have bad habits.

Edited by M4st0d0n, October 16 2014 - 10:11 PM.

[M4st0d0n]

And the problem isnt people lacking directions. It's people lacking motivation. A year ago when they implemented the achievements I had a ton of fun playing Siege. First you had to let your teammates play like the usual monkeys, til the base was nearly destroyed. Then you would say in the gamechat "Guys, start playing for real now, there's an achievement if we win this." Siege is suwh a waste, its heartbreaking. It's the only unique gamemode this game has, but was snobed by the MLG pro vets who were so busy chasing their own tails in MA they eventually ended up leaving the game.

Edited by M4st0d0n, October 16 2014 - 10:12 PM.

[alpha78]

M4st0d0n, on October 16 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

And the problem isnt people lacking directions. It's people lacking motivation. A year ago when they implemented the achievements I had a ton of fun playing Siege. First you had to let your teammates play like the usual monkeys, til the base was nearly destroyed. Then you would say in the gamechat "Guys, start playing for real now, there's an achievement if we win this." Siege is suwh a waste, its heartbreaking. It's the only unique gamemode this game has, but was snobed by the MLG pro vets who were so busy chasing their own tails in MA they eventually ended up leaving the game.

Probably a bit of both (lacking motivation and direction).  I know the one player I mentioned before that just stands on top the team base all match isn't farming EU and obviously doesn't score very high when all they get points for is shooting the enemy ship and the occasional enemy player that wanders close enough to the base to get a shot on.  I (and teammates) have tried communicating with them but they don't listen.  I know they're not afk because they will shoot at you if you get in their face.  Usually has a turret setup next to them for some reason.  I think they think the mode is to defend the base or something.

My point in all this was that in these situations, when you have 6 good players on the enemy team and 5 good players on your team and then one idiot standing idle in the corner, it can throw the balance.  One or two players "shouldn't" have such a huge impact on the game, but when the mode is about bodies at a certain point on the map, sometimes one or two players absent at the AA can make a HUGE impact.  That's why I say it's too fragile.

The base defender/camper is one extreme, but it also happens when there's a big deficit in skill between the 2 sides.  I've seen a pair of obviously low level CRT's who probably joined a higher tier server together for fun throw things out of balance too.  They're somewhat trying, but when the team makeup is 6 godmode vs 4 godmode + 2 noobs = 6 godmode win.

I know it's inherit in a king of the hill mode and not unique to hawken.  I also understand that it's part of the someone has to win thing.  No issue with loosing here, but when it's a stomp because of MM being fuzzy bunny or people jumping into a MMR server way above their skillset it's frustrating.