NA Server Tactics

[Digglez]

Possible solution; designate an NA server as the 'Teamwork' server where like minds can fight, get clans to form a nucleus of tactical play and publicly call the other players in to join them, use banner-stacking to stack team players together in pub matches, change the multi/xp reward mechanism to encourage blobs the way the original proximity-to-death rewards worked to encourage 'xp barns'.

Dont need a special 'teamwork' server to do teamwork.  Either type in chat or ask for a clans voice coms if you want to work with them.  Or just common sense shit.

[Zerran]

Based on this, one would think the first team to attempt teamwork (hill-camping or other simple tactics) would win. However this frequently isn't the case. Many players react to a call for tactics with lines like 'shield walls don't work' and proceed to ignore the suggestion. This results in a split team; those who are listening to the order to hold at a point, and those who are willfully ignoring the order and continuing in 'team deathmatch' style. This creates a problem. The team that called for tactics but did not implement them in unison is now stacked against itself because half of the team is holding back while the other half is charging forward. The team is engaged in two half-battles, both at 2v1 odds, and destroyed. Thus 'camping didn't work'.

The tactics are failing not because the tactics are bad, but because only about half the team is using them.

Very true. It's possible to still use tactics, but when utilizing them it's necessary to design them in such a way that they incorporate "the Zerg", even if only for delaying/holding.

[Everkistus]

I heard that once Fallens were renowned for their running archer tactics on NA.

[Vibe]

NA use chat to drama extensively in-game and on forum
EU uses banpolls

[Macropus]

1) If team tries to use some tactics, it becomes divided on those who follow tactics and those dummies who just charge anyway. Chargers die quick and team become outnumbered by enemies so even tactics won't help.
2) If the whole team charges, it has equial chances to win as well as enemies team.

I think that's why the most battles consist of two teams charging each other.

[a_bear_irl]

the problem with "tactics" is that the longer you stall the longer the enemy ranged sit there and pick you apart, half the team (2h and short polearms) are doing nothing or (shielders) sitting in a shieldwall

more than tactics what matters is knowing how to fight, and more importantly move, within a group.

[Rheinhardt]

I would say archers shooting up 2h users is a non-issue. Cheap shields or just standing behind a tree or shielder is all you ever need to do, particularly if you stay defensive.

[Havoco]

Possible solution; designate an NA server as the 'Teamwork' server where like minds can fight, get clans to form a nucleus of tactical play and publicly call the other players in to join them, use banner-stacking to stack team players together in pub matches, change the multi/xp reward mechanism to encourage blobs the way the original proximity-to-death rewards worked to encourage 'xp barns'.

Basically organize scrims with other clans. Btw, isnt that battlegroups thing supposed to do something like this?

[bruce]

Boost archer damage by 100+%, give them -66% of their running speed, make every map open plains. Enjoy shieldwalls and stuff, because random herpderpcharge team dies.

Right now, with half the map being worthless run to clusterfuck maps, and on even normal maps tactics being of little consequence b/c the team which does use tactics still won't prevail over the stacked team, and stacked team has no need for tactics because they win anyway, well... that's what you get.

Alternatively, old money/xp system so you get money/xp for kills scored in your proximity.

Actually, just make every map random open plains. Perhaps tweak in for an occasional ruin/etc also random. The only way to force people to cooperate is when failure to do so gets them killed repeatedly in idiotic ways.

[SHinOCk]

Nice retarded suggestions Bruce, why not just remove melee while were at it cause that's what would happen with changes like that

[bruce]

If melee players are by definition 2h which cannot use shield or stand still for a minute, or stop making "ARCHERY/CAVALRY/1H/SHIELD/POLEARM/THROWING/CROSSBOW/1H NO SHIELD/FAKEPEASANT OP!" threads then seriously.

That is why we can't have nice things and tactics, only zerg rush.

[MrShine]

Based on this, one would think the first team to attempt teamwork (hill-camping or other simple tactics) would win. However this frequently isn't the case. Many players react to a call for tactics with lines like 'shield walls don't work' and proceed to ignore the suggestion. This results in a split team; those who are listening to the order to hold at a point, and those who are willfully ignoring the order and continuing in 'team deathmatch' style. This creates a problem. The team that called for tactics but did not implement them in unison is now stacked against itself because half of the team is holding back while the other half is charging forward. The team is engaged in two half-battles, both at 2v1 odds, and destroyed. Thus 'camping didn't work'.

The tactics are failing not because the tactics are bad, but because only about half the team is using them.

No the tactics are failing because they are bad.  Any fool can spam orders in chat, but why should other players follow those orders?  Thinking you can control 40-50 players through a chat blurb (that many might ignore or have turned off) is asking to fail.

If you want super organized tactics like what you are describing do a scrim with another organized clan, your 'teamwork' server idea will be ineffective. 

Yes an organized group might have a better chance of winning (assuming they ARE all organized) , but they also become a bigger target by ranged. are more susceptible to being flanked, etc.   

[Swaggart]

I am a pubber, and I was being stupid at first.  Also, I wasn't giving out orders, I just started following the NH clan which seemed like the obvious smart thing to do.  But they just moved too slowly for all the rambos out there, so we got divided in two and punished accordingly.  So I had no tactic, just a choice of dying immediately with the Rambos, or dying later with the NH.

So ease off on the hate.

I'm not hating on you, or clans that use tactics. I'm pointing out that no one has the right to call pubbers stupid simply because they don't follow your vision of tactics. No one is obliged to follow your way of thinking and calling someone stupid for that is utter arrogance.

So you don't want to camp the hill for 3 minutes because that's boring, but you love charging out, dying to the first group of enemies you see and then spectating the match for 3 minutes.

Sense.  This makes none.

You're assuming that I blindly charge into a group of opponents as opposed to sticking with my own group of teammates. If I should happen to die while my group is fighting their group, then that's fine with me. What I don't find fun is sitting back until there is a 3:1 disadvantage against me and then getting steamrolled without much of a chance.

[CrazyCracka420]

Has anyone else noticed NA servers consist of thirty rambos per side running pell-mell through the map with no awareness to their own team or favorable terrain to fight on? Or is this just me?

That's why people cry about cav being overpowered, when in reality it's just infantry all trying to be rambo, and not even remotely trying to work as a team, use tactics, or the proper equipment to counter what the enemy throws at you. 

[rustyspoon]

IMO best tactics on battle are to stick with the main group and find a combat buddy.

Stick next to your combat buddy and double team everyone they come up against. You can rip through a lot of people quickly just by doing that.