DUST Search - Something everyone seems to be forgetting....

Zekain Kade wrote:

Baal Roo wrote:

This same basic principle even applies to the current skirmish matches. I've yet to encounter a skirmish match that was determined by one side's clones being depleted. Thus, the zerg rush can actually be pretty effective.

I've had a squad hold almost an entire opposing team to a single objective simply by surrounding it with Uplinks and continously spawning and rushing the objective. All of a sudden, 4 guys each only lasting 5 seconds or so a life, can feel like an onslaught from an entire team.

So, just as a hypothetical, let's imagine my team has 2 objectives and yours has 1. If my team can zerg rush your team at that 1 objective and effectively hold your team there in a constant state of defense, it doesn't matter if your team goes 5:1 and my team goes 1:5... we will win the match because your MCC will fall before ours does.

Sure, it's may not be as "brag worthy" from the perspective of the FPS veteran who thinks in terms of KDR, but from the perspective of "play smarter, not harder" it's pretty brag worthy to say "we outsmarted you, won the match, and did it CHEAPER too".

I'll put my stick skills up against probably all but the top 10-15% of console FPS players out there, but I'm perfectly willing to go into negative KDR for a match if there's a tactical advantage to doing so... and if you can't see any tactical reasons for ever going negative, then IMO that just shows a lack of understanding of the bigger picture and makes you a less valuable player both on AND off the battlefield.

What if your team actually loses because your zerg rush exhausted your entire clone reserve?

Will you feel proud then?


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 811	Posted - 2012.09.27 01:59:00 - [1] - Quote This same basic principle even applies to the current skirmish matches. I've yet to encounter a skirmish match that was determined by one side's clones being depleted. Thus, the zerg rush can actually be pretty effective. I've had a squad hold almost an entire opposing team to a single objective simply by surrounding it with Uplinks and continously spawning and rushing the objective. All of a sudden, 4 guys each only lasting 5 seconds or so a life, can feel like an onslaught from an entire team. So, just as a hypothetical, let's imagine my team has 2 objectives and yours has 1. If my team can zerg rush your team at that 1 objective and effectively hold your team there in a constant state of defense, it doesn't matter if your team goes 5:1 and my team goes 1:5... we will win the match because your MCC will fall before ours does. Sure, it's may not be as "brag worthy" from the perspective of the FPS veteran who thinks in terms of KDR, but from the perspective of "play smarter, not harder" it's pretty brag worthy to say "we outsmarted you, won the match, and did it CHEAPER too". I'll put my stick skills up against probably all but the top 10-15% of console FPS players out there, but I'm perfectly willing to go into negative KDR for a match if there's a tactical advantage to doing so... and if you can't see any tactical reasons for ever going negative, then IMO that just shows a lack of understanding of the bigger picture and makes you a less valuable player both on AND off the battlefield.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 811	Posted - 2012.09.27 02:05:00 - [2] - Quote Zekain Kade wrote: Baal Roo wrote: This same basic principle even applies to the current skirmish matches. I've yet to encounter a skirmish match that was determined by one side's clones being depleted. Thus, the zerg rush can actually be pretty effective. I've had a squad hold almost an entire opposing team to a single objective simply by surrounding it with Uplinks and continously spawning and rushing the objective. All of a sudden, 4 guys each only lasting 5 seconds or so a life, can feel like an onslaught from an entire team. So, just as a hypothetical, let's imagine my team has 2 objectives and yours has 1. If my team can zerg rush your team at that 1 objective and effectively hold your team there in a constant state of defense, it doesn't matter if your team goes 5:1 and my team goes 1:5... we will win the match because your MCC will fall before ours does. Sure, it's may not be as "brag worthy" from the perspective of the FPS veteran who thinks in terms of KDR, but from the perspective of "play smarter, not harder" it's pretty brag worthy to say "we outsmarted you, won the match, and did it CHEAPER too". I'll put my stick skills up against probably all but the top 10-15% of console FPS players out there, but I'm perfectly willing to go into negative KDR for a match if there's a tactical advantage to doing so... and if you can't see any tactical reasons for ever going negative, then IMO that just shows a lack of understanding of the bigger picture and makes you a less valuable player both on AND off the battlefield. What if your team actually loses because your zerg rush exhausted your entire clone reserve? Will you feel proud then? Have you seen that happen yet? I sure haven't. I guess it's possible, but it's yet to have been an issue. If such a thing DID happen, then yeah, that was a bad plan and my squad would necessarily be required to feel bad.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 811	Posted - 2012.09.27 02:23:00 - [3] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Zekain Kade wrote: Both sides have a unit cap. KD will play a massive roll when both sides are filled. The side with the worst general KD will lose. it's really as simple as that. Not entirely. On an ambush map, you're right. But the rules seem to change with skirmish maps. Just today I fought in a Skirmish Map where my team held all 5 objectives with absolutely no trouble. A few enemy mercs tried to hack one objective here and there, but they were quickly countered early in the game. The rest of the match was just basically cornering the opposing team on their own default spawn points. Of course, we won. But here is the quirk in the whole thing. My team had the absolute worst KDR in the match without one or two of us having double digits (even then their score was low). The opposing team, who we just face r a p e d the whole match, had an astonishing KDR across the board with some of their players reaching high double digits whole the rest had moderate double digits. I found it to be completely odd. I find the KDR to be almost entirely irrelevant most of the time for Skirmish maps. If you pulled up the KDR from 20 randomly chosen skirmish matches and tried to guess which team won the match purely on that statistic, I'm fairly certain you would do no better than 50/50. KDR seems to have almost no bearing at all on the outcome of skirmish.