Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
CylonRed

Ok - this weekend and I know we have newer players in the forums...

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
3,492 posts
6,195 battles

We have all been om lemming teams, been there, done that.  This weekend it seems to be worse than the last 3 months.  I have had 4-5 game losses strictly due to lemming - especially on 2 Brother map.  Been on the side the team abandoned most of those games (all loses BTW) and every time I mention that a paper then French cruiser, a DD and slightly less squishy cruiser can't really hold off a couple BBs, a DD, and sometimes a cruiser.  Silence is all I have gotten with no help forthcoming and then the eventual loss. 

So - for new folks....  Lemming on many maps does not work out well the vast majority of the time.  When the team lemmings the team gives an easy cap to the enemy (ie: free points), allows that part of the enemy to attack from behind, and it is a virtually automatic loss if the team can't push thru to the one side.  At best - the teams chase each other around the map. 

The only way this really works is if the team - by luck - lemmings to the weak side and can blow thru the cap to get to the home cap very quickly.  This is by shear luck to pick the 'correct' side.

Better idea  is to send folks to BOTH sides - if one side is weaker (less enemy there) then the team needs to go thru that ASAP.  The other side needs to prevent the team from getting the easy cap and not give away those easy points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,607
[PSP]
Members
6,359 posts
8,982 battles

New players tend to follow the leader in hopes that he will actually know something. This following behavior is reinforced when someone else does the same thing. There then comes a point when even those who know better join in because if they didn't they would be left alone and vulnerable. You can see this happen throughout human history, it's not just something seen in a game.

Edited by Snargfargle
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
595
[PVE]
Members
1,609 posts
6,769 battles

It is the belief that 'there is strength in numbers', not to mention that for the most part people are sheep or cattle and will follow one another to slaughter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles

I disagree. I think the entire team going in one direction is a fine strategy. I am pleased when I see it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,365
[PVE]
Members
5,700 posts
18,273 battles
28 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

New players tend to follow the leader in hopes that he will actually know something. This following behavior is reinforced when someone else does the same thing. There then comes a point when even those who know better join in because if they didn't they would be left alone and vulnerable. You can see this happen throughout human history, it's not just something seen in a game.

Though I tend to agree with your reasoning, sticking together is not a bad strategy. People complain when you YOLO, they complain when you lemming, and they complain when you split up..... IMHO staying together and focusing fire is the best of all the strategies. When you have a lemming train happening, take charge and call targets. Pretty simple. 

I hate PvP play but am forced to play it if I want to participate in campaign or mission rewards. What I see most is people splitting into two groups but trying to stay together until the first ship comes under fire and then they all start to turn away... Often that leaves the slower ships vulnerable to the other team. When the group stays together and starts fighting & focusing their fire, the enemy team scrambles and tries to retreat. Keeping up the fire and advancing keeps the enemy attempting to kite you while they escape. They sometimes attack, not often, but if they do, it just leads to an epic and brutal fight which I like. 

The 2 Brothers map is crap in Standard battle. Everyone just sits around waiting for someone to attack. It is terrible in PvP and it is terrible in PvE play (the bots always charge one side or try the gap). In Domination mode it isn't terrible but it isn't much fun either. The map is designed for stagnant, boring, gameplay and whoever allowed it in game should be ashamed. People often complain about the Tears map but 2 Brothers is far worse and reinforces the stale meta that is PvP. 

Edited by Taylor3006
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,881 posts
9,125 battles

Actually Lemming train has been working almost 100% - for the red team!

 

The difference being they push B aggressively after taking the first cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
327
[SWOB]
[SWOB]
Alpha Tester
1,143 posts
6,492 battles
17 minutes ago, Elegant_Winter said:

I disagree. I think the entire team going in one direction is a fine strategy. I am pleased when I see it.

 

Yeah, it's not really a question of exactly where you go, but how you do it and how well you co-ordinate.  Having the whole team, or most of it push hard in one direction is a very effective tactic assuming that the team actually works together and doesn't just bog down at the sight of the first enemy.  You can split the team just as effectively, but it also requires co-ordination and team play.

 

Concentrating your firepower is smart and a very forgiving approach.  Capping is critical, but not at the cost of losing a quarter of your team doing it in the first few minutes.  You can always cap away to your heart's delight after you've wiped the enemy out.

 

What loses matches is when the team fights about how their preferred tactic is the best and does nothing while blaming somebody else for the loss.  Instead of griping on the forums, it's more useful to communicate with your team in chat. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
1 minute ago, K538 said:

Yeah, it's not really a question of exactly where you go, but how you do it and how well you co-ordinate.  Having the whole team, or most of it push hard in one direction is a very effective tactic assuming that the team actually works together and doesn't just bog down at the sight of the first enemy.  You can split the team just as effectively, but it also requires co-ordination and team play.

Concentrating your firepower is smart and a very forgiving approach.  Capping is critical, but not at the cost of losing a quarter of your team doing it in the first few minutes.  You can always cap away to your heart's delight after you've wiped the enemy out.

What loses matches is when the team fights about how their preferred tactic is the best and does nothing while blaming somebody else for the loss.  Instead of griping on the forums, it's more useful to communicate with your team in chat. :)

Right. It's not about what thing you do; it's about how effectively you do that thing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,492 posts
6,195 battles
7 minutes ago, K538 said:

 

Yeah, it's not really a question of exactly where you go, but how you do it and how well you co-ordinate.  Having the whole team, or most of it push hard in one direction is a very effective tactic assuming that the team actually works together and doesn't just bog down at the sight of the first enemy.  You can split the team just as effectively, but it also requires co-ordination and team play.

 

Concentrating your firepower is smart and a very forgiving approach.  Capping is critical, but not at the cost of losing a quarter of your team doing it in the first few minutes.  You can always cap away to your heart's delight after you've wiped the enemy out.

 

What loses matches is when the team fights about how their preferred tactic is the best and does nothing while blaming somebody else for the loss.  Instead of griping on the forums, it's more useful to communicate with your team in chat. :)

It is effective - for losing.  It is rare that it wins since so few work together.  And as noted in my first post - I DID communicate and it was.... ignored every time.  And the 'griping' is trying to get it thru people's head why it is bad thing to do - point by point..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
3 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

It is effective - for losing.  It is rare that it wins since so few work together.  And as noted in my first post - I DID communicate and it was.... ignored every time.  And the 'griping' is trying to get it thru people's head why it is bad thing to do - point by point..

That's just it. People often won't work together, so trying to lay out the most effective strategy (which is still debatable) beforehand is often futile. It's best to work with what you have and try to maximize its effectiveness. That, and arguing over it doesn't help anyone. People will play how they want to play most of the time and no amount of arguing will change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[WAIFU]
Members
19 posts
5,049 battles
Just now, Elegant_Winter said:

That's just it. People often won't work together, so trying to lay out the most effective strategy (which is still debatable) beforehand is often futile. It's best to work with what you have and try to maximize its effectiveness. That, and arguing over it doesn't help anyone. People will play how they want to play most of the time and no amount of arguing will change that.

lemming is a poor strategy because

1. You are essentially giving up control and vision over half the map. 

2. You are giving the enemy the ability to surround you, reducing potential cover. 

3. You are exposing your cv by providing only a limited area to go to. When suppressed, it is far easier for the cv to be spotted and picked off. 

4. You are clumping all 12 of your ships into a much smaller area. While this is effective in reducing damage taken from shells, you increase your risk of collision and greatly increase the effectiveness of enemy torps -- while reducing your own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,492 posts
6,195 battles
5 minutes ago, Elegant_Winter said:

That's just it. People often won't work together, so trying to lay out the most effective strategy (which is still debatable) beforehand is often futile. It's best to work with what you have and try to maximize its effectiveness. That, and arguing over it doesn't help anyone. People will play how they want to play most of the time and no amount of arguing will change that.

That is why I don;t argue about it.  I point it out and say why it is bad.  When it goes south - I do mention the cause.  No yelling, no calling anyone names etc...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
Just now, iCarus0726 said:

lemming is a poor strategy because

1. You are essentially giving up control and vision over half the map. 

2. You are giving the enemy the ability to surround you, reducing potential cover. 

3. You are exposing your cv by providing only a limited area to go to. When suppressed, it is far easier for the cv to be spotted and picked off. 

4. You are clumping all 12 of your ships into a much smaller area. While this is effective in reducing damage taken from shells, you increase your risk of collision and greatly increase the effectiveness of enemy torps -- while reducing your own. 

Numerical superiority is the best advantage you can have. If you move forward and focus fire with numerical superiority you're most likely going to succeed. The disadvantages you mentioned don't weigh as much together as the advantage of numerical superiority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
Just now, CylonRed said:

That is why I don;t argue about it.  I point it out and say why it is bad.  When it goes south - I do mention the cause.  No yelling, no calling anyone names etc...

Annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,492 posts
6,195 battles

The disadvantages you mentioned don't weigh as much together as the advantage of numerical superiority.

Not in my 4K+ game experience.  Too many don't work together to make it effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,492 posts
6,195 battles
Just now, Elegant_Winter said:

Annoying.

But you said to communicate - so now it is annoying?  Can't have it both ways.  Pointing out the errors is appropriate as part of communication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

Not in my 4K+ game experience.  Too many don't work together to make it effective.

That applies to every strategy though.

Also, simply being near your teammates can be considered a form of teamwork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
327
[SWOB]
[SWOB]
Alpha Tester
1,143 posts
6,492 battles
8 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

It is effective - for losing.  It is rare that it wins since so few work together.  And as noted in my first post - I DID communicate and it was.... ignored every time.  And the 'griping' is trying to get it thru people's head why it is bad thing to do - point by point..

 

/shrug

 

I'm just sharing my observations.  But if what you're doing works for you then who am I to stop you?

 

There's a reason that in ranked battles, for example, the team doesn't tend to split up or if they do it's just a holding action against one of the caps while the main body works as a group.  This becomes apparent as the numbers on your team shrink.  It's just not obvious at the beginning of a 12 v 12 melee, things are random enough that for the most part it's just a free for all.  I've never played a game where concentrating your ability to damage the opponent in a focused manner was a bad plan and it can compensate for a lot of errors, the issue is generally how effectively people actually execute the plane.

 

Splitting your team equally works well in random battles mainly because you can be confident that the other team probably did the same thing purely by random distribution, but it sure doesn't work well when a coordinated opponent does have their ducks in a pile and pushes hard against one side while screening with one or two ships on the other.

 

My point isn't that one tactic is better than the other, my point is that they're entirely situational.  The only reason one seems better than the other is because it's what you see most commonly and they're good rules of thumb for new players who don't really understand how a match usually unfolds, but there are several different ways to win a match.  The #1 thing you can do to win a match is not to die early and the #2 thing is to keep your guns firing on an enemy more or less non-stop.  Caps matter, but they should come naturally if people are playing their roles correctly and staying engaged.  It's much easier to stop the ticker on a cap late in the game than it is to resurrect teammates now that you're outgunned.

 

Lack of coordination and indecision are a far bigger problem.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

But you said to communicate - so now it is annoying?  Can't have it both ways.  Pointing out the errors is appropriate as part of communication.

"I do mention the cause."

You're just rubbing it in. That's annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
506
[FML]
Members
1,785 posts
10,166 battles

The problem is not lemming trains. The problem is when the lemming train stops at first sight of enemy smoke, particularly without capturing the point in front of them, or - worse - allowing the enemy to cap it. 

 

A a stopped lemming train is a loss. And well done to the defenders for making it so. A lemming train that pushes through and destroys the enemy in detail wins. 

 

Its up up to you to make the difference. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[BEER]
Members
106 posts
6,180 battles
31 minutes ago, Elegant_Winter said:

Right. It's not about what thing you do; it's about how effectively you do that thing.

As George Carlin said, "It's not how long you make it, it's how you make it long."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[BEER]
Members
106 posts
6,180 battles
10 minutes ago, Elegant_Winter said:

"I do mention the cause."

You're just rubbing it in. That's annoying.

Many find "lessons learned" to be annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
1 minute ago, MajorKey said:

Many find "lessons learned" to be annoying.

Elaborate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[ARRGG]
Members
4,732 posts
7,577 battles

Oh the ole lemming train trick seen it often and even participated in some in my younger days... the posters right it rarely works, so some advice if you can’t stop it in chat.. join in and ..PUSH .. PUSH REAL REAL HARD!!!and may the force be with you

That is all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×