Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Halonut24

Is there a reason Tier X teams like to abandon flanks?

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

221
[WOSV]
Members
584 posts
3,347 battles

It seems to happen every game. The team deploys all to just 2 caps and ignores the third, especially when the third is filled with hostiles, who then pincer the team. Naturally I watch my whole team evaporate right in front of me and there's nothing I can do about it. Every game it feels like! I can't win in Midway if I paid my team to win! And I usually top out the leader board fruitlessly trying to stop the onslaught of red ships coming for us.

*sigh* sorry it's just frustrating. I can't understand it. Why just ignore an entire flank like that? At Tier X no less... Does anyone have an answer? Anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,975
[PHASE]
Members
5,760 posts
18,724 battles

This is a 1/3 game. 1/3rd of the games you have potatoes, then they do, and then 1/3 the games or really competitive. It's like golf. Two horrible fairway shots but you hit a 35ft put.....keeps you coming back

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,925 posts
6,832 battles

It largely depends on how the enemy is deployed.

Now, randoms usually aren't that adept in their strategic thinking, but it's the simple fact that at top tiers a superior force will be able to quickly focus down ships one at a time against an inferior force. Had that flank not been abandoned, you'd have lost any ships that went there anyway, likely. By moving to allies, you one, guarantee that no ships/points are lost early on and two, increase your teams chances of being able to steamroll any opposition they run into.

Unfortunately, the rest is up to the team to capitalize on. Seems you found the players that didn't realize they could either ignore the smaller enemy group or coordinate to quickly eliminate them, allowing your team to turn their attention to the larger group. Especially if your team went to two caps and theirs only went to one. In that situation, your team has cap advantage and the enemy has to come to you if they want a chance at winning.

Edited by GhostSwordsman
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,199 posts
9,493 battles

 I think it's Freudian really, they all regress to childhood abuse and clump together in a fish school with a result that can usually be portrayed thusly:

Fishball.jpg.01f46cb7700e8d35c670e6dadb01cee3.jpg

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
299
[WOLFG]
Members
603 posts

It really only takes one ship who starts turning away from the flank.  The other ships, or ship, in that area aren't about to take try and defend it themselves.  They just abandon it and go join the group.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
339 posts
5,488 battles

There's a disproportionate amount of bad players clumped at T10 that never learned a thing about positioning. Cue facerolls.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[-KAK-]
Members
497 posts
8,937 battles

The reality is that if there's 12 ships in a game, 3 caps means 4 ships per cap. If there's CVs, there's going to be one less at a cap. 

 

You have to hope that:

A) There's a reasonable group of ships at each cap. 3BB and 1 CA/CL = no cap.

B) There's no divisions foolishly spread across the start zone by the spawner. 9 times out of 10, they'll group up, no matter where they started.

C) You have at least 3 DDs. Most times if there's not at least 3 DDs, no one's going to triple cap.

D) Both teams triple cap. If one side double caps, and the other triple caps, the double cap team can usually win the opening engagements, and then they'll get the game because the third triple group is too far out to do anything. I have ABC Mountain range in mind when I say this (One team ABC, one team BC)

 

The CV rework doesn't help things either. Players are less likely to go off on their own because they'll get picked off. Hence the team huddles, hence less triple capping. I wouldn't argue that randoms have less strategic thinking, but they are more at the whims of what their teammates do - less team-wide strats, more solo strats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,437
[TARK]
Members
4,782 posts
1,793 battles

Tier X has the least skilled players, on average.

It has lots of high skill players...but even more people who just failed there way there and wont play lower tiers because then they wont have the advantage of being top tier...the only way they can be even decent at the game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,392
[NG-NL]
Members
6,038 posts
9,663 battles

My experience is a lot of T10 "players" are total wimps. They won't push until the enemy players are defeated, even if they need only push for the clear advantage. I've had several losses today thanks to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34,032
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
11,301 posts
9,279 battles
3 hours ago, Halonut24 said:

It seems to happen every game. The team deploys all to just 2 caps and ignores the third, especially when the third is filled with hostiles, who then pincer the team. Naturally I watch my whole team evaporate right in front of me and there's nothing I can do about it. Every game it feels like! I can't win in Midway if I paid my team to win! And I usually top out the leader board fruitlessly trying to stop the onslaught of red ships coming for us.

*sigh* sorry it's just frustrating. I can't understand it. Why just ignore an entire flank like that? At Tier X no less... Does anyone have an answer? Anyone?

Probably for the same reason you see it in mid tier and low tier games:

  • Someone doesn't like where they're deployed.  This could be for any number of reasons, from having had better games when deployed on the opposite flank to wanting to team up with X ship over there to fearing encountering Y-ship on the enemy team over the terrain in front of them, etc.
  • So they immediately put their rudder hard over and begin moving.  Maybe they'll be the kind of person that says, "Let's hit B / C" when they're deployed in front of A, at least warning their team they plan to abandon the flank.  Maybe they won't.
  • Now that this person is moving over, those that were deployed with them suddenly don't like their chances going in unsupported.  All it takes is one other person to nudge their rudder over and anyone with a lick of sense won't suicide off by themselves down the flank alone.
  • And there you have it, one flank completely abandoned.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,491
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,009 posts
16,934 battles
3 hours ago, Halonut24 said:

pincer

The reason is that 99.9% of the player base doesn't understand that this is a thing (and many honestly don't care to).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
628
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
1,638 posts
5,785 battles

The idea behind focusing two caps is that theoretically gives the chance to have an overwhelming force on one of those caps.  We go B/C.  Enemy goes A/B.  C may be open or just lightly defended.

If I spawn far left below A in that situation, I will almost always head over to A regardless.  But that is a dangerous proposition if everyone on my side puts their rudder over.  I do it because I know when to disengage and how to get myself out of that position.  But if a DD flanks me or if there's a CV in the game, I may not be able to go dark and GTFO.  And so from an individual perspective, staying with the team is the best bet.

Ideally though, from a team perspective, you should always at least try to slow a cap even if you don't intend to take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
428
[AAA]
Members
504 posts
9,086 battles
2 hours ago, harikari25 said:

There's a disproportionate amount of bad players clumped at T10 that never learned a thing about positioning. Cue facerolls.

This 100%. So many baddies in high tier games now it almost makes the game not enjoyable. It is so bad many times even good players in a division can no longer carry. At one time it was what team had the better players now it is what team has the better baddies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[-KAK-]
Members
497 posts
8,937 battles
3 minutes ago, Scrapyard_ said:

This 100%. So many baddies in high tier games now it almost makes the game not enjoyable. It is so bad many times even good players in a division can no longer carry. At one time it was what team had the better players now it is what team has the better baddies. 

I'm not going to argue that there's no bad players at T10 right now, there definitely are some..... But - The meta just shifted heavily with 0.8.0. I'd argue that some average-level players who were comfortable and knew what to do pre-0.8.0 are just lost atm. That doesn't necessarily mean they're bad as a whole, they just don't know how to react yet. 

 

Admittedly, I have noticed that a strong division can even have troubles carrying in some games atm. But again, I'd blame it partially on the meta and the uncertainty, not 100% on the players on your team that are playing perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,655
[INTEL]
Members
11,723 posts
32,786 battles

Grabbing two caps and ceding one is a good strategy on many maps. In Randoms its a strat that a Random team is capable of executing.

Often the flanking attack cant materialize because the flankers are not well organized and emerge from behind island walls serially and are killed. Sometimes they turn back. The flankers are just incompetetent as any other ships....

If a team can grab the center cap hard, it stands a good chance of fending off a charge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
981
[LRM]
[LRM]
Members
2,880 posts
7,091 battles
5 minutes ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

I'm not going to argue that there's no bad players at T10 right now, there definitely are some..... But - The meta just shifted heavily with 0.8.0. I'd argue that some average-level players who were comfortable and knew what to do pre-0.8.0 are just lost atm. That doesn't necessarily mean they're bad as a whole, they just don't know how to react yet. 

 

Admittedly, I have noticed that a strong division can even have troubles carrying in some games atm. But again, I'd blame it partially on the meta and the uncertainty, not 100% on the players on your team that are playing perfectly.

The meta shifted, and it has made the entire community a bit uneasy. CV stops teams from camping or hiding, and the old meta was all about that.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
489
[O7]
[O7]
Beta Testers
1,575 posts
9,643 battles
5 hours ago, Halonut24 said:

It seems to happen every game. The team deploys all to just 2 caps and ignores the third, especially when the third is filled with hostiles, who then pincer the team. Naturally I watch my whole team evaporate right in front of me and there's nothing I can do about it. Every game it feels like! I can't win in Midway if I paid my team to win! And I usually top out the leader board fruitlessly trying to stop the onslaught of red ships coming for us.

*sigh* sorry it's just frustrating. I can't understand it. Why just ignore an entire flank like that? At Tier X no less... Does anyone have an answer? Anyone?

Uh, focusing on just 2 caps in a three cap game has always been the meta, in fact it's encouraged. Splitting your team into smaller sections is just asking for them to be overwhelmed one group at a time. I often see one or two ships try to go for that third cap all by themselves and they almost always get wiped out without doing any meaningful damage in return and then the team just gets flanked anyways. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
738
[TOG]
Members
4,051 posts
21,689 battles

 

11 hours ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

The reality is that if there's 12 ships in a game, 3 caps means 4 ships per cap. If there's CVs, there's going to be one less at a cap. 

 

You have to hope that:

A) There's a reasonable group of ships at each cap. 3BB and 1 CA/CL = no cap.

B) There's no divisions foolishly spread across the start zone by the spawner. 9 times out of 10, they'll group up, no matter where they started.

C) You have at least 3 DDs. Most times if there's not at least 3 DDs, no one's going to triple cap.

D) Both teams triple cap. If one side double caps, and the other triple caps, the double cap team can usually win the opening engagements, and then they'll get the game because the third triple group is too far out to do anything. I have ABC Mountain range in mind when I say this (One team ABC, one team BC)

 

The CV rework doesn't help things either. Players are less likely to go off on their own because they'll get picked off. Hence the team huddles, hence less triple capping. I wouldn't argue that randoms have less strategic thinking, but they are more at the whims of what their teammates do - less team-wide strats, more solo strats.

 If I'm playing a DD, I normally look and see how many radar ships there is in the red's line up and what the cap in front of me looks like. I make my choice at that point. I tell them on the chat where I'm going and if I'm going to try for a cap or not. Sometimes the support goes off somewhere and I abort. Sometimes I decide not to cap. Losing 5-10k HP in the first 5 minutes in return for a possible first time cap is a dubious proposition. You can take back a cap. You can't take back a dead ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,669
[OO7]
Members
3,852 posts
9,125 battles
9 hours ago, Phil_Swift_With_Flextape said:

The meta shifted, and it has made the entire community a bit uneasy. CV stops teams from camping or hiding, and the old meta was all about that.

Uh, teams are far more campy post-rework than before.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[-KAK-]
Members
497 posts
8,937 battles
12 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

 If I'm playing a DD, I normally look and see how many radar ships there is in the red's line up and what the cap in front of me looks like. I make my choice at that point. I tell them on the chat where I'm going and if I'm going to try for a cap or not. Sometimes the support goes off somewhere and I abort. Sometimes I decide not to cap. Losing 5-10k HP in the first 5 minutes in return for a possible first time cap is a dubious proposition. You can take back a cap. You can't take back a dead ship.

Another good point. Probably should have been E) on my list. There are some scenarios as a DD where you just don't cap. IE 5 radar botes on the enemy team, or a set of hyper-agressive enemy DDs. 

 

I'd argue the goal is to not get outflanked. That doesn't necessarily mean you cap right away. It doesn't necessarily mean you take all three caps (Maybe only AC, or you leave a few strong ships on your flank for AB/BC)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,733
[H_]
Members
3,377 posts
15,097 battles

Ah, some really bad assumptions going on here....  One, this is a FPS.  I  not  we....  Unless, you are playing in a clan, there are no real teams....even in Ranked because they are "All for One !.....and, More for ME!"  Individual awards that are individually earned.   We've run into dozens of yolo and kamakazi's over the past few weeks......because of event requirements or simply because they "don't want to be part of any team...."   The game is changing and our host wants the Arcade FPS FFA and that means, the era of teams, roles and WW2 expectations is mostly gone or is leaving as these gimmicky changes drives them off......

We are even seeing aberrant, anti-social behaviors in scenarios where you must cooperate to win......  i.e. Yesterday in the scenario a player realized there were not aircraft in the scenario (a new player?) and then charged the enemy and died. 

We can't do Clan Battles because the Clan is down to a division now.     I  not  We.....is the FPS.  So, "we" need to understand that our host's strategic intent is to sell to you..........not us and that means everything is geared to sell to individuals; not, teams....  I  not  We...   We reap what we sow ! 

To the OP's point:  the reasons there ends up being a missing flank is because there is no individual value there...........  No reward to the risk to you face...........  No individual value as the lone DD trying to spot because they can't cap, are too far for torpedoes and have "gone silent" because of Aircraft and just can't see why they are doing this for no value?   They hit the brakes, and return to the center and pray for some left overs from the engagement........ 

Edited by Asym_KS
Had to add a paragraph that was left off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×