Pros vs Noobs

[TheCongoSpider 8,957]

Hard to evaluate from end-of-battle screen-shot.  Battle does not seem balanced based on outcome.  Add up ranks on each side and it's not like you suggest above - the ratios favor blue - by a LOT.

It wasn't 100% accurate, but I used the values that best fit the idea of what I'm trying to portray. And those numbers were talking about the ranks and/or quality of equipment, not the number of stars each team earned (not sure if you knew this or not so just putting it out there). 

 

Those 2 Marshals on Red did not contribute much - maybe they joined late? And Red was short AT LEAST 1 player - I suspect more than 1 during course of battle.

IIRC, one Marshal was there at the battle at the beginning and the other came in probably around 30 seconds or a minute in. I don't think I noticed any players leaving, wasn't paying much attention.

 

But for me, what stands out most was the Rank-spread.  ELEVEN?   :o    That's just pathetic.

I always have to remember to add 1 to my count because I look at it in the eyes of the lowest rank and count from the 2nd rank until the last rank. In my eyes, it's a 10-rank bracket. I treat that as more common than I'd like it to be. A 12-rank bracket (13 for you) would be more surprising. Given the number of players, it is expected by me. I do admire when a battle has a rank bracket of 3. Had 2 battles recently where the rank bracket was - .

[wolverine848 13,097]

It wasn't 100% accurate, but I used the values that best fit the idea of what I'm trying to portray. And those numbers were talking about the ranks and/or quality of equipment, not the number of stars each team earned (not sure if you knew this or not so just putting it out there). 

 

IIRC, one Marshal was there at the battle at the beginning and the other came in probably around 30 seconds or a minute in. I don't think I noticed any players leaving, wasn't paying much attention.

 

I always have to remember to add 1 to my count because I look at it in the eyes of the lowest rank and count from the 2nd rank until the last rank. In my eyes, it's a 10-rank bracket. I treat that as more common than I'd like it to be. A 12-rank bracket (13 for you) would be more surprising. Given the number of players, it is expected by me. I do admire when a battle has a rank bracket of 3. Had 2 battles recently where the rank bracket was - .

This was my understanding.  Blue lowest rank was 5 ranks above red lowest rank.

 

How is it possible they were there from beginning and had results like that?  Were they hiding in a corner waiting for OD recharge?

 

Lowest rank is 3rd Lt  So I start at 2nd Lt and keep counting until I get to highest.  That gives me 11 ranks.  Either way - that's too many.  One of the reasons I consider (this version) of MM to be trash.

Edited August 20, 2019 by wolverine848

[TheCongoSpider 8,957]

This was my understanding.  Blue lowest rank was 5 ranks above red lowest rank.

Yeah, that was the main motivation to take the screenshot. I didn't think to look at the ranks at the beginning. And the fact that 3 of them were below , was surprising. 

 

How is it possible they were there from beginning and had results like that?  Were they hiding in a corner waiting for OD recharge?

I mean...my team was wiping the floor with them from what I saw. 

 

Lowest rank is 3rd Lt  So I start at 2nd Lt and keep counting until I get to highest.  That gives me 11 ranks.  Either way - that's too many.  One of the reasons I consider (this version) of MM to be trash.

Oops, my bad. I accidentally skipped . Still, I think 's count is 1 more than my number. 

[lssimo 1,559]

I see it the opposite way. Each team has a few decent players, a somewhat bad player, and a really good player. Sometimes by virtue of your experience and rank you count as the really good player. Are you going to flee with your tail between your legs like a puppy or stay and give your team a fighting chance? Unless there's a numerical imbalance I always stay. Even a loss is good experience for you, and leaving instills a quitter's mindset.

Did that too many times, my experience is that come backs are rare and hard. Maybe the weak players need to understand that the game is broke and leave, so helping them in battles is like prolonging their agony.

 

Many quit after the enemy scores or captures a flag, and this are the smarter ones, guess who stays. So if you stay you'll have even less chances now. You can hope some good strong players join to replace the ones that left, but even if that happens what guarantees they'll stay, chances are with the missions they have or the Stars they need they'll likely leave.

 

Why stay when the imbalance is just too much?

 

Why stay when I know I'm not going to complete a Finish Top 3 mission?

 

Why stay when I don't have to? It's not like I'm doing Challenges or WARs?

 

So if battles seem balanced after my observations I'll stay. Did that yesterday and found one battle where my team won, and another very balanced where we tied. I don't care if I lose as long as the battle is balanced.

[The-Operator219 1,929]

Did that too many times, my experience is that come backs are rare and hard. Maybe the weak players need to understand that the game is broke and leave, so helping them in battles is like prolonging their agony.

 

Many quit after the enemy scores or captures a flag, and this are the smarter ones, guess who stays. So if you stay you'll have even less chances now. You can hope some good strong players join to replace the ones that left, but even if that happens what guarantees they'll stay, chances are with the missions they have or the Stars they need they'll likely leave.

 

Why stay when the imbalance is just too much?

 

Why stay when I know I'm not going to complete a Finish Top 3 mission?

 

Why stay when I don't have to? It's not like I'm doing Challenges or WARs?

 

So if battles seem balanced after my observations I'll stay. Did that yesterday and found one battle where my team won, and another very balanced where we tied. I don't care if I lose as long as the battle is balanced.

See? Quitter and a loser. Nobody is less deserving of a win than someone who abandons the match when they don't get their way. 

[lssimo 1,559]

See? Quitter and a loser. Nobody is less deserving of a win than someone who abandons the match when they don't get their way. 

 

You're wrong. All I'm saying is that if the enemy team is strong and my team is weak and not even trying, why stay? just to be spawn killed later?

 

But if they are at least trying, I stay.

 

I stayed most of the battles before even if my team was losing bad. One of the reasons I used to stay was because I was fighting and gaining exp and points, so when my team was losing and others were quitting, I couldn't leave because I already had a lot of exp and points, so I stayed till the end.

 

But I got tired of that. So now I decided to gain little exp at the beginning while I see if the battle is balanced or not. And it's not like I'm doing nothing, I plant a mine, see if the enemy is coming, see if we have defenders, defending if we need to defend, grabing supplies, and if things seem good I advance.

 

You know, when one team is active and the other is like sleeping, that's a bad sign.

[The-Operator219 1,929]

I think I see the problem here. You say you don't do challenges, so you clearly don't have many supplies because that's basically THE supplier. Even completing the first few tiers gets you set up for a while. So because you don't have supplies AND you're a quitter, I imagine you rely completely on missions. Missions are fine as a side thing, but actually finishing battles and earning crystals and supplies are your main way of moving up in the game. Now since you don't do challenges either I imagine you go for the easiest missions as well. "Collect 15 of X supply" or "Earn experience in battles", since they don't require you to stay in one battle like you're supposed to. Am I correct? And when you don't get your way and have a team that's struggling you can't do a single thing to help them if you tried. Am I wrong? Because you're a quitter and a coward.

[wolverine848 13,097]

I think I see the problem here. You say you don't do challenges, so you clearly don't have many supplies because that's basically THE supplier. Even completing the first few tiers gets you set up for a while. So because you don't have supplies AND you're a quitter, I imagine you rely completely on missions. Missions are fine as a side thing, but actually finishing battles and earning crystals and supplies are your main way of moving up in the game. Now since you don't do challenges either I imagine you go for the easiest missions as well. "Collect 15 of X supply" or "Earn experience in battles", since they don't require you to stay in one battle like you're supposed to. Am I correct? And when you don't get your way and have a team that's struggling you can't do a single thing to help them if you tried. Am I wrong? Because you're a quitter and a coward.

I don't do Challenges (might complete some Tiers while doing missions) and I have more supplies than I can ever use.  This goes for my alt at Lt. General.   So basically I rely on missions.

 

I've left battles where I notice half my team has no score after 2 minutes of a 7-minute battle.  Why should I waste my time on players who seem to refuse to participate?

 

As for using free switch to get rid of crappy missions - why criticize that?  Most players would switch out a "finish-top-3" mission?  I do that ALL THE TIME because it is something I have no control over.

[lssimo 1,559]

Many players quit battles, and many are quitting the game. These Saturday and Sunday there wasn't even 17k at peak. Some players only do missions and try not to gain any EXP.

 

I do most missions except Assault, DM and sometimes CP.

 

I've left battles where I notice half my team has no score after 2 minutes of a 7-minute battle. Why should I waste my time on players who seem to refuse to participate?

 

It's like the system creates the first team with players with fast connections and the second team with players with slow connections.

 

The enemy is scoring a goal or stealing a flag and most in your team aren't even moving yet. And if they are moving they are going to some corner or something, like they don't even have audio to listen that the enemy is stealing the flag. I'm like "noobs, look around!".

[u812ic 1,629]

Many players quit battles, and many are quitting the game. These Saturday and Sunday there wasn't even 17k at peak. Some players only do missions and try not to gain any EXP.

 

I do most missions except Assault, DM and sometimes CP.

 

 

It's like the system creates the first team with players with fast connections and the second team with players with slow connections.

 

The enemy is scoring a goal or stealing a flag and most in your team aren't even moving yet. And if they are moving they are going to some corner or something, like they don't even have audio to listen that the enemy is stealing the flag. I'm like "noobs, look around!".

Some players rather listen to music. That's ok if they are paying attention. I think some get into the groove of the music and forget about the objective. They just go with the flow...kill or be killed....die, respawn. It's all the same to them. Don't get me wrong, not all music listeners are like that.

[Showbot 819]

its oke