Just to compare our speculations to what exactly happened:
I don't think it ever happened that we had 2 simultaneous 1-on-1s happening at the same time, right?
This isn't to say that I think that splitting up your opponents isn't a viable strategy. It's probably just a strategy that wasn't fully explored during the tourney.
Indeed, some players just used their usual best ACs while other teams actually tried to make or choose complementary ACs. I think the results showed that the more coordinated teams really did better.
I think we also saw that ganging up on one guy was a top-tier strategy.
Missiles played a role, of course. But the ones that seemed most effective were the single-lock multi-missile systems like the micro missiles, MT, and 69M and SATYROS combined with missile extensions. Verts didn’t do too well simply because of their killing rate. Too bad nobody experimented with large missiles. I still think they’re viable.
Come to think of it, blades may still have a chance. I don’t wanna be the one to test it on the field though.
Truly.
This is almost the exact strategy that Goat and I used pretty much throughout the tournament.
This is how it went for Doc and Rick paired with their heavy tank partners. For Rick, a lightweight like Himitsu Heiki might have been more complementary to Apocalypse though.
Prior to the tournament, I thought that the important AC attributes for a 2-on-2 were defense, stability, and firepower. I considered armor important because I thought that, “hey, I’m gonna get hit anyway.” But things turned out pretty differently in the tournament itself. Here’re some of my other thoughts on 2-on-2:
1. Speed and mobility are really important. Speed allows one to quickly reinforce his or her teammate and can be used simply to stay out of the box of both opponents. It works for easy positioning and escaping too.
Fast+fast AC = good. Fast+Slow AC = still good. Slow+Slow = BAD. It's really easy to isolate 2 slow ACs from each other.
2. Heat was another unexpected variable that played a major role in the tournament. Under heavy fire, ACs with substandard cooling systems roasted and got forced into genbusting.
3. Double harpies simply MELT non-OB heavy tanks. There is no defense.
4. LX is a game-changer. With the proper support, LX becomes truly formidable.
5. Rapid-fire, high DPS weapons seem to be more effective than the high-precision timing-based weapons that are favored for 1-on-1.
6. Lag is a MAJOR factor. 2 PS2s simply have a hard time handling a 4-AC gangbang. The lag can get in the way of double-locks, boost-hopping, and timing shots. Lag caused me quite a few hard-lands and missed cannon shots.
(07-08-2009, 07:43 AM)Lord_Leperman Wrote: ...By far I've seen this mostly as two-1-on-1 matches happening at the same time...
I don't think it ever happened that we had 2 simultaneous 1-on-1s happening at the same time, right?
This isn't to say that I think that splitting up your opponents isn't a viable strategy. It's probably just a strategy that wasn't fully explored during the tourney.
Quote:...the typical scenario would be each participant just brings their best AC and tries to make the most out of it as well as their partner with the occasional gang-up-on-one-guy happening...
Indeed, some players just used their usual best ACs while other teams actually tried to make or choose complementary ACs. I think the results showed that the more coordinated teams really did better.
I think we also saw that ganging up on one guy was a top-tier strategy.
Quote:...For tactics, I think missiles will play a bigger role as support weapons in conjunction with longer ranged FCS'...
Missiles played a role, of course. But the ones that seemed most effective were the single-lock multi-missile systems like the micro missiles, MT, and 69M and SATYROS combined with missile extensions. Verts didn’t do too well simply because of their killing rate. Too bad nobody experimented with large missiles. I still think they’re viable.
Quote:Blades may come into play more effectively given the the distraction opportunities presented by one's partner on an opponent, therefore making blades a more viable opportunity weapon than on a regular 1-on-1 game.
Come to think of it, blades may still have a chance. I don’t wanna be the one to test it on the field though.
Quote:Also, a coordinated 2 player team will play much differently than 2 players w/o complementary designs, and I think deserves a totally different discussion.
Truly.
(07-09-2009, 02:23 AM)clonezero Wrote: I for one am thinking more of Focus Fire tactics have 2 designs equipped with quick kill weapons + back ups focus on knocking one of (preferably the one with lighter armor) leaving room to breathe ... but yeah it works both ways XD
This is almost the exact strategy that Goat and I used pretty much throughout the tournament.
Quote:if your paired with a uber heavy tank like Obsidian Rock or Apocalypse any light or mid class ac can act like the mobile guard taking pot shots when the enemies are trying to back away from the slow tank or when they try to circle around to the back.
This is how it went for Doc and Rick paired with their heavy tank partners. For Rick, a lightweight like Himitsu Heiki might have been more complementary to Apocalypse though.
Prior to the tournament, I thought that the important AC attributes for a 2-on-2 were defense, stability, and firepower. I considered armor important because I thought that, “hey, I’m gonna get hit anyway.” But things turned out pretty differently in the tournament itself. Here’re some of my other thoughts on 2-on-2:
1. Speed and mobility are really important. Speed allows one to quickly reinforce his or her teammate and can be used simply to stay out of the box of both opponents. It works for easy positioning and escaping too.
Fast+fast AC = good. Fast+Slow AC = still good. Slow+Slow = BAD. It's really easy to isolate 2 slow ACs from each other.
2. Heat was another unexpected variable that played a major role in the tournament. Under heavy fire, ACs with substandard cooling systems roasted and got forced into genbusting.
3. Double harpies simply MELT non-OB heavy tanks. There is no defense.
4. LX is a game-changer. With the proper support, LX becomes truly formidable.
5. Rapid-fire, high DPS weapons seem to be more effective than the high-precision timing-based weapons that are favored for 1-on-1.
6. Lag is a MAJOR factor. 2 PS2s simply have a hard time handling a 4-AC gangbang. The lag can get in the way of double-locks, boost-hopping, and timing shots. Lag caused me quite a few hard-lands and missed cannon shots.
