I seek criticism

GT: XENONOX

Most player will already know who I am.

If you don't know who I am, feel free to play with me as I am always open to play with new people.

Regardless, there are also videos that people can look at and use as reference for criticism.

What I'm looking for is criticism in my gaming style and my methods of approach.

Skillfull? Tactical? Too passive? Alternatives? New maneuvers? Different endorsements?

Every once in a while, I need an overview at my own performance and for this game, my friends have a hard time pin-pointing issues I have, so I came here to ask for a broader audience for this check up.

It can be anything, so feel free to add. Just remember that it should be within just normal pub-gaming, as private matches are within "team overview," not "individual overview" like this one.

Thank you and have a nice day, maybe.

Amen.

Armorless Assault. Tis' all.

But srsly, why do you run armorless assault? Just a question.

We should play sometime, Xeno.

Oh, heeeeeeey, I remember youuu.

The focus on the lack of armor endorsement allows me to play a guerilla style warfare, which I've fully enjoy because taking out enemies while suffering no damage allows me to find my next target with no down-time from health recovery.

All my weapons can be fully utilized with RoF.

I've switched from RoF/Acc/Crit to RoF/Acc/Skill as I find Crit does absolutely nothing. I've been playing with a handicapped, more or less, and it feels like with skill bronze, I have more options at my arsenal as bronze skill significantly helps with the fly ability.

I've undergo an endorsment change for the assault and the two new ones that I use are: Armor/Acc/Skill and Armor/Acc/RoF.

We should.

Please add criticism.

Amen.

Right, right, sorry. Anyways, after seeing your video guide for the Support on AmmoMule (I think it was 5 or so..?), it actually helped quite a bit. You give a lot of really good tips, for sure. Especially the fact that giving up as a support is basically the only real way to lose. That really got me thinking, and it motivated me. I haven't actually played in a game with you yet though, so I can't really judge you from that.

A) I do like armorless assault, emphasizes maneuverability and tactic over sponging.

B) Most assaults play too "rushdown", when they should be hitting the right targets and not wasting 2 minutes chasing a low-health-opponent through their own base. This is more vital to a armorless assault, as it is easier for a low health enemy to bait you into a death.

C) I like how you recognize the importance of a rate endorsement for both your weapons. I hate randys and their lolwatsagrenadelauncher?

I don't believe you have said this but I've seen this on the boards a lot lately. People say something along the lines of, it takes a true assault to play without armor, or good assaults don't need armor. I've played an RoF/Acc/Clip and it was a fun build, but you're just at a disadvantage.

If its a long range battle, you have the advantage in shots, but are actually doing very little damage. The advantage is minimal. The medium range battle I'd still say you have the advantage on. Again you have the advantage in shots hitting due to the accuracy, but the gold armor holds up enough for me to really worry about it. If I'm able to hit a few good shots on you it evens the fight due to your lack of armor. Advantage you by the slightest bit. Now heres where it all changes. At close range you are so significantly at a disadvantage. My armor will hold on the very few bullets you're able to fire before the few bullets I use take you down.

I'd rather be able to take shots and be forced to play at a medium range distance in order to deal lots of damage, then play a passive, distanced game that allows you to deal damage father, but lacks those hard hitting shots and leaving myself so vulnerable.

Now one may defend saying that a good, passive assault won't allow a player to close the gap. That may or may not be easy in pubs but truth one way or another I can find a way to close the gap, because my armor allows me to tank the damage needed in order to do so.

Thats my stance on the builds, and I'm sure you can see how it relates. Now onto your criticism.

First off, I don't believe I have ever played you by yourself in any pub game, ever. It's a little hard to to really dissect someone's skill when they are being overhealed or have good teammates helping them. That does not take away from your skill, but its hard to analyze your potential when you have the ability to play care free.

From the mix of pubs and privates I have played with you, more so pubs, I'd say the thing I notice the most is you play extremely passive and avoid deaths at all costs. Don't get me wrong that is a good thing, no death is a good death.. but I feel the play style forces you to run too much in close and mid range combat. Fights that you might be able to win you don't even chance and I think its because of your build.


hallelujah;

Stop running away so much when I'm about to kill you. :evil: Try to be more aggressive, make the first move while assault. Don't be dependent on juice when playing other skilled players :roll:

In light of the last post...

What I Like: Him playing strategically, hitting targets that are solidly at a disadvantage like snipers and blindsided enemies, leaving others for the heavies at the front lines.

What I Dislike: Other assaults playing rushdown... I played dizzydrake recently and his rushdown got him more kills (40 lol) but I would like to think he missed a lot of what is happening in the map in the process of overextending himself, and even in the pub I managed to bait him into a OHKO Charge-Deathblossom twice and he had gold armor.

There are pros and cons to rushdown assaults and their damage-sponge builds:

Pros are that they kill more often and thus clear the map more for their teammates.

Cons are that they can be baited and lured around, and by making them mechanically attached killing machines following the same low-heath target, they lose sight of map control so the rest of the team can get a better foothold, ESPECIALLY their sniper that should be taken care of by the assault.

It seems to be a simple fact that I've always got someone else who wants to play with me whenever I'm available.

The summary of it all is basically an issue with lack of armor, which is why I have different assault builds at this point. The decision to choose which build heavily depends on the role I'll be taking on the team.

The armor has its advantages, but it also has its disadvantages.

Elaborate on aggression, first move, and juice.

Amen.

Aggression is when you attack someone who didn't prevoke you at first and pursuing that attack without mercy.

First move is attacking before being attacked, or stepping up the attack first (by being the first to spend a charge to close the gap).

Juice is what you earn through damaging enemy targets with weapons, and once full you can use it to deal 3x damage while recieving only 33% damage for a short period of time.

Need any more elaboration?

But that is not why I posted, I just wanted to say that you are doing fine without being overagressive as long as you are making sure to harass/kill the enemies that are hurting your team the most.

Those aren't con's due to the build, those are cons due to the players lack of map awareness and overall being a bad player. Since I never played privates or with anyone for a long time when the game came out, I focused heavily on bots as an assault. Kind of the if you want it done right do it yourself mentality. The Pros heavily outweigh the Cons that you listed. I think you just ran into a specific assault who has that playstyle. Play me and you'll see how the difference in play style. Another thing that I overlooked is nobody should be chasing a tank with level 3 charge, that is not a con to the assaults build, but to the player.

I feel like you know I'm not complaining or anything of the sorts about playing with other people, but I thought I'd voice that again.

If anyone here has played me in a pub you'll see that 9 times out of 10 I join by myself, and that I end up staying through a few games whether its against another good player, or six. So it doesn't matter in the slightest bit to me.

Anyway, I do agree with your choice to run multiple builds. However I would like to hear some of the disadvantages of armor. I feel BroTranquilty tried to name some cons that didn't actually pertain to the build, and more so the player.

Nothing to change. What you do works perfectly in a public game setting, and running armorless assault is actually more effective in public games. Since you didn't ask about private games, I won't tell you how bad an idea it is to run armorless in them.

Understood.

These might just be my own speculations but I'll share what I have noticed when I played the two builds, which are Armor/Acc/RoF and Armor/Acc/Skill, aside from my typical RoF/Acc/Skill.

The advantage of having Gold Armor for the assault is the extra health, which is self-explanatory.

The disadvantage of having Gold Armor is sacrificing the endorsement spot. The thought of having a certain endorsement in silver or bronze can be flexible, but losing that one gold endorsement spot is crucial to the assault's playstyle.

With the two Gold Armor builds, I find my grenade launcher to be extremely less effective and my assault rifle has a hard time taking out pros without the damage of the bomb skill. The most efficient way to kill a pro is a successful bomb/AR combo. The extra armor makes my battle against assault a breeze, I will admit. Unfortunately, it makes my battle against gunners, tanks, snipers, supports, and even the assassin a pain. I can get the initiative ambush, but the lack of RoF makes it so my DPS is dramatically lower and the ambush can be easily nullified at times, depending on the scenario. That, or it's just less effective. Without Lv 3 bomb, the firepower on this build is extremely weak. Even with Lv 2 bomb I find the firepower on this build to be weak. The build heavily relies on the bomb skill.

My odds against gunners without gold RoF/Acc puts me at an even greater disadvantage I normally would had as I have used different builds. The idea is to avoid getting shot at from the gunner, but it feels like armor or no armor, he will kill me anyway.

The extra armor boost helps against grapples from assassin, but killing them with the lack of RoF from the AR is also a pain. I have many opportunities to put the assassin to sleep, but because of the lack of RoF, the assassin out-dashes my joggling assault as I shoot the assassin with a quarter of health left, which she would had been dead if I used my typical RoF/Acc builds.

Now, the two different bronze endorsement is putting me into distress as well. Bronze RoF helps with the AR, but the grenade launcher is still the same. The bronze skill recovery allows me to use my fly skill much more efficient to do menauvers that I normally would not had been able to do. With Armor and Accuracy in their respective spots, I am left to choose between these two bronze endorsements that ultimately changes my style again.

Perhaps a better choice would be RoF/Armor/Acc but that will be categorized to a different assault playstyle.

That's the main reason I have RoF/Acc/Skill (no more bronze critical) as my endorsement build. It allows me to do everything I can do as an assault, which I will only do with overheal or juicing, the only sacrifice is health, which to me, seems a fair trade with my guerilla warfare style.

For the shorter version, one is more survivability/tanking, the other one is high DPS.

For privates, it seems like Armor/Acc/Skill is a good choice, but that's a discussion for another day due to this topic.

Amen.

Ask sigmar

I find your playstyle to be very good as you choose to pick your fights other than vise versa. The fact that you implement both weapons is realy good as well.

Another thing is that you are breaking the "i have to run armor" thought process that most players believe in.
All in all you are a fun opponent to play with and have a good mind for what needs to be done.

If you ever want to play
Gamertag:ChewyMcgee

Here is my take on this.

Trying to be aggressive and making the first move is pretty related in this sense, or at least the way he typed it. You are known for your having a relatively unique and passive play style. There is no right or wrong way to play a game in my opinion and the play style you choose, mathematically/statistically etc is the best way to play the game. That said, I'll try to break it down in my own words but I may be off from what he was saying.

Being aggressive and making the first move have a lot to do with with map and pro control. I'll try to use an example from and old game I remember playing against you on Spunky. We were both assaults, and I most likely had a silver armor, and I remember you playing more of a no armor more accuracy build. I can testify for you that you have been one to make the first move, or specifically fire the first shots on me. For the most part though it is from a farther distance than usual, and in returns leads to a stalemate or leaving the ability for one of us to escape. It is a very good way to contain pros. Throughout most of the game though I remember the containment fire coming from your ejector pad, by your door or from the turret under the ejector towards mid map. Thats part of the passive play style.

It is obvious that BroTranquilty is exaggerating what these aspects are, as well of the way gold assaults play. My take on aggression may be influenced by my armor build, but for the most part I feel its important to control the middle of the map and push their side as well. It allows me to have control of sections of their base at a time. Armor helps me be able to pull that kind of control off. Maybe this presents me with more chances of "making the first shot" or hassling the other team more. Both are forms of containing and my form is a more in your face approach causing you to make some quick decisions. I have more options when I am being contained from a far from a more passive player.

As far as juice goes, I have seen you keep juice for those emergency situations. It's a great way to prevent anymore, if any, deaths. It's happened to me when I'm just about to kill you. I honestly don't remember a specific time, but I am sure you also juice on a push and do some good damage to our pros. I don't know how many times I've seen you take out turrets or push bots with juice in the games I've played against you. I can see how some players may see that you are only killing good players on a juice rush, due to the overall passive playstyle once again. More importantly, I can see that you aren't doing anything wrong and it shouldn't be took the way people are looking at it. You aren't an assassin, or a tank so it isn't exactly ideal to be pushing turrets and bots with juice, but it can be done. When it isn't done I feel people view its just padding a K/D ratio. My advice to maybe changing up the style would be after you juice, try to control their side of the map for as long as you can while of course being safe.


Edit : I see your post Xenonox, but can't respond at the moment. Skimmed through it and I see your point about giving up the gold endorsement spot. That's a good point as I feel thats looking at the big picture. I'll respond later.

Xeno, I would refrain taking advice from Bro because I have yet to see him go positive in a public match.

Theoretically, knowing that I don't boost (ask anyone), and that my K/D is over 1...

then obvious math states that I go positive more than 1/2 the games I play. Since I also don't play with a team usually, in randoms with maybe 1-2 good people on the enemy team, I would say that is an accomplishment.

In other words, nice credential check, but mine check out, thank you.