Current time: 06-23-2024, 12:19 PM
LR: Two-on-Two Discussion
#1
Since 2-on-2 isn't something we've ever tested in a competitive setting as far as Armored Core is concerned, I thought it'd make for an interesting topic.

Honestly, I think think that most effective designs and playstyles for 1-on-1 won't be as effective in a 2-on-2 environment. My Osiris, for example, is a very selfish AC that probably won't have enough ammo or flexibility for a 2-on-2. Few ACs like Halimaw, with an ability to tank, attack, stun, etc., will most probably still do fine though.

I've actually been thinking about this for quite some time now, and I intended to write about my thoughts on how the usual AC archetypes will probably (notice how i keep using the word) fare in a team game. But then, I thought that if I did that, I'd probably influence the current metagame too much, even though that metagame's probably just a pool of randomness right now.

Magandang mapag-usapan na din ngayon para maging medyo mas competitive naman atmosphere for PACT 5. Nagiging masyadong casual na tournaments natin eh. Tongue So go go discuss. Let's talk Armored Core naman. Sophie
Reply
#2
Have been discussing this with nix even before this topic was created. Anyway, as I'm not yet that well versed in competitive play in AC, I really can't give any substantial input.

However, I can say that field persistence(ammo and AP) is also a very important factor in this aside from the usual variables like unit matchups, load outs, counters, player skill, and even the map.

I kinda lean more on the notion that overly specialized units will not do that well here than on 1v1, but it then depends on what kind of unit your partner has, the units and the as nix put it, "overall shittyness"of the other team- but then again, player skill needs to be considered and if that player can use and push that specialized AC past it's limits, complement his partner's unit and playstyle, AND exploit the other team's weaknesses, then he could just pull something off. Sophie
Reply
#3
Keep in mind too that the metagame for randomly selected teams vs predetermined teams is totally different too!

For predetermined teams, you and your partner make complementary designs based on a playstyle you're both comfortable with, while keeping in mind the builds and strategies of other teams.

But with random teams, you're thinking of making an AC to complement or compensate for your would-be partner's AC aside from considering the competition!
Reply
#4
haha GRATUITOUS AMOUNTS OF POSSIBILITIES. Jason
Reply
#5
(07-07-2009, 03:40 PM)arch_angel Wrote: haha GRATUITOUS AMOUNTS OF POSSIBILITIES. Jason

shut up impotent fool!!!!!
Reply
#6
go troll somewhere else.
Reply
#7
Guys, tama na. Hinay-hinay once in a while.
Reply
#8
haha i was just trying to sound like uber serious. Tongue
Reply
#9
I kind of like to pull back on my words at the other topic. If we're talking about a competitive PACT5, I personally won't like to recommend 2v2, especially if it's randomized. Because if it's a tournament, 2v2 is just for lulz and stuff. It won't hurt to add that category for more battles and more fun/lulz, but it isn't a good tourney main event IMHO.

As I first thought, the main battles of PACT should follow competitive rules. 2v2/lulzbattles/gojira or whatever should be second notions if you want a proper PACT, and if you want proper rankings to come out of it. Not that I'm belittling what we can come up with, but 2v2 just seems too random for rankers.

srs mark is so srs. Ninja
Reply
#10
I really can't say much due to my limited experience on 2-on-2 match ups. By far I've seen this mostly as two-1-on-1 matches happening at the same time, unless if the two participants are specially geared to complement each other's designs and tactics where we'll be able to see a true 2-on-2 fight, 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.

For tactics, I think missiles will play a bigger role as support weapons in conjunction with longer ranged FCS'. In a middle of a double 1-on-1 scenario, one player may decide to help his or her teammate by temporarily breaking off from his current target and launching a salvo of missiles towards his distracted opponent (The one being engaged by his or her partner). I think the key here is for one to pull it off in such a way that one's current opponent doesn't realize what you're doing, as not to warn his partner of the incoming salvo (As the opponent's partner may launch a decoy or preemptively take cover). Verts seem to be the easy choice here for their homing ability as well as being able to avoid most obstacles. Positioning is also important, as one would ideally attack a distracted opponent from the side or from the back, or to get the right angle for missiles to hit.

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. Basically, the current strategy for non-complementary players is to treat the game as a 1-on-1 with the occasional potshot at the second opponent and hope that your partner can handle himself and do the same.

I have other things in my mind, but I need to organize my thoughts. I don't really know the effectiveness of direct fire weapons as support weapons, like say how SRs will be good at assisting one's partner w/o compromising one's own weapon effectiveness. 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.
Reply
#11
Direct fire weapons would be a little difficult to use as support weapons. Not to mention that target switching is more difficult.
It will be easier to use some of the weapons we don't usually use [Hydra2, Echidna, Ettin, etc, etc, etc...] because of the added distraction.

Ah yes, the power of synch and coordination... Works way better that any sort of scourge or medicine.
Unfortunately, konti lang may good levels nito dito. I mean, not many poeple have good sycnh due to distances.

I wish I get paired up with a King or a Rook so that we could Castle. Kahit once lang.

Time na. I'
l post after I defrag my brain.
'Signatures are overrated.'
Reply
#12
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

another one would be a CQC HM/Hvy AC paired with a OB tank or quad; CQC pins one with grenades and/or bazooka's the partner capitalizes with a ob charge.

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.

if anything is sure after this 2 on 2 pact gig more solid ideas would most probably come out.
whargarrblwhargarrblwhargarrbl!

Reply
#13
That being said, it means you guys have to go with predetermined teamups. NOT random.
Reply
#14
I still believe that we can do a fairly balanced, competitive tournament with the tiered randomized set-up. And you better believe that I'm gonna be competitive about this.

Believe me, I'd love to be teamed up with maitreya more than anyone else, but organizing predetermined teams is hell because of RR's history of erratic attendance. And besides, all the formats were voted for by the majority.

We, as participants, just have to adjust to the rules of the tournament. Self-centric one-dimensional designs (and tactics) won't work this time around. You have to bring a design that will be able to hold its own even if (1)you're being focus-fired, (2)your partner doesn't complement you too well, (3)you end up in a 1-on-1 situation, (4)you end up in a 1-on-2 situation because your partner died early. And the AC too has to be complementary to whatever you think your potential partner will bring. So yeah, designs now will have to be more thought-out than usual. But that's what it takes to win, right?

The metagame is simply different for a 1-on-1, a predetermined 2-on-2, or a randomized 2-on-2.

----------------------

Oh, and Clone really nailed a lot of my sentiments about a 2-on-2. Big grin Rick's scenarios will happen too, but I think Clone's scenarios will be happening more often. Sophie
Reply
#15
yes but the tactics in general can still be used in randomized settings to albeit not as much XD... but the thing about FF can be done with any pairing that was the main idea I was tossing around XD
whargarrblwhargarrblwhargarrbl!

Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  LRp Discussion J.E_Magog 76 102,340 04-05-2016, 10:52 PM
Last Post: J.E_Magog
  ACV General Discussion Lord_Leperman 546 711,679 04-16-2013, 12:16 AM
Last Post: Sirius140
  LR: OB Core Discussion NiX 26 30,636 04-28-2011, 11:55 PM
Last Post: adiyel
  SLp Discussion J.E_Magog 46 69,535 02-12-2010, 10:33 AM
Last Post: DaiZengar666
  AC3p Discussion Black Dragon 115 157,328 11-18-2009, 06:22 PM
Last Post: Fox
  FA Discussion J.E_Magog 307 351,732 08-25-2009, 11:53 AM
Last Post: R.Leonhardt
  AC:FA parts discussion 1.4 atdsutm 5 8,847 05-01-2009, 09:34 PM
Last Post: Lord_Leperman
  AC:FA parts discussion 1.3 Lord_Leperman 9 13,067 03-19-2009, 01:08 PM
Last Post: PhAYSe
  AC:FA parts discussion Lord_Leperman 30 38,461 12-23-2008, 02:29 PM
Last Post: atdsutm

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)