30th (Cambridgeshire) Regiment of Foot - The Triple X's [NAPL Champs] New Poll

[TheMightyLips]

In my experience there's a lot you can teach new recruits about shooting; where to place the crosshair, when to hold the shot and when to click-shoot to minimize moving the mouse, leading shots on moving targets. Hell, just changing the design of the crosshair can lead to more accurate shooting.

[LiquidSkorpion]

In a game where shots are mostly 1-hits or will get someone down to a guaranteed kill with a decent enough melee swing (or sometimes a kick/punch), it's worth accepting that shooting can be improved on with practice and instruction, and it's pretty dumb to write something off like that when it can actually be improved upon. In another, more melee/shield based module or game, yeah, who the fuck cares about shooting. But the guns in NW are pretty controllable, more so than the majority of people think, and that allows for some pretty huge swings in a fight. If two lines are equally skilled in melee and in equal numbers, the side that gets the best and most shots off is considerably more likely to win.

This.
If you watch the LG vs 3e 1v1 from last night, we were equally skilled in melee. We only won because our guys knew where and how to shoot

[Aurum]

What I don't understand is why there is such a heavy emphasis on melee during 1v1s and linebattles when groupfighting exists. Groupfighting exists in order to place that emphasis on melee, while 1v1s are about overall skill and tactics. It should account for shooting "skill", melee skill and leadership skills. if we're destroying the emphasis on all three of those then why the hell are we even playing 1v1s because all they'll become is glorified groupfights.

Nobody wants to play an hour long match, but very few 1v1s are actually like that. When you force the entire community into submission over your own playstyle it really destroys any sort of competition. Don't expect anymore interesting leagues or matches.

edit: meant glorified groupfights, not 1v1s

[Wastee]

I didn't read any of the posts above but yeah you can improve shooting but it's still like 70 percent luck. So many times I should hit a shot but I somehow don't on someone standing 7 feet infront of me.

[John Price]

If you watch the LG vs 3e 1v1 from last night, we were equally skilled in melee. We only won because our guys knew where and how to shoot

Liquid can vouch for my leadership style. I can be quite hand holdey however we win the majority of our shoot outs just by one of our leaders calling out where they should be aiming. I don't just mean at long range but at short. Telling your guys to aim for the parts of the line that are about to reload for example, can not only get you kills but keep your members alive.

Its all about practice and experience. Shooting is still RNG though. All you can do is aim centre mass for 2 seconds and hope it hits.

[Marceaux]

Shooting can be improved through a variety of training's and standard drills. If you can regulate the way the entire regiment fires/aims and reloads you can easily utilize shooting to its max potential. Also there are clearly several different opinions on how to have the best shot possible, which proves that there are clearly better ways to do it and more ways to give yourself the best % chance possible of getting shooting kills. For example several players think holding your shots around 2-3 seconds will maximize your chance at hitting the target. However i believe that firing instantly and not holding shots at all is the best route for a variety of reasons. To each his own in the end i suppose.

What I don't understand is why there is such a heavy emphasis on melee during 1v1s and linebattles when groupfighting exists. Groupfighting exists in order to place that emphasis on melee, while 1v1s are about overall skill and tactics. It should account for shooting "skill", melee skill and leadership skills. if we're destroying the emphasis on all three of those then why the hell are we even playing 1v1s because all they'll become is glorified 1v1s.

Nobody wants to play an hour long match, but very few 1v1s are actually like that. When you force the entire community into submission over your own playstyle it really destroys any sort of competition. Don't expect anymore interesting leagues or matches.

THIS! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Theodin]

What I don't understand is why there is such a heavy emphasis on melee during 1v1s and linebattles when groupfighting exists. Groupfighting exists in order to place that emphasis on melee, while 1v1s are about overall skill and tactics. It should account for shooting "skill", melee skill and leadership skills. if we're destroying the emphasis on all three of those then why the hell are we even playing 1v1s because all they'll become is glorified groupfights.

Nobody wants to play an hour long match, but very few 1v1s are actually like that. When you force the entire community into submission over your own playstyle it really destroys any sort of competition. Don't expect anymore interesting leagues or matches.

edit: meant glorified groupfights, not 1v1s

Because melee is the only one of those three that is truly skill based. Leadership is what - luck? intensity? intelligence? Important to note the best leaders have always been skilled meleers, and the best regiments have had the best meleers. Melee=good in regiments, this is a correlation and a causation.
Moreover, melee is more powerful than leadership or shooting because of the finality. 9y could charge across the map, take 8 casualties and still win the round because once they entered melee, shooting and leadership didn't mean anything.

[Windflower]

Shooting and leadership used to be the specialization for the 63e when they dominated in NWL S4. Usually if you can outsmart the other line and get your shots off in a good angle you can make enough casualties to easily win in melee.

[Audiate]

I didn't read any of the posts above-

And I didn't read past that.

Nobody wants to play an hour long match, but very few 1v1s are actually like that. When you force the entire community into submission over your own playstyle it really destroys any sort of competition. Don't expect anymore interesting leagues or matches.

Take note, people. Stick to groupfighting if melee is what you exclusively care about. Not that it matters now, though, the fetish of melee in this game has already killed this game long ago. I can totally understand why, because amazing 1v10 clutches are always great to watch. I remember Xeroth messaging me about how amped he was over killing like 10-20 people single-handedly, and that stuff is great when it happens, especially for the team who barely pulls a Hollywood win out of it. But exclusively caring about melee, which I noticed as an issue way back when Tav's 91st was still a thing, that only really manifested as a potential problem for the future of this game around the time of Tico's 12th. Every "pro" regiment wanted to be as stacked in melee as the 12th were, and they were certainly able to win several games just because of how stacked they were in melee.

There's a reason EU players have almost unanimously preferred EU events over NA events. Specifically in 1v1s, which are quite a bit different than multi-reg events, things like no more firing after a melee has begun, absolutely no aiming for officers (anyone remember 1v1 events that had a round restart over that shit?), arbitrary rules about what hill camping means and how long someone can take before moving 10 feet to hill camp again, all that nonsense really devolved the team gameplay of this game. And it's the bandwagon structure of this game that prevents regiments from boycotting known events/tourneys with shitty rules in favor of new events/tourneys with actually great and fun ones.

[Theodin]

Shooting and leadership used to be the specialization for the 63e when they dominated in NWL S4. Usually if you can outsmart the other line and get your shots off in a good angle you can make enough casualties to easily win in melee.

Mm, no. The 63e could shoot well but it was teamwork in melee that won them the matches. Skill wise the 71st was better but the 63e could groupfight better

[Wastee]

There's a reason EU players have almost unanimously preferred EU events over NA events. Specifically in 1v1s, which are quite a bit different than multi-reg events, things like no more firing after a melee has begun, absolutely no aiming for officers (anyone remember 1v1 events that had a round restart over that shit?), arbitrary rules about what hill camping means and how long someone can take before moving 10 feet to hill camp again, all that nonsense really devolved the team gameplay of this game. And it's the bandwagon structure of this game that prevents regiments from boycotting known events/tourneys with shitty rules in favor of new events/tourneys with actually great and fun ones.

I didn't quite catch what the reason is, could you elaborate? You just kinda went on to talk about 1v1s rather than answer the point you posed, or am I just stupid.

[Gbit]

I think a distinction has to be made between shooting regiments and hillcamping regiments

[Wastee]

Shooting regiments vs melee regiments is a good debate. However, melee regiments have won every league outside of NAPL Season 1, but you could argue that at the time 30th was one of the top melee regiments in NA.

That league belonged to the LG then 6te dropped out

[Theodin]

Shooting regiments vs melee regiments is a good debate. However, melee regiments have won every league outside of NAPL Season 1, but you could argue that at the time 30th was one of the top melee regiments in NA.

That league belonged to the LG then 6te dropped out

Never forget me getting banned

[Carson]

I think a distinction has to be made between shooting regiments and hillcamping regiments

Ouch.