A Unicorn's Comprehensive Guide to the Survival Side - by Adroxis on the NA forum

[nilzatron]

I'm finding this a very interesting read to advance my gameplay. Probably best reserved for those that have reached at least intermediate skill level.

[nilzatron]

"The best players on the enemy team should be saved for last. Numbers almost always win in the end with tactical thinking.
2. It was brought to my attention that just focusing on the best players first isn't the best method for winning. I agree completely with that assessment because in my past I found that destroying all of the worst players first will leave only the unicums left standing at the end. Then it just becomes a numbers game where your team can cascade on the unicums, and no matter how good they are, or are positioned, your health pools will overwhelm them and be too much to burst down fast enough. A little bit of tactical thinking and coordination with the team is required to make sure your guys don't proceed to commit seppuku trying to be the heroes, saving the game from the killer purples. But 9 times out of 10, eight versus three engagements end in victory."

This raises a very interesting point, as intuitively I have always assumed the other way around. Thinking about it makes sense though. Put yourself in that situation. When is it easier to carry? When you are alone and outnumbered or when you still have at least a few allies around to spot for you, soak up a little damage or at least momentarily turn the opponent's attention to them? (There have even be one or two occassion where I was able to carry the game to victory because we had an afk heavy at the base, which allowed me to stay hidden).

[we_just_dinged_em]

Destroy the best players on sight. The longer they live, the more damage they do to your team.

Simple really.

[Daeworn]

Destroy the best players on sight. The longer they live, the more damage they do to your team.

Simple really.

I had to agree with "Dong". Too often I got in situation, when we had number advantage like 10:5 kills, but the tide of battle was changed by the remaining platoon of good players, who finished the rest of team by themselves. Simply one by one.

[HowTheStoryEnds]

not to mention that three purples will wipe the floor with eight reds especially if they approach one or two at the time, which seems to be the bad teams standard modus operandi.

[lostplace]

But 9 times out of 10, eight versus three engagements end in victory."

8 vs. 3 sounds plausible at first glance, but the problem with good enemy players is that they use to get their guns asap in the battle and start dealing damage themselves if not engaged and stopped by competent players of your own team. Hence focusing on bad players first might rather end in a 3 vs. 3 or even worse. Watching Quickybabies livestreams, I also note his awareness of the best enemy players and his preference to neutralize those first if possible.

[Daeworn]

not to mention that three purples will wipe the floor with eight reds especially if they approach one or two at the time, which seems to be the bad teams standard modus operandi.

Yep, I did almost the same yesterday. Yet we were not purple and we were only two, but managed to stay and kill 4/5 enemies (before our team cap), just because they come one by one. 8 vs 3 works if its 8 vs 3, but usually it is 1-2 vs 3, 1-2 vs 3, 1 vs 3, 1 vs 3, ... as later players become scared as they see teammates dyeing. Or the heroes just don’t wait for team to back them up and die, while team is to far to manage to do anything.

[Arnold_Judas_Rimmer]

After engaging an enemy heavy of the same tier and clearly getting the better of him I was then surrounded by 3 low tier tanks who slowly ate away at my hp by shooting my rear. Since that battle I allmost always try to engage and kill the support tanks first.

Could someone provide a link to this info no the NA forum please.

[Sponsored content]