This site is an article focused on the online game Mobile Suit Gundam Battle Operation 2 (GBO2). Contents include game updates, reviews, gameplay diaries, and fantasy articles (articles that introduce the author's own interpretation of MS (game characters)). All content on this site is not official information. Therefore, the information on this site may contain ambiguous, inaccurate, outdated, or misleading expressions. So please be careful when browsing the site.
penalty in rating match (4)
I will continue the story. This time, it is an explanation of "Block the teammate's attack area (with the intention of flickering a friendly fire penalty)" and an idea of countermeasures.
This behavior seems to be a nuisance against the rules, but I don't know if it is the actual problem. If so, I will proceed.
The official operation weighed down on damage reports due to intentional misfires (including melee attacks with down effects), and implemented a function that causes a penalty for the action in rating match and quick match (the mechanism is confidential. However, it is still in operation.) Most intentional misfires are likely to be retaliation. Players involved in misfiring are often subjective, and doing so has little benefit to other teammates, and also detracts from the goal of winning.
Although the measures against accidental fire are effective from the background, it is a topic of this time that some methods of operation may be a kind of private sentence.
Could it be that a malicious player is setting up another player for a trap? This means that.
For example, suppose "Person A attacked both allied B and enemy C with a broad stumbling weapon, repeatedly preventing allied B from defeating enemy C." And if "B lost his cool and became enraged and retaliated against A," then it is B who is disciplined. In this way, A's own losing points can be written off. It is vicious if factual, and I have no sympathy for the inability to take it in a winning direction.
It is unavoidable that B, who retaliated, got what he deserved, but there are extenuating circumstances that require extenuating circumstances.
Now, as a countermeasure to this problem, the person A in the example should use the part of the system that is protected by "B being penalized" as a clue.
It is a self-defense measure and may be a methodology that cannot be done in "official operation".
The team members (especially the player who was mistakenly fired) in which the "disposal by accidental fire" occurred are considered as "not just victims". That is, the player is a "suspector who has trapped". If that player is then a teammate of the match in which the misfiring person occurred, and if he was directly injured, he will be identified as a "warned player".
The "penalty disposer" and the "warned player" will no longer match other players. There is a penalty for both the "misfire victim" and the "misfired player" in the matched match.
A player who is misfired many times may be performing a kind of annoying behavior. Of course, you are allowed several times, but eventually you will be identified as a nuisance.
Although penalties are not permitted, you should also examine the circumstances that led to the penalties.
This time we're talking about judging penalties, or "one person judging another". If I can't be impartial, it's not worth the story so far. Maybe my underlying desire is to somehow get rid of the players I don't like. But there's no guarantee I won't be an annoying player myself, and I could be punished across the board no matter what idea I'm being recruited for. People make mistakes, but I don't think mistakes can be tolerated more than once. I'm sure the official management will take various measures in the future, but I want to continue to be a normal player in the future.
That's it for this time.
penalty in rating match (3)
I will continue this time.
"Abandonment of battle (by leaving it on the battlefield (such as infantry))"
I've heard that abandonment of battle is a tricky act.
A disconnection is still a violation of the rules, but abandoned combatants make less of a contribution to teammates than a disconnect. If the remaining teammates overturn their inferiority, the abandoned combatant can benefit from the victory. When defeated, points are deducted just like teammates, but there is no penalty for abandoning battle. This seems to be a tricky act.
Official operation already has a penalty for no operation. Although it may be effective to tighten this penalty judgment, it will affect the tactics that become secret when the unit or pilot stands still. Although it is a tactic that is not always adopted, it is not preferable because it is difficult to use.
Although it seems that a certain effect can be obtained by stricting the judgment severity only for rating matches, this nuisance can not be reduced. Leaving a seat due to a penalty is a loss to your teammates. There is no minus if you win a battle that is difficult to win, but it is hard to say that it is a plus.
I have an idea on this issue. It's just not definitive.
Except for a certain area (here inside the enemy's base), if the infantry state exceeds a certain time (about 10 seconds after the announcement of lack of strength), it will be discharged. After leaving the seat, AI units of the same category will be introduced as reinforcements. This unit has twice as much durability as a regular unit, but it's less clever. While systematic care (damage mitigation bonus) for leaving a person may occur, the disadvantage in terms of number of people (with AI unit subscription) may or may not be improved.
This method does not work for players who abandon combat while in MS. I have an idea for the time being, but it may have some negative effects on the players participating in the battle. This is because a rating match is used to detect whether it is in a neglected state, "Capture an opponent's unit on the reticle for a certain period of time (HP bar capture by information connection is also OK)" is added. If the number of captures is less than a certain number, the player will be dismissed as a penalty. The idea is to capture enemy units in order to avoid disposition, which leads to combat action even without attack action. When the point lead is expanded in the early game, it may already exceed the specified number of times, so tactics to avoid more engagement than necessary will not affect. It seems that it will affect the play style of installing a bomb at the base and then participating in battle. However, that playing style is a tactic with a low reputation.
It will continue. So far this time.
"Abandonment of battle (by leaving it on the battlefield (such as infantry))"
I've heard that abandonment of battle is a tricky act.
A disconnection is still a violation of the rules, but abandoned combatants make less of a contribution to teammates than a disconnect. If the remaining teammates overturn their inferiority, the abandoned combatant can benefit from the victory. When defeated, points are deducted just like teammates, but there is no penalty for abandoning battle. This seems to be a tricky act.
Official operation already has a penalty for no operation. Although it may be effective to tighten this penalty judgment, it will affect the tactics that become secret when the unit or pilot stands still. Although it is a tactic that is not always adopted, it is not preferable because it is difficult to use.
Although it seems that a certain effect can be obtained by stricting the judgment severity only for rating matches, this nuisance can not be reduced. Leaving a seat due to a penalty is a loss to your teammates. There is no minus if you win a battle that is difficult to win, but it is hard to say that it is a plus.
I have an idea on this issue. It's just not definitive.
Except for a certain area (here inside the enemy's base), if the infantry state exceeds a certain time (about 10 seconds after the announcement of lack of strength), it will be discharged. After leaving the seat, AI units of the same category will be introduced as reinforcements. This unit has twice as much durability as a regular unit, but it's less clever. While systematic care (damage mitigation bonus) for leaving a person may occur, the disadvantage in terms of number of people (with AI unit subscription) may or may not be improved.
This method does not work for players who abandon combat while in MS. I have an idea for the time being, but it may have some negative effects on the players participating in the battle. This is because a rating match is used to detect whether it is in a neglected state, "Capture an opponent's unit on the reticle for a certain period of time (HP bar capture by information connection is also OK)" is added. If the number of captures is less than a certain number, the player will be dismissed as a penalty. The idea is to capture enemy units in order to avoid disposition, which leads to combat action even without attack action. When the point lead is expanded in the early game, it may already exceed the specified number of times, so tactics to avoid more engagement than necessary will not affect. It seems that it will affect the play style of installing a bomb at the base and then participating in battle. However, that playing style is a tactic with a low reputation.
It will continue. So far this time.
Thoughts on the update information for 2020/04/30
A part of the mask data of the unit is released. The [Collision Point From Melee Attack] that I treated as a skill is now almost unnecessary. The mobility was also evaluated by walking speed and thruster, but from now on, it is necessary to evaluate the moving speed of the thruster.
Mixup rules can now be selected in custom matches. My secret desire did not come true. I am wondering if the measure that the benefit of increasing HP (after the destroyed unit is returned) is large for low cost units will change the battlefield where only high cost units were changed. Units with EXAM and HADES are likely to become a force even at the initial cost. It seems that the number of flight system holdiner and transformation tanks will increase more than now. In the lowest cost range, there are few advantages other than HP. I don't think it's attractive because there aren't as many unique things as Agguguy.penalty in rating match (2)
Let's continue the previous day.
To enumerate the problems,
"Deprive teammates of the will to fight with a give-up declaration",
"Leave by disconnecting the game",
"Abandonment of battle (by leaving it on the battlefield (such as infantry))"
"Block the teammate's attack area (with the intention of flickering a friendly fire penalty)",
"Denial of the game by multiple amputees".
Although it is a violation of the rules and a violation of morals, it seems that there were players who did such acts in the past, and they may appear in the future. In addition, there are cases where the behavior is suspected, and even if nothing actually happens, game play with anxiety will be uninteresting.
Even I, the author of this article, and even the beginners in this game can make mistakes. Therefore, it seems that it is necessary to build a mechanism that makes doubts and mistakes less likely to occur.
This game has a penalty for disconnecting. Whether or not this penalty is sufficient does not matter here. Here, let's consider the measures for the problem that does not cause a penalty (play that makes you feel malicious).
"Deprive teammates of the will to fight with a give-up declaration",
"Abandonment of battle (by leaving it on the battlefield (such as infantry))"
"Block the teammate's attack area (with the intention of flickering a friendly fire penalty)". It seems that the above three need to come up with ideas.
"Deprive teammates of the will to fight with a give-up declaration"
I think that the official management measures were the intervals between continuous chats and the method that made it difficult to make continuous calls.
Although it is effective, there was a problem that it became difficult to send regular battle situation reports at the same time. Voice chat is a deprecated game, so it was not desirable to have a time lag.
My idea for this problem is to automatically send a reaction message under some set conditions. At the same time, the receiver will process the message contents.
It is difficult to understand, so I will give an example.
Suppose "you" accidentally accidentally fired at "me". At that time, the apology message set by "you" is sent only to me.
Even if the text is wrongly set here, such as a greeting, the apology message set by the recipient (in this case "I") is displayed. This one point makes it easy to understand who sent the message and what the intention was.
Auto message trigger and its range
"Greeting (at start / end)" "All opponents and teammates"
"Apology for misfiring" "Teammates who want to apologize"
"Damage report when one's legs are destroyed or when the durability is greatly reduced" "Teammates within their radar range"
"Sending information on the enemy's legs being destroyed by his own attack or the enemy's durability being greatly reduced." "Teammates within his radar range"
"I was attacked by a disadvantaged enemy." "Teammates within my radar range"
If you want to check the information constantly, it is a good idea to enable all auto messages.
If you have too many automessages to read useful information, it may be useful to disable some.
It's getting longer, so I'll continue.
Up to here for this time.
Up to here for this time.
penalty in rating match (1)
This time, I will talk about the penalty in rating match. However, I do not talk about leaving the room when forming a team.
My position is neither high nor too low. This time, I'm not talking about team battle prowess but manners and attitudes.
When a team is formed, there is a chance that it will be possible to win, but at the beginning of the game, it often happens that the development does not meet expectations. It's a game aimed at winning, so if you can win it is hard to come to the surface, but if you lose, some people may lose their will. The reaction of these individuals creates a vicious cycle for subsequent teammates.
Players who are abandoning the game may start to give a "greeting at the end of the game" during the battle, a so-called "give-up declaration". Or, the intention may be reversed by sending "chat celebrating teammates" in succession, and the intention of "I'm at a disadvantage (due to you guys)" may be sent. These manifestations convey bad intentions to teammates. If the caller is still participating in the battle, there is a "probability of winning" as the match itself is not broken. However, the sense of loss of battle is transmitted to allies, and there is a risk that more people will be lost. Some people "cut and give up". Since there is no give-up on the game system, this act is a "rule violation". The remaining teammates will not be penalized, but must win in a disadvantaged situation. Although people who avoid breaking the rules, such as disconnection, there may be people who do not contribute to the battle and leave the battlefield abandoned. The remaining teammates will remain virtually unfavorable in terms of number of people, and players who continue fighting will suffer the disadvantage that they cannot "receive system care due to the departure of others." A player's abandonment of battle is harmful, but the action of a player who has not abandoned is not restricted. However, a malicious player can interfere with teammates who have not abandoned the battle. The disturbed player may be deprived of his aggressiveness because he is concerned about the friendly fire penalty. Instead of not leaving themselves, they try to elicit the departure of others.
Finally (however it happens) is to ruin the game by "leaving and disconnecting" in a timely manner to the winning team and causing "match failure".
These actions are not always done, but they occur occasionally and make them too noticeable. A player who has even touched the malicious intent at one time is enough to let his or her mind depress.
Based on this current situation, I would like to consider the problems and penalties. This topic continues.
Up to here for this time.
My position is neither high nor too low. This time, I'm not talking about team battle prowess but manners and attitudes.
When a team is formed, there is a chance that it will be possible to win, but at the beginning of the game, it often happens that the development does not meet expectations. It's a game aimed at winning, so if you can win it is hard to come to the surface, but if you lose, some people may lose their will. The reaction of these individuals creates a vicious cycle for subsequent teammates.
Players who are abandoning the game may start to give a "greeting at the end of the game" during the battle, a so-called "give-up declaration". Or, the intention may be reversed by sending "chat celebrating teammates" in succession, and the intention of "I'm at a disadvantage (due to you guys)" may be sent. These manifestations convey bad intentions to teammates. If the caller is still participating in the battle, there is a "probability of winning" as the match itself is not broken. However, the sense of loss of battle is transmitted to allies, and there is a risk that more people will be lost. Some people "cut and give up". Since there is no give-up on the game system, this act is a "rule violation". The remaining teammates will not be penalized, but must win in a disadvantaged situation. Although people who avoid breaking the rules, such as disconnection, there may be people who do not contribute to the battle and leave the battlefield abandoned. The remaining teammates will remain virtually unfavorable in terms of number of people, and players who continue fighting will suffer the disadvantage that they cannot "receive system care due to the departure of others." A player's abandonment of battle is harmful, but the action of a player who has not abandoned is not restricted. However, a malicious player can interfere with teammates who have not abandoned the battle. The disturbed player may be deprived of his aggressiveness because he is concerned about the friendly fire penalty. Instead of not leaving themselves, they try to elicit the departure of others.
Finally (however it happens) is to ruin the game by "leaving and disconnecting" in a timely manner to the winning team and causing "match failure".
These actions are not always done, but they occur occasionally and make them too noticeable. A player who has even touched the malicious intent at one time is enough to let his or her mind depress.
Based on this current situation, I would like to consider the problems and penalties. This topic continues.
Up to here for this time.
Mix up in a custom match
I enjoy the mix-up rules moderately as a weekend play. The rule has been a hot topic since the beginning, but there are some points of concern. It is no longer possible to play an active role in a low-cost unit now, and it is appropriate to recognize that it is a rule with a wider range of units that can participate than a quick match or a rating match.
When this rule is implemented in custom match, we would like to be able to set the upper and lower cost limits. I was vaguely thinking if I could play as a game rule if I changed the score to victory according to the set cost range.
In the mixup where both the upper and lower limits are 100, I delusion that "Type 61 Battle Tank" and "Wappa" will be the main battlefields. Speaking of desire, I want you to implement "Magella Attack Tank" and "MP-02A Oggo" that can be customized like "MS" at a cost of 50 that cannot be dispatched by quick match or rating match.
That's it for this time.
When this rule is implemented in custom match, we would like to be able to set the upper and lower cost limits. I was vaguely thinking if I could play as a game rule if I changed the score to victory according to the set cost range.
In the mixup where both the upper and lower limits are 100, I delusion that "Type 61 Battle Tank" and "Wappa" will be the main battlefields. Speaking of desire, I want you to implement "Magella Attack Tank" and "MP-02A Oggo" that can be customized like "MS" at a cost of 50 that cannot be dispatched by quick match or rating match.
That's it for this time.
Previous Work(Mobile Suit)
This time, "Barzam" has been added, so the end of the campaign will remain, but the units that have appeared in the previous work should be added in the future. Rather than being a pick-up, it may be used for clan match, rank match rewards, future campaign rewards, and additional methods such as "Gun Cannon SML". Obtaining routes other than gacha is also an opportunity to encourage players to participate in the game, and it seems that there is such an aspect that there are unrecorded but powerful units. I think there are also rewards for additional missions in the battle simulator.
Today I just wanted a new unit and couldn't concentrate on the game. Today is up to here.
Today I just wanted a new unit and couldn't concentrate on the game. Today is up to here.
Barzam
The pickup this time is "Barzam".
I expected it to be a unit other than the ZetaGundam generation, but it was different.
Fortunately, I was able to win the Barzam Lv1 that was picked up, so I will introduce it to the public reaction and personal opinion.
Barzam is a unit that has shooting-biased parameters and consists of minimum armament and standard possession skills. It can handle melee attacks well, but cannot expect firepower.
Insufficient power with a single unit. It is vulnerable to melee attacks and is not suitable for brawls, so it requires pushing and pulling timing, etc., and it is a role that survives and keeps shooting.
A unit that can continuously damage enemies if the selected main armament and Vulcan mesh with the battlefield in which it was launched. The impression is that if it is a momentary fire power, it is either a special rifle or a shot bazooka, or a beam rifle or bazooka that can continuously stop and give fire power to the battlefield for a long time.
If you have a dedicated rifle, it looks like "ALEX", and if you have a beam rifle, it looks like "G-Line Standard Armor", but the role is different.
I see Alex's beam rifle as a weapon for restraint or melee attacks, G-Line beam rifle as a weapon for melee attacks, and Gatling as an interception weapon to anti-aircraft units.
Anyway, I liked "ALEX" with bazooka, but I also wanted to use "Barzam". I don't have a popular unit at this cost and there are unavoidable circumstances. But the biggest reason is "I like the design of Barzam".
I expected it to be a unit other than the ZetaGundam generation, but it was different.
Fortunately, I was able to win the Barzam Lv1 that was picked up, so I will introduce it to the public reaction and personal opinion.
Barzam is a unit that has shooting-biased parameters and consists of minimum armament and standard possession skills. It can handle melee attacks well, but cannot expect firepower.
Insufficient power with a single unit. It is vulnerable to melee attacks and is not suitable for brawls, so it requires pushing and pulling timing, etc., and it is a role that survives and keeps shooting.
A unit that can continuously damage enemies if the selected main armament and Vulcan mesh with the battlefield in which it was launched. The impression is that if it is a momentary fire power, it is either a special rifle or a shot bazooka, or a beam rifle or bazooka that can continuously stop and give fire power to the battlefield for a long time.
If you have a dedicated rifle, it looks like "ALEX", and if you have a beam rifle, it looks like "G-Line Standard Armor", but the role is different.
I see Alex's beam rifle as a weapon for restraint or melee attacks, G-Line beam rifle as a weapon for melee attacks, and Gatling as an interception weapon to anti-aircraft units.
Anyway, I liked "ALEX" with bazooka, but I also wanted to use "Barzam". I don't have a popular unit at this cost and there are unavoidable circumstances. But the biggest reason is "I like the design of Barzam".
Resource Satellite
GBO2 Diary 2020/04/23
Wednesday. Generally a space mission day. Today, we will talk about Resource Satellite. What I care about when playing in space is the vertical turning angle, planar radar, and low-density support fire that is hard to see because it is too dark. In addition, because there is only one relay point in Resource Satellite, imbalance is likely to occur. After improving the common denominator, the difficulty of the game in space will fluctuate significantly, so I can't talk about it concretely. This time I will focus on the relay points. It is hard to see the big impact if the battlefield has the same ability, but it will become more dominant if the superior side controls. The inferior side is more likely to lose resistance. I know so.
If you don't use support fire at this stage, increase the number of relay points from one to three. Additional relay points are low altitudes near the bottom of the stage, large meteorite parts, closer to your base than conventional relay points, and positions that have been suppressed from the beginning of the game (you can neutralize them).
With a basic rule match that employs these points, I think that it is difficult to immediately become inferior because I have a foothold in the center even if I lose in the first match. Of course, if you lose both races and are controlled by the enemy, there is a fear that your base will be pressed further.
This game controls relay points, and fighting for positions is also an important element in battle. It is the motive for developing the battle that creates the superior situation, but I think that it is easier to play if you can start from a simple collision. The simple match rule is fine, but since there are few relay points, I feel that it will only be an extreme play such as melee or distracted battle.
Up to here for this time
Wednesday. Generally a space mission day. Today, we will talk about Resource Satellite. What I care about when playing in space is the vertical turning angle, planar radar, and low-density support fire that is hard to see because it is too dark. In addition, because there is only one relay point in Resource Satellite, imbalance is likely to occur. After improving the common denominator, the difficulty of the game in space will fluctuate significantly, so I can't talk about it concretely. This time I will focus on the relay points. It is hard to see the big impact if the battlefield has the same ability, but it will become more dominant if the superior side controls. The inferior side is more likely to lose resistance. I know so.
If you don't use support fire at this stage, increase the number of relay points from one to three. Additional relay points are low altitudes near the bottom of the stage, large meteorite parts, closer to your base than conventional relay points, and positions that have been suppressed from the beginning of the game (you can neutralize them).
With a basic rule match that employs these points, I think that it is difficult to immediately become inferior because I have a foothold in the center even if I lose in the first match. Of course, if you lose both races and are controlled by the enemy, there is a fear that your base will be pressed further.
This game controls relay points, and fighting for positions is also an important element in battle. It is the motive for developing the battle that creates the superior situation, but I think that it is easier to play if you can start from a simple collision. The simple match rule is fine, but since there are few relay points, I feel that it will only be an extreme play such as melee or distracted battle.
Up to here for this time
Rival Victory Mission
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/22
Tuesday. Given my rival victory mission, I've recently recognized that it's a personal battle. We have determined that winning the score faster than any player on the other team will win the race in the shortest time. If you win the one-sided game of this side, you can win the rival with high accuracy. I will talk about what I achieved in one of the matches this time and what I thought about this.
At the beginning of the season, the enemy started a blitzkrieg, so I thought it would be a tough match. However, the fighting power of his teammates surpassed his enemies and swiftly pushed them back, further trapping all enemies in the enemy base. The enemies that were out of step with each other were still destroyed, and the match ended with little damage to this side.
The rival record was that all teams won all the matches and all opponents lost all. This result does not give the impression that rival victory is a reflection of individual competition, and I do not have the image that I was able to play an active part. The burden on the individual in the battle was light, and at least I was not so tired. I think that the opponent's plan is not understood here and that the opponent's failure has led to the one side game, but I do not think that I was able to play an active part there. Someone other than myself took the lead and came along with it. In that sense, I thought that the rival record was only a bonus for victory. I don't always feel the same in other games.
Up to here for this time.
Tuesday. Given my rival victory mission, I've recently recognized that it's a personal battle. We have determined that winning the score faster than any player on the other team will win the race in the shortest time. If you win the one-sided game of this side, you can win the rival with high accuracy. I will talk about what I achieved in one of the matches this time and what I thought about this.
At the beginning of the season, the enemy started a blitzkrieg, so I thought it would be a tough match. However, the fighting power of his teammates surpassed his enemies and swiftly pushed them back, further trapping all enemies in the enemy base. The enemies that were out of step with each other were still destroyed, and the match ended with little damage to this side.
The rival record was that all teams won all the matches and all opponents lost all. This result does not give the impression that rival victory is a reflection of individual competition, and I do not have the image that I was able to play an active part. The burden on the individual in the battle was light, and at least I was not so tired. I think that the opponent's plan is not understood here and that the opponent's failure has led to the one side game, but I do not think that I was able to play an active part there. Someone other than myself took the lead and came along with it. In that sense, I thought that the rival record was only a bonus for victory. I don't always feel the same in other games.
Up to here for this time.
Findings in battle
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/21
Monday. In normal matching with quick match or rating, each person has his or her own play style and tactics, and it is rare for 5 to 6 teammates to unify their will. Therefore, they often fight with unfamiliar tactics and formations. Being unfamiliar can easily reduce your winning rate. Judging that the odds are low, people are forced to choose whether to play aggressively to increase the odds, or to give up and play in a messy and wait for a chance.
This time I chose a well-balanced General-Type. At that time, most of the allies were mainly units with long-range weapons. At this time, I thought it would be difficult to obtain support for allies even if I got too close to the enemy. I decided that it was better to lure the enemy into a decoy and let my allies attack, so I moved around and fired. This judgment did not work well, and provided the enemy with a superior shooting position free of charge. The counterattack from a disadvantaged position was hard to hit, and the initial point difference was lost and the player lost. In the long-distance battle, only my firepower decreased, and if both teams were the same, it could be said that I could not win because of that.
The success or failure of the self-judgment was not accompanied by any result, so it can be said that the battle was unfamiliar. It may be good to choose only the formations that are easy to fight to keep winning, and you will not get tired, but I personally enjoy the difficult battles, so I will choose various things from now on.
Up to here for this time.
Monday. In normal matching with quick match or rating, each person has his or her own play style and tactics, and it is rare for 5 to 6 teammates to unify their will. Therefore, they often fight with unfamiliar tactics and formations. Being unfamiliar can easily reduce your winning rate. Judging that the odds are low, people are forced to choose whether to play aggressively to increase the odds, or to give up and play in a messy and wait for a chance.
This time I chose a well-balanced General-Type. At that time, most of the allies were mainly units with long-range weapons. At this time, I thought it would be difficult to obtain support for allies even if I got too close to the enemy. I decided that it was better to lure the enemy into a decoy and let my allies attack, so I moved around and fired. This judgment did not work well, and provided the enemy with a superior shooting position free of charge. The counterattack from a disadvantaged position was hard to hit, and the initial point difference was lost and the player lost. In the long-distance battle, only my firepower decreased, and if both teams were the same, it could be said that I could not win because of that.
The success or failure of the self-judgment was not accompanied by any result, so it can be said that the battle was unfamiliar. It may be good to choose only the formations that are easy to fight to keep winning, and you will not get tired, but I personally enjoy the difficult battles, so I will choose various things from now on.
Up to here for this time.
Zaku Flipper & City Ruins
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/20
Sunday. Quick match (300). I participated in "GM II" for "Arctic Base" and "Zaku Flipper" for "City Ruins". In GM II, the bazooka's aim was good, and the enemy was defeated 10 after a long time. good.
I have wanted Zaku Flipper since its implementation. I got it, so I don't have a chance to play it, so I treat it as a collection. I'm glad that it will finally be available. City Ruins, which has good compatibility with stealth skills, can hardly be recognized by opponents who cannot deal with it. Therefore, you can attack at the desired timing and you can not miss it, so you can get the expected battle result. If you are defeated, you can simply call it your mistake. At least this time, there was no image of the movement being read by the opponent, and it was only once that I was defeated at the wrong evacuation timing. If your opponent is well prepared for stealth, you may not be a threat if you keep your current skills. However, since the jamming skill and Observation Data Link skill can be supported without any effort, I think Zaku Flipper is excellent and in high demand.
Up to here for this time.
Sunday. Quick match (300). I participated in "GM II" for "Arctic Base" and "Zaku Flipper" for "City Ruins". In GM II, the bazooka's aim was good, and the enemy was defeated 10 after a long time. good.
I have wanted Zaku Flipper since its implementation. I got it, so I don't have a chance to play it, so I treat it as a collection. I'm glad that it will finally be available. City Ruins, which has good compatibility with stealth skills, can hardly be recognized by opponents who cannot deal with it. Therefore, you can attack at the desired timing and you can not miss it, so you can get the expected battle result. If you are defeated, you can simply call it your mistake. At least this time, there was no image of the movement being read by the opponent, and it was only once that I was defeated at the wrong evacuation timing. If your opponent is well prepared for stealth, you may not be a threat if you keep your current skills. However, since the jamming skill and Observation Data Link skill can be supported without any effort, I think Zaku Flipper is excellent and in high demand.
Up to here for this time.
Gundam type
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/19
Saturday's mission is to destroy 2 enemies and 1 win. Since the mission introduction has been completed once, I may omit it from now on. MS used today is "Gouf Flight Type", "Gundam Mk-II", "G-3 Gundam", "Gundam GP01", "Gundam". I like it in games, but I'm not a fan of Gundam-type units. Considering it a high-performance unit that can be a rival or enemy, it is nothing but a threat. In fact, if the performance is taken advantage of by the enemy, it is inevitable that my poor skill will not be able to suppress it. The Gundam type, which has a high minimum performance and moderate marginal performance, has an excellent position in the game. Therefore, the Gundam type is an excellent companion who supplements my poor skill.
The battlefield in the high cost zone is dominated by the number advantage. Cut weakened enemies with concentrated firepower, destroy them, and prevent reversal by occupying favorable terrain. They will weaken if they are too distributed, but high cost units have a wide combat range. It has strengths such as fast legs, resistance, and long range.
I couldn't do that well in today's game (and today?). This is the loser's side, who is destroyed at the outset without keeping pace. If you attack a nearby enemy without vigilance or prediction, you will be easily blocked and destroyed. I couldn't read the changes on the battlefield, and I was in a pinch due to careless positioning. Every time I play, the problems come up, but I don't come up with a breakthrough, but I am afraid. This diary can also be used as a record of failures, so I hope that you can make notes and make new discoveries.
Up to here for this time.
Saturday's mission is to destroy 2 enemies and 1 win. Since the mission introduction has been completed once, I may omit it from now on. MS used today is "Gouf Flight Type", "Gundam Mk-II", "G-3 Gundam", "Gundam GP01", "Gundam". I like it in games, but I'm not a fan of Gundam-type units. Considering it a high-performance unit that can be a rival or enemy, it is nothing but a threat. In fact, if the performance is taken advantage of by the enemy, it is inevitable that my poor skill will not be able to suppress it. The Gundam type, which has a high minimum performance and moderate marginal performance, has an excellent position in the game. Therefore, the Gundam type is an excellent companion who supplements my poor skill.
The battlefield in the high cost zone is dominated by the number advantage. Cut weakened enemies with concentrated firepower, destroy them, and prevent reversal by occupying favorable terrain. They will weaken if they are too distributed, but high cost units have a wide combat range. It has strengths such as fast legs, resistance, and long range.
I couldn't do that well in today's game (and today?). This is the loser's side, who is destroyed at the outset without keeping pace. If you attack a nearby enemy without vigilance or prediction, you will be easily blocked and destroyed. I couldn't read the changes on the battlefield, and I was in a pinch due to careless positioning. Every time I play, the problems come up, but I don't come up with a breakthrough, but I am afraid. This diary can also be used as a record of failures, so I hope that you can make notes and make new discoveries.
Up to here for this time.
GM Night Seeker
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/18
In the battlefield where high-cost units are competing against each other, my skill is not yet the standard. Because of that, I tend to prefer the battlefield of low-cost units. It has a lot to do with not having the high-cost units you want to play, but this time I don't mind.
A quick match on the ground map (250). "Agguguy" is changing the game environment in the cost zone. Unfortunately I don't own "Agguguy", but I feel that the number of confrontations is increasing. This time, the casually selected "GM Night Seeker" was a day when we could find a little significance for its existence.
GM Night Seeker has anti-stealth lv1 and can contain the stealth lv1 of Agguguy. I remembered only Agguguy's stealth, but I forgot completely about anti-stealth until the middle of the match, and even thought that Agguy would approach me dignifiedly without taking advantage of his own stealth. I noticed that the radar caught the enemy shadow passing through the hot battle area. I've probably noticed the other side, and it's too late to try to hide further. I was able to take the initiative. However, he hits the heat rod without knowing the attack time of the enemy. I was able to defeat it with great effort, but the threat level is high enough to cause considerable damage. Due to the high degree of threat, there are many opportunities for allies to participate in the attack, and I showed the usefulness of GM Night Seeker that can be discovered first. Even if Agguguy is not an enemy, there are some safe factors such as durability and bazooka stability (selected for this reason in the first place). I think I can continue to use it.
Up to here for this time.
Dijeh & Update Day
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/17
This week's pickup is "Dijeh" My prediction was erroneously wrong. I immediately rolled the Gacha, but there was no way I could get the "Dijeh" I was looking for. I had no choice but to look up their reputation in the world.
It has good shotgun-like performance as a secondary weapon and is regarded as an anti-Raid type. This is not good at shooting at long and medium distances, and is good at stopping the movement of enemies due to firepower. The unit's concept is simple, so it's reliable to make no mistakes.
Since the unit's rating has yet to be finalized, it shouldn't be considered useful or even unnecessary in a roundabout way. However, this simple unit characteristic is generally considered to be useful.
It seems that the addition of higher levels of units that control the environment even if the cost is insufficient shakes the motivation of some tiers who play rating matches. This is because I saw the reaction of a player who always regards the units that build the environment as supreme, and considers the others to be disgusting and harmful.
Initially, I had the prejudice that such players were forced to find flaws in others and eliminate frustrations that went wrong. But it wasn't. They themselves do not tolerate any behavior that seems to be the cause of the defect. Not only to others, but to themselves. That was the harvest update day that I noticed.
Up to here for this time.
This week's pickup is "Dijeh" My prediction was erroneously wrong. I immediately rolled the Gacha, but there was no way I could get the "Dijeh" I was looking for. I had no choice but to look up their reputation in the world.
It has good shotgun-like performance as a secondary weapon and is regarded as an anti-Raid type. This is not good at shooting at long and medium distances, and is good at stopping the movement of enemies due to firepower. The unit's concept is simple, so it's reliable to make no mistakes.
Since the unit's rating has yet to be finalized, it shouldn't be considered useful or even unnecessary in a roundabout way. However, this simple unit characteristic is generally considered to be useful.
It seems that the addition of higher levels of units that control the environment even if the cost is insufficient shakes the motivation of some tiers who play rating matches. This is because I saw the reaction of a player who always regards the units that build the environment as supreme, and considers the others to be disgusting and harmful.
Initially, I had the prejudice that such players were forced to find flaws in others and eliminate frustrations that went wrong. But it wasn't. They themselves do not tolerate any behavior that seems to be the cause of the defect. Not only to others, but to themselves. That was the harvest update day that I noticed.
Up to here for this time.
Rick Dom & Rick Dom II
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/16
Wednesday's mission is to participate in two space battles and win two games. This time, play with Quick Match (350). I chose "Rick Dom II".
There were two "Support-Type" teammates, so I took a slightly front position. I try to act as a stop to get them to shoot down the enemy. In that case, if I found a "Raid-Type", I tried to prevent it from going to the ally "Support-Type.
My grasp of the battlefield ends halfway. Among the enemy forces, I recognized that the Raid-Type was "GM Guard Custom" and the General-Types were "Rick Dom" and "GM Intercept Custom(FB)", but I did not understand any more. I need a little more growth here. I was able to win this match, and earned the assist score, so I was able to fulfill my purpose. It was badly damaged as the price to pay for it. I was dying several times, but it seems that my attack was effective.
Well, up to this point it's a common game scene, but there are things I'm curious about. What's the difference between "Rick Dom" and "Rick Dom II" at the same cost? Is to say.
The clear difference is the weapon's performance and the presence or absence of high-spec AMBAC skills. Yes, they are, but the main weapons have advantages and disadvantages, and the secondary weapons are overwhelmed by Rick Dom II. That's a fact, but it seems that the Rick Dom has a relatively simpler structure, is more robust, and is less prone to operational errors than the Rick Dom II.
The factor that makes it difficult for me to feel the difference between two units is to operate within the range in which melee attacks reach. And I think that it is in an operation that does not make full use of mobility. This is the reason why they struggled with the enemy Dom they faced. Even if AMBAC is used, there is no skill or small hit box that can be used to advantage.
After The Campaign
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/15
What are you waiting for after the campaign? Before that, I have a prediction for the final week. The third week is "Guncannon Detector", the source is "Z-MSV", and it is easy to think that the expected range will be within "Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam". Major predictions include transformation units such as "Asshimar", "Messala", and "Methuss". I also expect it to be around here. Even if the transformation unit is not a pickup, I expect it to be refrained from appearing after this week. And by the time of their re-appearance, they will have a new personality.
We expect to see pickups next week on units from pre- "Mobile Suits Zeta Gundam" eras. Personally, I would like "Gundam Unit 7", "Gouf Tactical Assault Type", "Gouf Vijayanta", etc. to appear.
There will be additional game rules and another type of map battle with the same name. I think the possibility of "underwater combat" has not yet come, but it is not zero. There will be days when it can be used as a custom match for the rule "Mixup". Resumption of "Clan Match" during suspension and adoption of "Space" map in irregular "Rank Match" are likely to be realized in the near future. It is expected that sortie restriction rules for each generation (source category) will come. The possibility of raid battle mode is low, but the possibility of "asymmetrical interpersonal battle" is not zero.
Up to here for this time
What are you waiting for after the campaign? Before that, I have a prediction for the final week. The third week is "Guncannon Detector", the source is "Z-MSV", and it is easy to think that the expected range will be within "Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam". Major predictions include transformation units such as "Asshimar", "Messala", and "Methuss". I also expect it to be around here. Even if the transformation unit is not a pickup, I expect it to be refrained from appearing after this week. And by the time of their re-appearance, they will have a new personality.
We expect to see pickups next week on units from pre- "Mobile Suits Zeta Gundam" eras. Personally, I would like "Gundam Unit 7", "Gouf Tactical Assault Type", "Gouf Vijayanta", etc. to appear.
There will be additional game rules and another type of map battle with the same name. I think the possibility of "underwater combat" has not yet come, but it is not zero. There will be days when it can be used as a custom match for the rule "Mixup". Resumption of "Clan Match" during suspension and adoption of "Space" map in irregular "Rank Match" are likely to be realized in the near future. It is expected that sortie restriction rules for each generation (source category) will come. The possibility of raid battle mode is low, but the possibility of "asymmetrical interpersonal battle" is not zero.
Up to here for this time
Act Zaku Commander Type & Limited Rule
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/14
Now, "Act Zaku Commander Type" is also available for DP purchase, which is a good environment. The mission on Monday is to get assist points and sortie on the ground map.
I chose quick match as usual, but today I couldn't match at all. We avoided quick matches (unstable due to overlapping PSN obstacles) and chose custom matches that could barely be played. We decided to play with the limited rule "Raid-Type (400), melee attack and tackle only, no shooting weapons". We also aimed to achieve the assist point mission in this room.
I chose "Act Zaku Commander Type". "Act Zaku Beam Rifle" which is still excellent, "Observational Data Link" skill which is rare in Raid-Type, and "Over Boost" skill which is more rare and unique presence. I don't know if this personality can be used on a basic battlefield, but I feel like demand is being taken by units like "Gouf Flight Type".
If the rule is only for melee attacks, counter attacks are likely to occur frequently. The pursuit after the counter is established can be hit with a (very unique) heavy blow. And with the "Over Boost" skill, it has the advantage that it can tackle many times.
The "Observational Data Link" skill allows all allies to check enemy HP information, making it easier to quickly reduce the number of enemy soldiers. The result is that it is easy to adjust to earn assist points.
I was satisfied with the fact that the unit selection and the tactics were intertwined, and I was able to win the game and accomplish the assist mission.
Since the limited rules are the way of playing each one participates for their own purpose, it is an opportunity to easily try your own unit operation theory. If you think there is more to winning than losing, then you should give it a try.
Up to here for this time.
Now, "Act Zaku Commander Type" is also available for DP purchase, which is a good environment. The mission on Monday is to get assist points and sortie on the ground map.
I chose quick match as usual, but today I couldn't match at all. We avoided quick matches (unstable due to overlapping PSN obstacles) and chose custom matches that could barely be played. We decided to play with the limited rule "Raid-Type (400), melee attack and tackle only, no shooting weapons". We also aimed to achieve the assist point mission in this room.
I chose "Act Zaku Commander Type". "Act Zaku Beam Rifle" which is still excellent, "Observational Data Link" skill which is rare in Raid-Type, and "Over Boost" skill which is more rare and unique presence. I don't know if this personality can be used on a basic battlefield, but I feel like demand is being taken by units like "Gouf Flight Type".
If the rule is only for melee attacks, counter attacks are likely to occur frequently. The pursuit after the counter is established can be hit with a (very unique) heavy blow. And with the "Over Boost" skill, it has the advantage that it can tackle many times.
The "Observational Data Link" skill allows all allies to check enemy HP information, making it easier to quickly reduce the number of enemy soldiers. The result is that it is easy to adjust to earn assist points.
I was satisfied with the fact that the unit selection and the tactics were intertwined, and I was able to win the game and accomplish the assist mission.
Since the limited rules are the way of playing each one participates for their own purpose, it is an opportunity to easily try your own unit operation theory. If you think there is more to winning than losing, then you should give it a try.
Up to here for this time.
GM II & Agguguy
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/13
Sunday mission is score and one victory. Use "GM II" at a 300 arctic base. Until recently, I liked "Gouf (VD)" and "High Mobility Zaku Ground Type", but recently I generally use "GM II". Both the main weapon beam rifle and live ammunition bazooka are easy to use, so I chose bazooka this time.
This unit is a type that helps allies recover by shortening the respawn, and contributes to victory by surviving long and continuing to damage enemy units. One-on-one performance is not so high, but it is easy to handle and durable.
This time, if I earned an assist score by doing damage while enduring long, I was able to win enough points. The presence of allies who cover and make chances will be great.
Even at this cost (300) battlefield, the presence of "Agguguy" is outstanding. Even if stealth is present, it is easy to identify with the naked eye, and it is dangerous, so it is easy to draw attention. This time it was picked by both sides. I think that the attention of "Agguguy" makes it easier to understand the game development. This is because the cover of the support type of the ally and the role of the interception always come around. "Efreet" which is suitable for the cover is also easy to be picked. This time, two bodies were picked by the enemy. I helped stop "Efreet" from trying to hinder his "Agguguy". As you can imagine, "Agguguy" -centric meta may be developing now. Like "Efreet (DS)" which was popular a while ago.
Up to here for this time.
Early Production Gelgoog & Gundam
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/12
Is "Early Production Gelgoog" and "Gundam" no longer survive on the highest cost battlefield?
Many units are sufficient for Level 1 implementation costs. When they reach a high level and performance remains at the initial level, it is usually obsolete.
With recent updates, the high-level "Gyan" and "G-3 Gundam" seem to have received some performance adjustments that seemed to be cost-effective.
The ability to withstand attacks is high enough.
The turning performance and the moving speed with thrusters are often inferior. Weapons have low or high firepower but lack versatility. Even if the performance differences are accumulated and the role of time gain and interference is excellent in durability, it can not be said that it can be fulfilled.
Looking at these examples, isn't the performance falling into something that should be enhanced? Everybody may think once.
If so, enhancements like "G-3 Gundam" mentioned earlier. Enhancements such as "addition of required skills" and "increase of versatility parts slots" are common but desirable.
GBO2 cannot be equipped more than necessary because there is a limit to the parts frame that can be equipped even if some slots increase too much.
Improving armament is easy to improve, but it is not a good idea as the shared units are unnecessarily strengthened. You may be able to deal with this by giving the unit that wants to be strengthened its own "skills to enhance weapon performance". Introducing it seems to be difficult because it is complicated to adjust skill performance each time with fine parameter adjustment.
What about the idea of giving the skill "Early level units can equip higher level weapons"? Low-level weapons can be kept, or higher-level weapons can be "given benefits other than power". It was a temporary bug, but I think it would be good idea to add a guided grenade sub weapon to the high level of machine gun.
So far this time.
Hizack & GM Intercept Custom (FB)
GBO2 Diary - 2020/04/11
Do you enjoy space battles? I enjoy it, although there is a stress that my MS operation does not work well. Friday's daily mission includes space warfare. If you play mainly in ground battles, you will feel like you cannot grasp the distance in space. It's a mess of melee attacks not reaching at all or overtaking enemies and flying. I chose "Hizack" and "GM Intercept Custom (FB)" today.
"Hizack", this time equipped with bazooka and heat hawk. I'm wondering if the ax is adapted to the space environment, but if you hit it, it's preferable for big damage. "GM Intercept Custom (FB)" is comfortable with missiles, beams, melee attacks and ease of handling while struggling with the launch interval of the rocket bazooka. Well, I wrote a lot of things that I could understand if I was playing, but the game was unilateral and there was almost no reversal. There seems to be an element that tends to act alone compared to the ground battle. In a match that has the impression of being able to fight well, there are only cases where there is no interference from enemy colleagues even when the enemy confronted by your attack is fatally injured. The same is true of the opposite case, so it's probably a factor in pushing and losing.
There is a difference between in-game position information and shooting ease between the ground battle and the space battle. In the universe, there are few things that can easily measure the distance like the ground, and because the target moves quickly, it is not possible to expect multiple hits even for burst weapons below a certain level. It is easy to make a difference in the accuracy of the attack, so it seems that the difference is linked to the battle result.
Intuitively, your own attack comes off, but the enemy's attack seems to be quite hit. I think this is a catch that I can not enjoy the space battle. It's fun to win ... but it's more fun to fight well and hit strong enemies. I feel stressed by losing my skills because of my low skill, but I feel like complimenting the strength of the enemy. Next time you will be more excited to win, so you will be more absorbed in the battle.
Aside from offensive action, positioning is as important as ground fighting. However, the fact that the know-how has not been established so much in space warfare seems to be a factor that tends to be a unilateral development. First of all, there are different guidelines, such as where to advance to the target and how to move based on the results there. That is reflected in the action as it is. At first, I move in groups, but after engagement, I am a confused soldier. I feel unskilled because I can't overcome it alone.
I want to mutter in various ways, but that's it for today.
登録:
投稿 (Atom)