148 replies to this topic

[STR4NG3R]

ok so playing "some" of the top clan units in CW has made the majority of IS quit playing CW at all....
I would like the option to not drop against them when I don't want to or I too may stop CW all together... I can mute the people I don't want to hear so why cant I have a list of units (say 10 or more player teams ) that are on my no play list lol...
or show us who we will be fighting against so we can choose the planet without them

eg. 75% MS
25% mixed

or 100% MS

now I know the units will cry that we don't drop as teams etc etc but that's the way it is right now and well if you want the IS to keep playing something needs to be done.

[stjobe]

Oh, this should be good...

*gets popcorn*

[Mystere]

If only Darius III had the option of not fighting Alexander the Great, then maybe the Persian Empire would have been saved.

LOL!

Edited by Mystere, 12 July 2015 - 02:42 PM.

[Sjorpha]

STR4NG3R, on 12 July 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

ok so playing "some" of the top clan units in CW has made the majority of IS quit playing CW at all....
I would like the option to not drop against them when I don't want to or I too may stop CW all together... I can mute the people I don't want to hear so why cant I have a list of units (say 10 or more player teams ) that are on my no play list lol...
or show us who we will be fighting against so we can choose the planet without them

eg. 75% MS
25% mixed

or 100% MS

now I know the units will cry that we don't drop as teams etc etc but that's the way it is right now and well if you want the IS to keep playing something needs to be done.

Remember, what doesn't kill you makes you STR4NG3R.

Seriously, there is no way it would work.

[stjobe]

I'd just stop playing the ones I lost against, then I could win every match and be the bestest robbit-fighter in the WOOORLD!

*cue Rocky theme*

[Pjwned]

I'll be honest and say this is a small part of why I don't play CW, but it's mostly that CW is uninspired with long, drawn out games that I don't enjoy participating in...so I don't.

I think PUG stomping is just a small part of the larger picture.

[Dingo Battler]

Its goes in a cycle.

PUGs get stomped in CW, cry out for more balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
PUGs leave CW
PUGstompers QQ about CW, hours to get matches, no PUGs to stomp, etc.
PUGs suggest balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
etc.

Will continue until every last PUG leaves CW, then the PUGstompers will leave, and no one will play, because the PUGstompers in reality, are no skill units that falls apart the moment they hit any real competition

[Mycrus]

KBurn85, on 12 July 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Its goes in a cycle.

PUGs get stomped in CW, cry out for more balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
PUGs leave CW
PUGstompers QQ about CW, hours to get matches, no PUGs to stomp, etc.
PUGs suggest balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
etc.

Will continue until every last PUG leaves CW, then the PUGstompers will leave, and no one will play, because the PUGstompers in reality, are no skill units that falls apart the moment they hit any real competition

[Burktross]

I can see it now
"boycott X unit because they use Y ******* ******* tactic."

[Yellonet]

STR4NG3R, on 12 July 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

OP post...

I think I was in the match with you against MS.
Although I'm a noob and maybe should keep my mouth shut, but I have to say that so far this game seems to be very unbalanced in a number of ways.
Unbalanced matches is not good gameplay and getting completely slaughtered over and over will in many cases make new players such as myself move on to other games instead.

IMO much of the balance problem lies in how matches are set up, both in terms of how easy it is to defend and how difficult it is to attack and that you can stumble upon a complete team of enemies that use proper communications and perhaps decent tactics against your own rabble of random people.
When it comes to balancing attacking vs defending the most realistic approach would be to make the attackers have more players, lets say 12 vs 10, or perhaps equal number of players but attackers getting 25% more tonnage. In reality it is easier/advantageous to defend so an attacker would not attack unless he had some kind of advantage, be in manpower or firepower.
The risk of running into highly organized opposition is more difficult to deal with but I think that giving more visual help on what to do and in general make it easier to see the benefit of working together in the game would go some of the a way to evening the odds.

Getting spawnkilled several times doesn't really trigger me to play more...

[Kain Demos]

These forums are so full of children.

"Please give me the option not to play against certain 'mechs"

"Please give me the option not to play against certain weapons"

"Please give me the option not to play certain maps"

"Please give me the option to not play against certain players"

"Please give me the option not to play against certain units"

Is there no end? I guess the Wargames image above sums it up best.

EDIT: I do believe an ignore feature in the solo queue would be nice--once someone was on your ignore list not only could they not message you but would keep you out of matches with them.

Many other games have these feature whether they are solely PVP or if it is for just the PVP part of the game.

Edited by Kain Demos, 12 July 2015 - 04:17 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

Yellonet, on 12 July 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

When it comes to balancing attacking vs defending the most realistic approach would be to make the attackers have more players, lets say 12 vs 10, or perhaps equal number of players but attackers getting 25% more tonnage. In reality it is easier/advantageous to defend so an attacker would not attack unless he had some kind of advantage, be in manpower or firepower.

consider that organized units, especially on events, prefer to attack because they need those planets, they leave defense to pugs

and you propose to buff attackers...

[Alan Davion]

Kain Demos, on 12 July 2015 - 04:16 PM, said:

These forums are so full of children.

"Please give me the option not to play against certain 'mechs"

"Please give me the option not to play against certain weapons"

"Please give me the option not to play certain maps"

"Please give me the option to not play against certain players"

"Please give me the option not to play against certain units"

Is there no end? I guess the Wargames image above sums it up best.

EDIT: I do believe an ignore feature in the solo queue would be nice--once someone was on your ignore list not only could they not message you but would keep you out of matches with them.

Many other games have these feature whether they are solely PVP or if it is for just the PVP part of the game.

Only when the forums and game servers are completely shut down will it ever end.

[Yellonet]

Kain Demos, on 12 July 2015 - 04:16 PM, said:

"Please give me the option not to play certain maps"

I really don't understand what would be wrong with this.
Also, I can't think of a game that forces you to play maps you don't want to play.

[Yellonet]

bad arcade kitty, on 12 July 2015 - 04:19 PM, said:

consider that organized units, especially on events, prefer to attack because they need those planets, they leave defense to pugs

and you propose to buff attackers...

Well, in my - honestly quite short - experience, defenders have a large advantage and usually end up slaughtering the attackers when they jump out of their ships, but maybe this is just my experience?

[Kain Demos]

Yellonet, on 12 July 2015 - 04:22 PM, said:

I really don't understand what would be wrong with this.
Also, I can't think of a game that forces you to play maps you don't want to play.

A veto system like SC2's ladder would be ok. It lets you check off up to 3 maps and you see those three a lot less but could see increased wait times.

[bad arcade kitty]

Yellonet, on 12 July 2015 - 04:22 PM, said:

I really don't understand what would be wrong with this.
Also, I can't think of a game that forces you to play maps you don't want to play.

hey, sergeant, i didn't enlist to the army to fight in a damn bog, send me to fight in a large city... preferably with good night clubs

[ScarecrowES]

There is already an existing system to ensure that players have a high likelihood to not have to fight against certain units if they don't wish to. Simply put, you are welcome to queue to defend a planet that is so far off the attack lane that noone wants it. This will ensure that no units that might be actually trying to progress toward their objectives (more likely to be the larger and more organized units) are likely to try to drop in. Granted, you may never actually get a match, and when you do it will almost certainly be a ghost drop, but you will not have to fight units that you don't want to fight.

[Idealsuspect]

KBurn85, on 12 July 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Its goes in a cycle.

PUGs get stomped in CW, cry out for more balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
PUGs leave CW
PUGstompers QQ about CW, hours to get matches, no PUGs to stomp, etc.
PUGs suggest balancing
PUGstompers tell them to git gud, QQ moar nubs, ggclose, etc.
etc.

Will continue until every last PUG leaves CW, then the PUGstompers will leave, and no one will play, because the PUGstompers in reality, are no skill units that falls apart the moment they hit any real competition

You just tell the truth... the obvious truth that some of us tell it since 6 months and more, the truth that PGI don't care and the truth that the pseudo skilled-stompers don't wanna accept... ( ex-victim who became a tormentor syndrom )

If fact like the age when the lord unit was stomping PUGs in regulars matchs is over cause PGI with one year late decide to split PUGs and groups queue
Maybe one day CW will have a separate queue for PUGs and group huum but CW isnt fun and fast to play like regular matchs ( less maps, more waiting and matchs longuer ) also people will not repopulate CW like they did with regular or group queue.

[ScarecrowES]

Idealsuspect, on 12 July 2015 - 05:54 PM, said:

You just tell the truth... the obvious truth that some of us tell it since 6 months and more, the truth that PGI don't care and the truth that the pseudo skilled-stompers don't wanna accept... ( ex-victim who became a tormentor syndrom )

If fact like the age when the lord unit was stomping PUGs in regulars matchs is over cause PGI with one year late decide to split PUGs and groups queue
Maybe one day CW will have a separate queue for PUGs and group huum but CW isnt fun and fast to play like regular matchs ( less maps, more waiting and matchs longuer ) also people will not repopulate CW like they did with regular or group queue.

Sorry... groups are the entire point of community warfare. Why would they split up groups from pug drops? If anything, they should be doing more to encourage players to get into units. I really see no reason for players interested in playing community warfare on a regular basis to do so as a solo player.