2555 replies to this topic

[Novakaine]

Tarzilman, on 28 September 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

There's a reason this knight-word got censored. So maybe you stop calling ppl so. They rather are grey knights and definitely aware themselfes of the deficits both the game and the devs have got. But you keep ignoring it on and on.

They shall hence forth be known as the PDF.

[Pihoqahiak]

Infernus1986, on 28 September 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

If you can dig them up, the old forums where filled with constructive threads that pointed out problems and offered solutions.
A lot of them where lost in the great purge when they "redid" the forums, the rest where completely ignored by the devs without a single response from them or trolled to deletion by people who disagreed with the OP

I might have to dodge some flak for this, but I went back through my old posts and found it anyway to show that they do seem to listen sometimes, although they never did contact me in any way about it, but...

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2254504

I'm sure there might be a better way to embed the post as a quote into this post, but I'm not very forum savvy. In my defense of the post, my idea posted in it to curb the Alpha Strike problem that this game had become was not anywhere near as extreme as PGI has taken it with "ghost heat". They do seem to have a serious problem in the steps they take in trying to address balance issues,almost always swinging the pendulum drastically one way, then the other instead of small incremental changes. Also, their refusal to clearly document game information in an easily accessible form causes a LOT of problems for new players and even experienced players at times. Why they haven't just devoted the tiny amount of time and effort it would take someone to accomplish that task just baffles me.

So, anyway, when I saw what they were implementing with "ghost heat" I thought, hey, right on, they do listen sometimes and really are willing to try suggestions out...uh oh, wait a minute, hmmm, they sure did take that and run to the extreme with it. Honestly though, this example is one of the few suggestions from the forums that I've seen PGI implement something similar to since early in closed beta, and they mauled the idea of it doing so. There have been a LOT of well thought out, well presented ideas on these forums that seem to have gone completely unnoticed by PGI. It's a shame too, I think the game could've been in a much better place right now if they had picked up on some of them (and I sure don't mean how they implemented "ghost heat" lol).

[Brut4ce]

Werewolf486, on 28 September 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

This is meant to be a piece of advice for Russ and PGI, not a bashing. The next time you're going to have an event, be it business to business, business to employee, business to public you should probably hire some professionals to handle the things you have no understanding about. My wife and I have an event planning business handling hundreds of thousands of dollars for our clients to put on great events and after reading about, listening to people talking about the Launch Event I can safely say that you really needed to hire professionals. Professionals to handle the Event Planning which means hiring the vendors (caterers, security, ushers, etc), doing the timeline, coordinating and to have that event planner leading it. You may shrug it off, but those are the people who make events happen with what seems like no hitches, when in reality it was lots of planning (usually starting a year out) and the Event Planner running around putting out fires in such a manner the public generally has no idea.

If your event looks and runs poorly then that's the impression people are left with. Hire the right people to do the right jobs and you will come out smelling like roses. DON'T call an event planner with 2 weeks to go, the more time you give them to do their jobs the better the event will be. Usually a year in advance you should pick the right event planner and start having meetings to plan the event, then let the planner go out and get the right vendors for the job. After that it's a matter of the Planner keeping things on track and making sure everyone is on the same page leading up to the event. Planners are indispensable assets, and a good one can make your event the one everyone is talking about for the right reasons.

Yeap, Sound and excellent point made Werewolf. But i fear, due to (maybe?) Business finances overshadowing everything else, organisation and planning turned out to be OP and was Nearfed with the bat

dymlos2003, on 28 September 2013 - 08:33 PM, said:

No but they would atleast talk to us like they did in closed beta. I miss those days. The vocal minority ruins it for everyone

Ok i've been reading these kind of statements in the last few pages and my brain started weeping. Hmmm.... Maybe we could start setting up those thick sharp poles again and put all those bad people on them as an example to all and then set some great big fires to feast upon their ashes......yeap....worked for us in the past. What ruins it for everyone mate, and not just here, but with most products around you these days, is BUSINESS policies aka "PROFIT", taking presidence over everything else. Has peoples culture degraded so much....one can only but wonder.....*sigh*

<S>

Edit: spelling

Edited by Brut4ce, 28 September 2013 - 11:56 PM.

[Jess Hazen]

Novakaine, on 28 September 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

They shall hence forth be known as the PDF.

{Noble MechWarrior} gets censored?

lol wow; just wow.

I wonder why that is?

Anyway pretty excited about what cw will bring. I can't freaking wait for more details.

[GalaxyBluestar]

Pihoqahiak, on 28 September 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

I might have to dodge some flak for this, but I went back through my old posts and found it anyway to show that they do seem to listen sometimes, although they never did contact me in any way about it, but...

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2254504

I'm sure there might be a better way to embed the post as a quote into this post, but I'm not very forum savvy. In my defense of the post, my idea posted in it to curb the Alpha Strike problem that this game had become was not anywhere near as extreme as PGI has taken it with "ghost heat". They do seem to have a serious problem in the steps they take in trying to address balance issues,almost always swinging the pendulum drastically one way, then the other instead of small incremental changes. Also, their refusal to clearly document game information in an easily accessible form causes a LOT of problems for new players and even experienced players at times. Why they haven't just devoted the tiny amount of time and effort it would take someone to accomplish that task just baffles me.

So, anyway, when I saw what they were implementing with "ghost heat" I thought, hey, right on, they do listen sometimes and really are willing to try suggestions out...uh oh, wait a minute, hmmm, they sure did take that and run to the extreme with it. Honestly though, this example is one of the few suggestions from the forums that I've seen PGI implement something similar to since early in closed beta, and they mauled the idea of it doing so. There have been a LOT of well thought out, well presented ideas on these forums that seem to have gone completely unnoticed by PGI. It's a shame too, I think the game could've been in a much better place right now if they had picked up on some of them (and I sure don't mean how they implemented "ghost heat" lol).

Pihoqahiak, on 28 September 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

I might have to dodge some flak for this, but I went back through my old posts and found it anyway to show that they do seem to listen sometimes, although they never did contact me in any way about it, but...

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2254504

I'm sure there might be a better way to embed the post as a quote into this post, but I'm not very forum savvy. In my defense of the post, my idea posted in it to curb the Alpha Strike problem that this game had become was not anywhere near as extreme as PGI has taken it with "ghost heat". They do seem to have a serious problem in the steps they take in trying to address balance issues,almost always swinging the pendulum drastically one way, then the other instead of small incremental changes. Also, their refusal to clearly document game information in an easily accessible form causes a LOT of problems for new players and even experienced players at times. Why they haven't just devoted the tiny amount of time and effort it would take someone to accomplish that task just baffles me.

So, anyway, when I saw what they were implementing with "ghost heat" I thought, hey, right on, they do listen sometimes and really are willing to try suggestions out...uh oh, wait a minute, hmmm, they sure did take that and run to the extreme with it. Honestly though, this example is one of the few suggestions from the forums that I've seen PGI implement something similar to since early in closed beta, and they mauled the idea of it doing so. There have been a LOT of well thought out, well presented ideas on these forums that seem to have gone completely unnoticed by PGI. It's a shame too, I think the game could've been in a much better place right now if they had picked up on some of them (and I sure don't mean how they implemented "ghost heat" lol).

interesting so you want to claim to be in part responcible for ghost heat... you got balls son but lets check this out.

-----

someone said...

Unless they nerf heat efficiency on the weapons. Or institute different sized energy hard points. We're going to continue seeing boating.

then your quote...


Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:14 PM
The answer isn't to nerf heat efficiency, I think a better answer is to increase the heat produced by firing multiple of the same type of weapon within a short period of time. It doesn't even have to be a large increase to curb boating to more reasonable levels. Increase the heat produced by a weapon type (specific type, as in PPC, or Large Laser, not weapon class) that is being fired simultaneously with another of it's type or fired after firing another of that weapon type within the last .25 seconds by 5 or 10 percent. Something along those lines. This would encourage using higher heat weapons in moderation and encourage more diverse and balanced builds while discouraging boating.

and first response to you is...

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:57 PM
So you want to kill the Hunchback 4P, the Awesome 8Q, every light/medium mech which happens to have 4+ med lasers in their stock loadout (which are a lot) to force people to run what you call "balanced" builds?

Why on earth would you do that? I suggest you browse through sarna and realize how many "natural" boats there actually are. Battlemechs dedicated to a single role (read: weapon) are nothing unusual in the battletech universe.

So.. no. That Idea is bollocks.

-----

yep i thought i was going crazy when i said in nov-dec don't listen to forumers and then homeless bill, doch bach and many others prove me wrong. however now i find this out. it seems pgi listens to all the wrong ideas and within a few moments someone calls the idea out for what it is and lo it happened exactly in that fashion. same when ecm came along and people knew the streakmandos and ravens were coming.

i feel sorry for pgi, it's hard to listen to the right ideas when they're jumbled with these kinda messes. somebody has a lot to make up for their ideas... nudge nudge particular founder with bad influence on devs. say sorry for giving them bad ideas.

[Xtrekker]

I gotta say, some people are really showing their true colors in here. People I had previously thought ok are apparently a$$hats. On both sides of the "argument".

Regarding entitlement, I guess I'm in that bunch, because I've never put $120 on a game before. Especially a "free" game. A game I've never seen or really heard anything about other than what was pitched. And I've never had to explain such a stupid expenditure to my wife. So yeah, when you stand up for something and defend it (coworkers, friends, family), try to get more people interested, etc., only to find that in the end the effort/faith wasn't real, you feel a bit ripped off. Regardless, it's moot, other than the occasional eruption in the forum. I'm certainly not sitting around waiting for anything. But for some reason I do feel the need to defend the Founder effort when I see it being crapped on by the haha-pointy-finger-types out there.

As far as communication, I think that's kind of an overused nail. Yeah, their communication isn't stellar, in that they don't really tell us much in terms of a concrete direction. However, even the golden MWLL team did the same. The forums were sometimes awful and full of negativity, and anytime a dev would answer a question it seemed like a meltdown would follow, drawing said dev into an argument. Eventually the team was under strict orders to not reply to provocative posts, because every time it would turn into a PR nightmare. Most of the dev team openly admitted that they didn't even read the open forums anymore because there was never anything good. It was all critical, hostile, you did this wrong, we wanted this, etc. Mind you the good stuff was out there, but really sorting through all the {Scrap} just made it not worth it. Of course that was a volunteer project, and when a bunch of people start trashing your effort...well there isn't much incentive to make them happy anymore. And plenty of people walked. So I absolutely understand why PGI wouldn't care to pay much attention to this forum. Maybe sometimes being "professional" just means not giving discontent any unneeded fuel.

[Pihoqahiak]

GalaxyBluestar, on 29 September 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

i feel sorry for pgi, it's hard to listen to the right ideas when they're jumbled with these kinda messes. somebody has a lot to make up for their ideas... nudge nudge particular founder with bad influence on devs. say sorry for giving them bad ideas.

If you're "nudging" me to apologize for my thoughts on dealing with the serious problems of high alpha strike builds, that's not going to happen. Those game mechanics and builds were bad for the game, and as I said, my suggestion was very minor compared to what they did in the end. It was meant to curb it, tone it down, but not completely dismantle it as what PGI implemented did to it. Hell, it didn't, and still doesn't, need to apply to all weapons the same. I seriously doubt much of the player base wants the sort of game where the majority of mechs are able able to peel limbs off any mech on the field or core them in one alpha strike, two at the most. especially when you'd have 12 of those alpha strikes per team, lol. The whole point of being a beta was to be able to test that stuff out while they had the chance to do that without being disruptive to a fully released game. Unfortunately, PGI's implementation of anything was so slow, and so drastic every time, that their testing time was largely wasted. Whenever Community Warfare is finally implemented large scale changes to game mechanics will become far more disruptive as well. At that point, players will have attempted to attack and capture objectives to acquire specific resources based on how weapons and mechs are working in the game at that time. Majorly changing how those work can easily make them worthless, wasting everyone's time and effort put into their various campaigns. Not a very good situation for a persistent, immersive gaming experience.

Edited by Pihoqahiak, 29 September 2013 - 02:09 AM.

[Moromillas]

Xtrekker, on 29 September 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

I gotta say, some people are really showing their true colors in here. People I had previously thought ok are apparently a$$hats. On both sides of the "argument".

Regarding entitlement, I guess I'm in that bunch, because I've never put $120 on a game before. Especially a "free" game. A game I've never seen or really heard anything about other than what was pitched. And I've never had to explain such a stupid expenditure to my wife. So yeah, when you stand up for something and defend it (coworkers, friends, family), try to get more people interested, etc., only to find that in the end the effort/faith wasn't real, you feel a bit ripped off. Regardless, it's moot, other than the occasional eruption in the forum. I'm certainly not sitting around waiting for anything. But for some reason I do feel the need to defend the Founder effort when I see it being crapped on by the haha-pointy-finger-types out there.

As far as communication, I think that's kind of an overused nail. Yeah, their communication isn't stellar, in that they don't really tell us much in terms of a concrete direction. However, even the golden MWLL team did the same. The forums were sometimes awful and full of negativity, and anytime a dev would answer a question it seemed like a meltdown would follow, drawing said dev into an argument. Eventually the team was under strict orders to not reply to provocative posts, because every time it would turn into a PR nightmare. Most of the dev team openly admitted that they didn't even read the open forums anymore because there was never anything good. It was all critical, hostile, you did this wrong, we wanted this, etc. Mind you the good stuff was out there, but really sorting through all the {Scrap} just made it not worth it. Of course that was a volunteer project, and when a bunch of people start trashing your effort...well there isn't much incentive to make them happy anymore. And plenty of people walked. So I absolutely understand why PGI wouldn't care to pay much attention to this forum. Maybe sometimes being "professional" just means not giving discontent any unneeded fuel.

Ah, the reputation of the founders. From my perspective, the majority of founders (and some non) do seem to cross the boundary into self entitlement. 3PV is a perfect example. It's something that didn't impact the game, but you can still see a lot of whinging about it, especially "the promise." And just recently, more whinging that CW isn't here yet. I've even seen players threaten to lodge a complaint with BBB. really? An organization that probably has enough on its plate sorting out real problems that affect any number of people, and players want to lodge frivolous complaints with them.

You see them carry on like they've lost something of tremendous import, and when you ask them about it, they just talk absolute rot. You load up the game to see what has been removed, only to find out they're full of ****.

If it's about bloated, grandiose, fantastic expectations of the game, then that's unfortunate. In that situation, there will always be some sort of disappointment, regardless of the outcome.

That example is exactly why I think there is too much communication from PGI. Feedback, metrics and market testing are obviously important, but it seems all this effort in communication is either wasted, or detrimental.

[Navid A1]

people please...
don't whine about features... UI2?, CW?, new game modes?... forget about them. why your expectations are so high?

i'll be quite happy if the game had 4 maps, 4 mech types (like in CB) and nothing else (for real); IF the game could only run 3 matches without a hard freeze. I (try to) play 3 hours a day and it all turns out to me waiting for my mech to become available again from the client captivity after a hard freeze.
seriously, I wish the devs could just focus on the core of the game first and solve various memory leak bugs and then try to add content.

[CyBerkut]

Lysander Voidrunner, on 28 September 2013 - 03:17 PM, said:

You're mad that they included 3PV? You're mad that they didn't spend that time doing something else that would futher your enjoyment? Again, time to grow up. This is a business, the only reason for it to function and to exist is to make money. If they start catering to your ilk, we'll have a great game that too few people would play for it to be viable, with directly translates to . Learn to live with necessary evils. If you want to play a game that satisfies your every craving, I suggest you make one yourself. Right now, I get the feeling that the disgruntled founders were under the impression that since they bought into the founders package it gives them some kind of special priviledges where they can dictate to the devs what is required of the game and how to make it better.

Speaking for myself, I don't view being a Founder as entitlement to special privileges to dictate anything to the devs. As a paying customer, however, I feel it reasonable to hold PGI to it's own word. It's bad enough that they turned their back upon their own design pillar(s)... but then much later in the process they attempt to mollify the disaffected customers with an unequivocal guarantee that they would never have to play in 3PV, or against other players using 3PV... and then proceed to sell Phoenix Project packages after that. Then, their actions rendered it untrue.

Quote

I'm not defending PGI because I'm whatever you chose to call me, I'm not defending their business practice. If I was studio head, heads would have rolled for lack of maps and lack of game modes. What I'm defending them against is unjustified claims under Canadian Law. I don't justify their business decisions, I however, understand them.

3PV is meant to increase the pool of players. It's that simple, if you were head of the project, no matter how much you would hate the mode (as almost everyone does) you would include it because you don't want to close doors to potential consumers.

But that isn't what happened. They didn't merely "include" 3PV. They completely substituted it for 1PV. They closed the door on me, and other like-minded, paying customers.

Quote

This business model relies on retention, they don't have the luxury of up-front payments. They have to appeal to as many players as possible.

1. Apparently, it's not too interested in 'retaining' the people who wanted to play in 1PV-only. They were about as concerned with retaining us as they were with keeping their word.

2. They had the luxury of up-front payments. I paid for the Founders pack well before delivery, and the same was true for the Phoenix Project.

After 1PV-only got dumped, I got the Phoenix Project refunded. Personally, I would not seek a refund for the Founders package. I had fun with it up until they dumped 1PV-only. I retain a sliver of hope, however foolish, that PGI will someday re-establish a 1PV-only queue accessible to PUG'ers, etc. So, I watch, and wait. And I will voice my displeasure when I see fit.

Quote

And they aren't going to apologize to you or anyone for not making the game of YOUR dreams. I can respect that. It's your choice to play their game, not their responsability to make yours. Again, learn to live with it.

It wasn't just MY dream. It was THEIR design pillars. It was THEIR unequivocal promise. It was THEIR stated dream, and they sold product to a bunch of people on the basis of all that.

As for apologies, well, there was the "3rd Person - An Update And Apology Feedback Thread"
so they apparently thought they were apologizing. In truth though, your characterization is probably more accurate. Pretty sad.

Edited by CyBerkut, 29 September 2013 - 07:21 AM.

[marlyy]

Navid A1, on 29 September 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

people please...
don't whine about features... UI2?, CW?, new game modes?... forget about them. why your expectations are so high?

i'll be quite happy if the game had 4 maps, 4 mech types (like in CB) and nothing else (for real); IF the game could only run 3 matches without a hard freeze. I (try to) play 3 hours a day and it all turns out to me waiting for my mech to become available again from the client captivity after a hard freeze.
seriously, I wish the devs could just focus on the core of the game first and solve various memory leak bugs and then try to add content.

Open your eyes kid, first they want/have to make money. They focus on developing stuff to make money with ( nonstandart mechs, paint/camo ) and than to make it harder to grind ( cbill nerv... ) . In meanwhile maybe a small group is working on bugs and tuning.

I just hope they dont bring ammo/repair cost back, and maybe they keep their promises they give us this time?!

btw i solved my freezes by limiting my frames to 50max. stop trolling forums and look for solutions on it, haha. *irony

[Navid A1]

marlyy, on 29 September 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Open your eyes kid, first they want/have to make money. They focus on developing stuff to make money with ( nonstandart mechs, paint/camo ) and than to make it harder to grind ( cbill nerv... ) . In meanwhile maybe a small group is working on bugs and tuning.

I just hope they dont bring ammo/repair cost back, and maybe they keep their promises they give us this time?!

btw i solved my freezes by limiting my frames to 50max. stop trolling forums and look for solutions on it, haha. *irony

- hmm... now that i open my eyes i see that sales and camo/paints that ensures the inflow of cash are not particularly content that need major development resources... right?... i mean it's not going to take the devs a week to announce a sale (if we assume that they even bother with these sales). in other words, stuff that makes money for them are separate from game engine optimizations.

- R&R costs. maybe they will have a use in future. but right now... i'm with you.

- lol... i hardly get even 30fps (low spec user here) and i already have tried a couple of solutions...
i don't care if addressing these bugs take a long time (they have limited resources). i just wish that they put their resources on optimizing the engine and move onwards from a stable point.

[Myssi]

Lysander Voidrunner, on 28 September 2013 - 03:17 PM, said:

As for Consumer Driven Fraud, it's illegal in Canada despite the very broad consumer protection website that's been provided. Buying something, using it for an amount of time and once it's use for them has expired wanting a refund is expressly forbidden, not covered under consumer law because it doesn't affect consumers. It is called Return Fraud. That is why you have a certain amount of time to return the product, it is normally time alotted for you to make normal use and determine if the item is defective or not. .

I'd still like an explanation on how contacting someone and asking their assistance in dealing with a company is considered a fraud. Apparently you have in depth knowledge about the matter. Do explain.
I do not want the definition of fraud. I want to know how filing a complaint at this point can possibly be considered a fraud.
And do not give examples of physical objects, do it with digital purchases if you must. Jeans do not have a period where you can only wear the part that covers your groin, rest of them being given at a later date when they are considered finished.
Digital and physical purchases are completely different entities, they have completely different life and development cycles and distribution methods.

And how can wanting something be forbidden? I hope the thought police has their act together if this comes more common around the world.
Searching for return fraud in canada came up mostly with articles like this http://canada.credit...-fraud-1282.php
i.e customer returning a product to a store that he or she has stolen or otherwise obtained without actually purchasing it.
Under the information I found about it you aren't even talking about return fraud, so some explanation is needed here also.
Please enlighten me with your in-depth knowledge of the law. Now is your chance to help me understand before you start calling me arrogant and that I lack the knowledge and\or I should just leave.

Edit; fixed grammatical errors.

Edited by Myssi, 29 September 2013 - 09:09 AM.

[Lysander Voidrunner]

First and foremost, you have to grasp the concept of sales vs. backing of a product. Sales is literally an exchange of product as is for money. Backing is much more akin to venture capital in it's nature where you are exchanging money for future prospects of rewards which may or may not materialize. It's a little bit like gambling with the exception of the luck part. No court of law would ever support the claims of refund after a year because of broken promises because it wasn't a sale for future delivery.

As for content, here is where we're on the same wavelength. I agree, they need to make a few heads roll so as to start having more maps, more modes and more flashy bells and whistles. That and now that the game is "live" they need to respect the 6 month delay they gave themselves. Not because I would sue them but because they no longer have the beta excuse.

[Jestun]

Nothing suggested here would be fraud.

The only way a customer could commit fraud to get the funds back would be explicitly lying to their bank in order to get a chargeback (something which I haven't seen advocated in any post).

Discussing it with your bank, or a 3rd party complaints / legal advice entity is in no way fraud.

Edited by Jestun, 29 September 2013 - 09:42 AM.

[DeaconW]

CyBerkut, on 29 September 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

Speaking for myself, I don't view being a Founder as entitlement to special privileges to dictate anything to the devs. As a paying customer, however, I feel it reasonable to hold PGI to it's own word. It's bad enough that they turned their back upon their own design pillar(s)... but then much later in the process they attempt to mollify the disaffected customers with an unequivocal guarantee that they would never have to play in 3PV, or against other players using 3PV... and then proceed to sell Phoenix Project packages after that. Then, their actions rendered it untrue.

But that isn't what happened. They didn't merely "include" 3PV. They completely substituted it for 1PV. They closed the door on me, and other like-minded, paying customers.

This^^ captures my feelings as well.

[Dymlos2003]

The whole 3pv situation is over blown and over exaggerated. It's there to help and it's not forced upon us. Just click it off or play in 12 groups.

Edited by dymlos2003, 29 September 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[FlipOver]

dymlos2003, on 29 September 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

The whole 3pv situation is over blown and over exaggerated. It's there to help and it's not forced upon us. Just click it off or play in 12 groups.

Don't understand why bring this up again but tell me, it's there to help with arm lock? Won't it be a useful tool for players to see around buildings without exposing themselves? Won't it be a useful tool to use when taking heavy AC2 fire to get out of the cockpit and not get all the shakes, helping you to fight back?

"Just click it off or play in 12 groups"
You mean, the only way for us to prevent others from taking advantage of the 3PV is to play in a 12 man? Is that really enough?

Edit - Sorry but what you said makes little to no sense

Edited by flipover, 29 September 2013 - 10:39 AM.

[Deathlike]

Yes, because 12-man is always available... except it isn't at certain hours of the day. You're lucky if "failed to find a match" isn't the mantra. I had a few of those last night as it were.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 September 2013 - 10:45 AM.

[Dymlos2003]

flipover, on 29 September 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:

Don't understand why bring this up again but tell me, it's there to help with arm lock? Won't it be a useful tool for players to see around buildings without exposing themselves? Won't it be a useful tool to use when taking heavy AC2 fire to get out of the cockpit and not get all the shakes, helping you to fight back?

"Just click it off or play in 12 groups"
You mean, the only way for us to prevent others from taking advantage of the 3PV is to play in a 12 man? Is that really enough?

Edit - Sorry but what you said makes little to no sense

There is no advantage of 3PV so what you said makes little to no sense