225 replies to this topic

[Ransack]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 February 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

This is a discussion of how to make wagers between Murphy's Law and say the 10th Solaris Rangers on the out come of the private match. If I am willing to put say 50K C-Bills on the out come between out units, How does that affect you? You keep saying you want you want you want, well there are over 500K members here, not everyone wants the same game you want or I want. Te difference is I am open to looking or ways to make the game fun for more people not less.

As for mailing someone C-Bills... If I am a member a Unit why can't they help out a brother or sister? The Law did it in real life for me, Was that Cheating?

Currently in open drops, winner get the bigger share of the prize. In this Winning team gets ALL of the prize
Currently, no one has a stake, so are free to do curious things. In this everyone has a stake, it would minimize the Rambo complex.
I don't see what the problem would be since, The Law and 10SR have been here since closed beta, so I seriously doubt that CBills or XP would really be an issue ever. None of what we earn, lose or exchange would affect anyone else. Sure the system would be gameable by those desperate enough to find a way. But in truth, what in this isn't gameable by those desperate enough?

Personally I don't see how a winner take all rumble would be worse than a swarm of ECM lights running for a quick cap on a turret-less assault map.


Oh well, it's nice to dream

[RichAC]

RichAC': "Not condone cheating and critically cheating? did you mean criticize? Thats just it, he wasn't criticizing any of it. Like you, by trying to determine how much it would actually affect the community, he is trying to find excuses to condone it.... With crimes, That would only be true, if you in fact were to admit the action is a crime in the first place...."

You got me, I left out a word. Let me restate it for you:

It is not and that is blatantly dishonest. One can not be a cheater, not condone cheating and still be able to critically analyze cheating and its various forms. We do this with crimes, yet anyone who looks at one crime being worse than another crime is not judged as a criminal or defending crime.

If you want me to extend my point, people commit crimes everyday. Even you commit multiple crimes everyday. You aren't arrested for them because they are minor, don't affect anyone and they aren't worth enforcing. (I wish I could find the example where he broke the tax seal on a pack of cigarettes) The impact on society at large is considered. The same could be considered here.

How badly can players actually exploit this private game mode?
how much effort would it be to stop them?
What advantages would there be if we included it in an exploitable way?
What impact is there on other players?
If there is any impact on other players, how can we minimise it?

Even I can't follow who said what in your posts anymore man. I'm sure your "audience" can't either.

But what are you saying here? That some crimes are ok to commit? Its not a crime if you don't get caught? huh?

And the only one criticizing cheating here is me, you and phoenix are tying to minimize how malicious or effective different methods of cheating are. I not only find that suspicous, it has no bearing with me. being unsportlike is unsportlike.

I did, just because you hitting the button doesn't include where I quoted doesn't mean you get to play cute and deny it happened.

Would you like it in my italics mode so you can it?

This was the challenge IceSerpent put forward that you failed to meet.

'IceSerpent': "Name one. Post a link to any game that provides instructions on how to use hardware macros for a specific (make and model - wise) gaming device, instead of just instructions on how to create in-game macros if such are available."

This is me partially defending your position that there is indeed one company that indeed does provide said support but only because they sell the hardware.

That was never my position. and Exactly what I thought you were saying. Once again my friend, macros are not an in game option in WoW so they can try to sell their mouse. Think about why that makes no sense...

'Nightfire': "Conflation again of built in and supplied, language interpreter with macro support with macro support with PGI's failure to support external 3rd party products supplied and supported by said 3rd party. The supplied page (I looked myself) doesn't make any mention of hardware though it should be mentioned that through SteelSeries, Blizzard does make, distribute and support their own hardware. (WoW Mouse)

Again, the concept of supply and ownership is either lost or completely ignored by RichAC."

This is you, blatantly twisting, straw-manning and lying. Trying to turn my partial defense of your position into me claiming WoW only had macros to sell their mice ... ?

'RichAC': "I was being sarcastic, about you talking about macros are in wow because they want to sell their special mouse....lmao. Which was a totally out of touch clueless reply..."

and here again, repeating the lie to try and convince people it was true.

refer to previous statement...lol your in your own world man.

'RichAC': "Your buddy was talking about how he would be forced to pay for the game, or play with "*******" as he politely put it, if he cannot get xp/cbills for private matches. He also went on to state, that it would be boring to play with the same 4 mechs all the time......"

Yeah, not my buddy and not quite what he said but I'm not too concerned. We know you have trouble with reading comprehension.

sure bud..

RichAC': "Well the truth is, the game is free to play. And if he wanted to master more then 4 mechs, he would have to pay money anywas to get more mech bay slots.....which has nothing to do with private matches at all......rant over...lmao."

You're right, what you said definitely has nothing to do with Private Matches ... unless you consider that if Private Matches is all you play and said matches don't yield any rewards, you won't ever get any new mechs without using MC.

Oh well....

'RichAC': "Well, do you drop solo or with a premade all the time. I notice that when dropping solo, I will never see certain players in a match. Its just a fact."

I stopped dropping solo a long time ago. It's simply not fun to play a teamwork based game with people who can't work together. I will happily admit though, that is my preference.

Ya thats what I figured. Its very challenging to drop solo. Its also more challenging to play in a public queue, as opposed to a private match, for the same reasons, which you keep denying.

'RichAC': "His point was that he would quit the game, if he couldn't only play with friends and get xp and cbills. I said goodbye to him."

Oh I got that. The point you may have not gotten is your subtext of "Well you won't ever be able to play with your friends if I can help it so 'Goodbye', I won't miss you". It was uncalled for.

i never said or implied any such thing. Your trolling me very hard to try and make me the bad guy, Your whole goal is to try and get me banned I guess. But your the only one that looks bad friend.

'RichAC': "Of course not, I've also included UNSPORTLIKE behavior. Because when they demand they get cbills and xp the same as everyone else participating with the community, it does...And when you guys start defending ways to exploit the game, or try to determine to what degree certain exploits negatively affect the community, as if it matters, its extremely unsportlike."

Wanting progression for playing in your preferred game mode is not unsportsmanlike.

You need to divorce yourself from this thinking that not playing public is not playing with the community. They are playing with the community, they are just not playing your preferred game mode.

Nobody is defending exploiting the game. Myself, I am admitting exploitation happens whether you want it to or not. The public queue is proof enough of that. I just want to quantify what said exploitation is likely to be if abused and if it falls within tolerance levels. Despite your personal belief, tolerance levels can be above 0 and have the game remain in a healthy state.

It does matter. You will have people who will exploit no matter what you do. You cannot eliminate it and if you try, you will doom yourself to failure. You can however constrain it and ensure that it doesn't negatively impact anyone else. At the end of it all, if they cannot negatively impact anyone else (including yourself) why are you so concerned that bad actors exist?

Again, I don't know how you don't understand rewarding an exploitable match is unsportlike.

They are not playing with the community, they are playing with themselves.

Well, since you keep wanting to talk about what cheats are more likely to be exploited, private matches will be way more exploited successfully then sync dropping.

And unlike sync dropping we can totally eliminate exploitation in private matches. Exploitation alone is not the only reason why private matches should not be rewarded. The other is so people fill a playerbase in the public game modes and PGI stays in business.

RichAC': "Nobody is talking abolishing private matches.....I don't what logic your referring to.... We know 100% for a fact private matches can be exploited.'

Ok, since you want to be literal, let me restate the assertion:

Yeah, CAN. We have a strong suspicion that there is room for exploitation but people exploit the Random Public Queue now. If we apply the same logic, should we abolish the reward system in the public queue because people exploit sync dropping?

Firstly, there is no strong suspicion, it is 100% a common sense fact that private matches can be exploited. Secondly, since you like to keep talking about how exploitable something is, it is much easy to exploit the game in a private match then it is to sync drop. Thirdly, unlike syncdropping, exploiting matches can be totally eliminated. Fourthly, of course we still need a game mode with rewards..... A ridiculous question......

'RichAC': "But you bring up a good point, the excuse many have for sync dropping is "to play with friends" what people like you and ice serpent and phoenix admit and confirm, that is not what its about at all. Its about exploiting the game, and some people will still be doing this even with private matches."

Look, I'm being nice here so how about you engage some grey matter?

Just because some people can and will exploit for personal reward doesn't mean everyone does.

Action is not evidence of motivation!

IceSerpent and myself do not admit or confirm your delusional belief that all sync droppers are just in it for the C-Bills and pug stompers. Stop trying to use me as a claim for that. I've never said it and you can't me on it.

Then what is the debate about? If its only about "playing with friends" what is the problem with not rewarding private matches?

RichAC': "Also unlike the exploits possible in private matches. There is really nothing that PGI can do to stop sync dropping. An ELO helps a bit, a bigger community can also help. But the the only thing that would deter sync dropping, is a community that is vocal against it."

Yes, there are ways of opposing sync dropping. Not the scope of this discussion but yes, fixable. It is worth the effort to stop it? Doubtful. This is your big killer here, impact vs resource cost to remedy.

The Matchmaker is completely and utterly broken.

Being vocal would do nothing. Leaving in droves would. it is my opinion that PGI listens to their wallet.

Really? I'm all ears? How can we stop it?

And So I guess you answered your own question here then. As to why we would stop private match exploitation, but not rewards for public community matches.

I disagree the matchmaker is broken, There are lower brackets I will never play in, but on the same token, because the ELO gap is wide, there are players i play with that are out of my league. But I don't complain when i lose a couple matches.....eventually it all evens out.

Being vocal against unsportlike play, is why the LoL community has made their game so popular. The more players...the more money for PGI's wallet... I'm sure they don't want to have a game, only a couple rich guys play. I'm sure they want a game that is respected and played by millions.

[RichAC]

Nightfire, on 21 February 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

nice, this is what we call, "quoting out of context". It's another logical fallacy.

I never admitted that this game is designed around the game mode we have now, the Public Random Queue. Quoting me out of context and then shifting your position doesn't make you right.
I'm trying real hard here to be nice and deal only with your arguments since this is your thread but really, you are displaying the worst of behavior.

It doesn't matter what mode their game it is based around, It sure isn't private matches lol Their game is based on their reward system. And there you go again, hoping everyone thinks I'm the bad guy.

Quote

Actually, while I did suggest you take a poll, this isn't what I was suggesting but as I said, I'll give you props for trying.


It's a microcosm, you can't say it's accurate. 60 people is hardly a "3rd person view response".
Why even bring up CW? Private Matches and CW have nothing to do with each other! Do you imagine CW do be some new Random Elo Queue? If so, someone is insane. Ok seriously, how can you possibly compare CW and Private Matches? I'm really curious now as to how you think these things are going to work and how they could even compete with each other.

Rewards that carry over, definitely affect each other... as other posters have already said.

Quote

Who said these were examples of fairness or exploitation? These were examples of the devs changing their minds on things they said would never ever happen. Core design pillars they were called.

Thats exactly my point they don't have to do with exploitation.

Quote

Where you evade by relying on a somewhat literal interpretation? I stand by the statement that the position that Private Matches should not have rewards can be used to justify the removal of rewards from the Public Random Queues because they are currently being exploited.





Do you somehow think that people in Private Matches are going to start playing and have an Atlas by the end of the day? Seriously, quantify your position instead of resorting to implied hyperbole.

One exploitation can be stopped, the other one can't as far as I know.... theres the difference.

Yes people in private matches can an atlas at the end of the day...lol

Quote

No, they wouldn't because Elo would be, should be completely unaffected by playing in Private Matches! Elo has no place in Private Matches and any Wins/Losses should not be calculated into Elo. This is a null point and you should drop it. You only use it to distract.





So what? If they had played in the Random Public Queue, they would have unlocked modules. Or do you mean the ability of the player in which case not only will Elo correct for that, it is the same impact as someone starting of with natural talent. the effect on others is not earth shattering.

Rewards should also have no place in a private match.

Not earth shattering, but unnecessarily affected none the less.

Quote

Self selection is no grounds for refusing rewards. Exploitation, if it can be shown to be destabilizing, is a reason. Your love affair with Elo and instance that it is the only means of play with any value is elitist. The only reason the Elo system exists is not so you can have rewards, it was because people were complaining about getting stomped in the public queue over and over again.We had rewards long before we had an Elo system. In my opinion, it is absolutely necessary to have some sort of matchmaking system when you are creating games from random pools. This is to preserve the game experience, not to make sure you struggle for your rewards. Elo has no place in a Private Match and this has nothing to do with the reward system.

To make sure you struggle? haha, Its making sure everyone has a fair chance man.

Quote

'RichAC': "Soon they will get private matches, and they can play with everyone they want '



No they won't. As it stands, they still won't be able to play the game with their friends and progress. They are getting this elsewhere and enjoying it. Here is the major pit fall. There were many team players who wanted to play with their friends (more than 4 of them) and progress in the game. They could not do that and they still will not be able to do that. PGI has failed on this front. If Private Matches yielded rewards for progress, they will have actually fulfilled a promise they made long ago.

'RichAC': "The game is already based around their reward system."

The reward system is far from complete and I don't see how you connect this with CW?

So again , its not about playing with friends. Its about getting easy rewards with minimal effort and challenge...

Quote

'RichAC': "All crimes are crimes, All cheats are cheats, why try to bring up the differences between them in this discussion, if not to condone one more then the other?"



I actually brought this up to demonstrate that once can have knowledge of a subject and talk about a subject without condoning a subject. You've run with this way too far in a direction that the analogy was never meant to demonstrate. However, since you want to keep this going: Not all crimes are prosecuted if it isn't worth the effort and they have minimal impact on society. Likewise, you can choose to do nothing about an exploit if they have no significant impact on the game. Or are you saying we should shoot people on the street for littering?

of course thats not what I'm saying haha. And so what are you saying? Its ok to exploit a private match, because the affect on other players is deemed minimal to you? Not rewarding private matches, is not something that would take alot of resources to implement....So by your own logic there should be no debate about it..

Quote

'RichAC': "But sportsmanship this is the key understanding you personally lack! I think maybe like Joseph, you only have "gamesmanship"'



True to form, you attack the person and not the argument. These are the sorts of touches that demonstrate you have no real intellectual substance to your position, you just want to sling barbs and distract from the curtain you hide behind. This quote demonstrates how unqualified you are to talk about sportsmanship.

well, you know the saying, if it walks like a duck....

Edited by RichAC, 21 February 2014 - 01:49 PM.

[RichAC]

Ransack, on 21 February 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

Currently in open drops, winner get the bigger share of the prize. In this Winning team gets ALL of the prize
Currently, no one has a stake, so are free to do curious things. In this everyone has a stake, it would minimize the Rambo complex.
I don't see what the problem would be since, The Law and 10SR have been here since closed beta, so I seriously doubt that CBills or XP would really be an issue ever. None of what we earn, lose or exchange would affect anyone else. Sure the system would be gameable by those desperate enough to find a way. But in truth, what in this isn't gameable by those desperate enough?

Personally I don't see how a winner take all rumble would be worse than a swarm of ECM lights running for a quick cap on a turret-less assault map.


Oh well, it's nice to dream

IF you were to earn cbills and xp in a private match, of course it would be unfair to everyone, would affect public community matches if they were carried over.


I see nothing wrong with wagering cbills if you want..... But only if they were earned in a ranked game mode..... Or if they were separate currency and not counted towards anything in the mech lab.

I know for sure you of all people, would not want this in assault mode as it is now. though...haha. Especially if your playing against a competitive team who only cares about winning

But if you want to do this in a private match, and pick your opponents, and set the gamemode and rules...sure why not? You set a certain ante for everybody, sounds like a cool idea for fun, as long as it doesn't carry over. Otherwise it can be exploited.

Edited by RichAC, 21 February 2014 - 02:19 PM.

[OldCowboy]

Having an atlas at the end of the day? A full day if hard grinding in public matches and this could be done. If I was able to earn money in private matches I could easily exploit this and have my atlas by breakfest.

Damage is not the only way to get cbills. You could do this running the timer out in just a few matches using the tag assist narc assist spotter assist ect. It's bad enough to say this couldn't be exploited "that bad" when u think about how uber it would be.

If I was able to exploit like this and somehow managed to earn a friend.... :'( ....well me and that friend would abuse the system all weekend and have enough cbills and mastered mechs to well...well we would have enough mechs to take on the clans ourselves!

And I can't remember who said(and I'm paraphrasing) "yeah but even with earning all that stuff fast with my friend, it wouldn't make him a better player." No it won't make him a better player, it's a damn money cheat code in a game where u are expected to grind for it or put some cash up for it. Might make him an unskilled noob in an atlas but we already have those. And those guys paid for their stuff with honost effort.(unless they paid for it and don't earn their own money).

Now I'm getting out of this rediculously trolly thread. I've yet to see one fair and valid reason for someone to be able to earn anything usefull other than practice and play with friends from private matches. If someone wants to drop 1000 private matches for a cockpit item resembling private parts, sure, give it to them. But that's it.

[Ransack]

RichAC, on 21 February 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

IF you were to earn cbills and xp in a private match, of course it would be unfair to everyone, would affect public community matches if they were carried over.

And with the losers not getting anything, it evens out.

Quote

I see nothing wrong with wagering cbills if you want..... But only if they were earned in a ranked game mode..... Or if they were separate currency and not counted towards anything in the mech lab.

Why not? People that DC, suicide farm, die in 10 seconds, hide and wait for savior kills, get to keep their Cbills and XP. They risk losing nothing, so jump from mech to mech. But you know this already.

Quote

I know for sure you of all people, would not want this in assault mode as it is now. though...haha. Especially if your playing against a competitive team who only cares about winning

Yes I would. My base would never be undefended. Different tactics for different situations

Quote

But if you want to do this in a private match, and pick your opponents, and set the gamemode and rules...sure why not? You set a certain ante for everybody, sounds like a cool idea for fun, as long as it doesn't carry over. Otherwise it can be exploited.

I could write a very long list of the currently exploitable things in this game. It is what it is. Question though, why should people who want to play competitively without the unknown factors of an open queue not be able to advance?

But you've already won. Paul has said it not gonna happen, Joe and I were discussing an idea as a possibility for this "E-sport". Carry on.

[RichAC]

Ransack, on 21 February 2014 - 03:39 PM, said:

And with the losers not getting anything, it evens out.



Why not? People that DC, suicide farm, die in 10 seconds, hide and wait for savior kills, get to keep their Cbills and XP. They risk losing nothing, so jump from mech to mech. But you know this already.

I guess you just don't understand how exploitable a private match is, or maybe its your lack of understanding about human nature.... and suicide farm, hide and wait for savior kills? what? You sound like one of those guys that think a k/d ratio doesn't mean anything, because "anyone can steal a kill" lmao...

As far as people that D/C. Noone is going to get an "atlas by breakfast" that way , as the previous poster described . Which is why you rarely ever see it happen, its fruitless. Most D/C's are actually connection/pc problems. I'm sure its happened to all of us at one point. Playing on a unit on teamspeak, I'm sure you see it happen constantly....

Unlike how private matches will be exploited by everyone, like You and Joe are already discussing doing in this thread! lmao.

And i think its shame that people like you, have ruined this community by begging PGI to ruin the spirit of competition by diminishing win bonuses. When instead they could just easily not reward win bonuses to those who have a disconnection next to their name. It would change the popularity of this game tremendously! IMO, I think this reward system needs to be revamped.

Can you imagine if in sports like football or soccer, for example. Or hockey since its the winter olympics..... Where Noone wanted to play positions, because they claimed it was boring if they weren't getting the glory for scoring a goal? Or better yet, if all they wanted to do was tackle people, because they found it boring to score the goal? haha.

Even though pro athletes get paid on their personal stats, most of them still care more about winning. This has bothered me since I started playing this game. It really takes the motivation away, and I still find it suspicious most of the server is still against completing objectives for a fast win, after PGI has given guys against that skirmish mode!

Quote

Yes I would. My base would never be undefended. Different tactics for different situations

So you can defend after all, so it never had anything to with fast cap wins at all then.... which you could stop if you were actually playing to win, according to you here..... This has always been my point.

Quote

I could write a very long list of the currently exploitable things in this game. It is what it is. Question though, why should people who want to play competitively without the unknown factors of an open queue not be able to advance?

without? or do you mean with? Well there is competitive matches, and then there are competitive game modes. The most competitive game mode is 12 mans obviously. The most sponsored pro game, League of Legends, I don't believe anyone gets in-game money to buy characters and attribute boosts, not even xp and such based on points in a match or even for winning. They only get xp based strictly on time played alone....

Private matches would address the issue of unknown factors.

Quote

But you've already won. Paul has said it not gonna happen, Joe and I were discussing an idea as a possibility for this "E-sport". Carry on.

For it to carry on, it would need to be the same way the most popular e-sport of all time carried on. Thats still the most popular fps on the pc after almost 20 years. That game counterstrike, that Phoenix delusionally played on planet mars, where he thinks he leveled and got xp and rewards for playing in private matches..lol.

But what made that game popular, is in house competitions that sprouted into leagues. I see nothing wrong with that, and I am excited about private matches for that reason alone. Hopefully there will be less sync droppers. Hopefully these guys that want that camraderie, will have some and start playing tourneys with their friends. Communities can make their own rankings for each unit etc, keep their own stats.....or play against anyone they want. This is how counterstrike started.

This is also what makes leagues of legends popular. And no matter what game mode, these guys are only playing for the glory, for bragging rights, and FOR STATS.

But to ensure that people keep playing the other game modes, so the general playerbase will always have people to play with, and PGI stays in business, and the matchmaker that some sore losers think is broken doesn't get further undermined, and to be fair to other players, who in a sense would be penalized for not being part of some clique, Private matches should not be a way to earn any cbills or xp. Period.

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 12:57 AM.

[Nightfire]

RichAC, on 21 February 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

Even I can't follow who said what in your posts anymore man. I'm sure your "audience" can't either.

Fine, let me break it down into simple pieces then:

This is what you said:

RichAC': "Not condone cheating and critically cheating? did you mean criticize? Thats just it, he wasn't criticizing any of it. Like you, by trying to determine how much it would actually affect the community, he is trying to find excuses to condone it.... With crimes, That would only be true, if you in fact were to admit the action is a crime in the first place...."

This is what I said:

'Nightfire': "You got me, I left out a word. Let me restate it for you:

It is not and that is blatantly dishonest. One can not be a cheater, not condone cheating and still be able to critically analyze cheating and its various forms. We do this with crimes, yet anyone who looks at one crime being worse than another crime is not judged as a criminal or defending crime.

If you want me to extend my point, people commit crimes everyday. Even you commit multiple crimes everyday. You aren't arrested for them because they are minor, don't affect anyone and they aren't worth enforcing. (I wish I could find the example where he broke the tax seal on a pack of cigarettes) The impact on society at large is considered. The same could be considered here.

How badly can players actually exploit this private game mode?

how much effort would it be to stop them?

What advantages would there be if we included it in an exploitable way?

What impact is there on other players?

If there is any impact on other players, how can we minimise it?"

'RichAC': "But what are you saying here? That some crimes are ok to commit? Its not a crime if you don't get caught? huh?"

You want to use the crime analogy, let's do it! If Joseph pulled out a gun and put a bullet in your skull, would that be a crime? While you may jump to the conclusion that, obviously it would be, there is no doubt the reality is that if the US Government declared you a Terrorist and Joseph, as an ex-serviceman, was recalled to terminate you it wouldn't be a crime.

The point is the actions we do and don't consider crimes are only crimes because the Governing body deems them as such for the harmony of society.

Another example before I get to the game. If someone takes a naked picture of an underage girl and distributes it they are guilty of production and distribution of child pornography. Your 0 tolerance approach deems that this person is a criminal and should be sent straight to jail. This law exists for the protection of minors. The fact that this person is the same underage girl and the person she sent the picture to is her underage boyfriend would suddenly put a new light on the situation in that by enforcing that law, society would be victimizing the very people the law was designed to protect.

The law is often unenforced because to do so is more effort and causes more harm to society than to do otherwise.

So here are two examples of how what you might think is black and white, really isn't. Laws are supposed to bring cohesiveness to society. If something outrages someone but in reality has little impact on society, the Governing body is more likely to tell the outraged person to get over themselves and move on than change all of society to suit one individual.

So, how this relates to MWO:

• As you discovered with Macros, what you consider cheating isn't unless MWO says it is. I'll get back to this as it ties everything up.
  
• If the Private matches are exploitable but not significantly enough to impact the economy and has no impact on the player-base at large, PGI are quite justified in just saying "we're fine with this".
  
• If PGI have no problem with it, then it is no longer cheating. Just like Macros.

'RichAC': "And the only one criticizing cheating here is me, you and phoenix are tying to minimize how malicious or effective different methods of cheating are. I not only find that suspicous, it has no bearing with me. being unsportlike is unsportlike."

Look, I've tried to be nice but you cannot debate like an adult so I'll treat you like a child.

• Ok, I'm talking about Critical thinking, you are latching on to the word "critical" and seeing criticize. They are not the same thing. If you had any sort of decent education you would have been taught critical thinking and why the assumptions you make have lead people in the past to mistakes like "The world is flat".
  
• Find it suspicious all you want. The fact that innocent people can question and challenge the veracity of things are why your country has The Right to free speech and The Right to not bear witness against yourself. Additionally your legal system has a required component called "mens rea", you would know it as 'motive'. This must be proven along with the criminal act for a conviction. For some crimes it is not just enough you broke the law, you needed to intend to do so. So cast aspersions as much as you like, my simply having an education or questioning the validity of a position is not evidence of my being a cheat or exploiter.
  
• Questioning the validity of rules is not unsportsmanlike behavior. Insulting your opponents instead of addressing their arguments is.

Quote

Nightfire': "I did, just because you hitting the button doesn't include where I quoted doesn't mean you get to play cute and deny it happened.

Would you like it in my italics mode so you can follow it?

This was the challenge IceSerpent put forward that you failed to meet."

'IceSerpent': "Name one. Post a link to any game that provides instructions on how to use hardware macros for a specific (make and model - wise) gaming device, instead of just instructions on how to create in-game macros if such are available."

'Nightfire': "This is me partially defending your position that there is indeed one company that indeed does provide said support but only because they sell the hardware."

'RichAC': "That was never my position. and Exactly what I thought you were saying. Once again my friend, macros are not an in game option in WoW so they can try to sell their mouse. Think about why that makes no sense..."

Actually, your position was that PGI should have instructions and tutorials on every device that could be used with the game. IceSerpent said it was impractical (it is) and that no company provided support for hardware. You did make that assertion, do I need to quote you on that? I'm doing an awful lot of quoting of things you keep saying you never said. Have you not realised by now that I can just go back and find these?

Now stop saying I said that because I never did. You can't quote me where I said it. You made it up!

Quote

'Nightfire': "Conflation again of built in and supplied, language interpreter with macro support with macro support with PGI's failure to support external 3rd party products supplied and supported by said 3rd party. The supplied page (I looked myself) doesn't make any mention of hardware though it should be mentioned that through SteelSeries, Blizzard does make, distribute and support their own hardware. (WoW Mouse)

Again, the concept of supply and ownership is either lost or completely ignored by RichAC."

'Nightfire': "This is you, blatantly twisting, straw-manning and lying. Trying to turn my partial defense of your position into me claiming WoW only had macros to sell their mice ... ?"

'RichAC': "I was being sarcastic, about you talking about macros are in wow because they want to sell their special mouse....lmao. Which was a totally out of touch clueless reply..."

'Nightfire': "and here again, repeating the lie to try and convince people it was true."

refer to previous statement...lol your in your own world man.

So I show how you lie, deceive, insult and straw-man with your own quotes and you deny it?

What, someone else wrote those things? My linking to your exact posts where you twist and distort is what? Me altering your words?

All I have to say is DARVO. DENY you said those things. ATTACK my mental state, inferring I'm delusional and REVERSE who is the VICTIM of your deceit and make me out to be the OFFENDER.

I have never, ever, ever said that WoW put macros in their games just so they can sell their mice. That is your delusion that you cling to. It somehow gives you assurance to think that you're right.

'RichAC': "Your buddy was talking about how he would be forced to pay for the game, or play with "*******" as he politely put it, if he cannot get xp/cbills for private matches. He also went on to state, that it would be boring to play with the same 4 mechs all the time......"

'Nightfire': "Yeah, not my buddy and not quite what he said but I'm not too concerned. We know you have trouble with reading comprehension."

'RichAC': "sure bud.."

What? That he's not my buddy or that you don't have problems with reading comprehension? I'd like to point out three separate people now have pointed out your inability to comprehend what they've said. Either you have a problem with reading comprehension or you deliberately choose misconstrue people's words just to manipulate these conversations when you have nothing to back your arguments. So which is it?

Quote

RichAC': "Well the truth is, the game is free to play. And if he wanted to master more then 4 mechs, he would have to pay money anywas to get more mech bay slots.....which has nothing to do with private matches at all......rant over...lmao."

'Nightfire': "You're right, what you said definitely has nothing to do with Private Matches ... unless you consider that if Private Matches is all you play and said matches don't yield any rewards, you won't ever get any new mechs without using MC."

Oh well....

See, your entire lack of empathy here is very telling. You won't even engage the discussion because ... exploitation. You're quite happy for Private Matches to have no rewards because you want people who would enjoy that mode better to suffer more so you can preserve your experience in the Public Drop Queue. It's not that you have some actual reason here, you have a motivation. That motive being, Private Matches must be as minimal an impact on the Public Drop Queue as possible so as to preserve your experience. This is all about you and your Public Drop Experience. Nothing else. Your unwillingness to explore any issue surrounding Private Matches and your callousness to anyone who has an opposing view shows this to me.

Quote

'RichAC': "Well, do you drop solo or with a premade all the time. I notice that when dropping solo, I will never see certain players in a match. Its just a fact."

'Nightfire': "I stopped dropping solo a long time ago. It's simply not fun to play a teamwork based game with people who can't work together. I will happily admit though, that is my preference."

Ya thats what I figured. Its very challenging to drop solo. Its also more challenging to play in a public queue, as opposed to a private match, for the same reasons, which you keep denying.

You know, I figured you for a solo dropper too with how badly you despise and insult pre-made groups and sync-droppers. You impugn their motivations based on how they impact your experience. You cannot empathise with them at all and as such can only project your own feelings on to them. Your lack of empathy also fits in with how I've profiled you.

Quote

'RichAC': "His point was that he would quit the game, if he couldn't only play with friends and get xp and cbills. I said goodbye to him."

'Nightfire': "Oh I got that. The point you may have not gotten is your subtext of "Well you won't ever be able to play with your friends if I can help it so 'Goodbye', I won't miss you". It was uncalled for."

i never said or implied any such thing. Your trolling me very hard to try and make me the bad guy, Your whole goal is to try and get me banned I guess. But your the only one that looks bad friend.

You're right, you never said it. You're wrong if you never implied it, that's why I said subtext. You may say you didn't mean to imply that but you did. Go on, ask PhoenixFire55 what he thought you meant by it. See if he didn't get that implication from what you said.

Quote

'RichAC': "Of course not, I've also included UNSPORTLIKE behavior. Because when they demand they get cbills and xp the same as everyone else participating with the community, it does...And when you guys start defending ways to exploit the game, or try to determine to what degree certain exploits negatively affect the community, as if it matters, its extremely unsportlike."

'Nightfire': "Wanting progression for playing in your preferred game mode is not unsportsmanlike.

You need to divorce yourself from this thinking that not playing public is not playing with the community. They are playing with the community, they are just not playing your preferred game mode.

Nobody is defending exploiting the game. Myself, I am admitting exploitation happens whether you want it to or not. The public queue is proof enough of that. I just want to quantify what said exploitation is likely to be if abused and if it falls within tolerance levels. Despite your personal belief, tolerance levels can be above 0 and have the game remain in a healthy state.

It does matter. You will have people who will exploit no matter what you do. You cannot eliminate it and if you try, you will doom yourself to failure. You can however constrain it and ensure that it doesn't negatively impact anyone else. At the end of it all, if they cannot negatively impact anyone else (including yourself) why are you so concerned that bad actors exist?"

Again, I don't know how you don't understand rewarding an exploitable match is unsportlike.

Let's go over this again:

• sportsmanship is how you conduct yourself, setting the rules of the game requires a more mature approach rather than "This good, that bad!". The overarching concern should be if the game experience remains good for all concerned rather than if some moral concept someone might hold is breached.
  
• You assume that all Private Matches will be played by exploiters. This is a false assumption.
  
• If you don't want to reward an exploitable game mode because it is unsportsmanlike, why are you not demanding rewards be pulled from the Public Random Queue because of Sync-Droppers? If you can't stop people exploiting Private Matches, they shouldn't get rewards, right? So since PGI can't stop Sync-Droppers (according to your own claim), all rewards should be pulled from the Public Random Queue, right?
  
• You are willing to apply this rigid morality in circumstances that benefit you but not when it threatens your own positions.

'RichAC': "They are not playing with the community, they are playing with themselves."

They would be playing with the community just fine. Your problem is that they would not be using the Random Matchmaker which means, if it was popular, it would impact your preferred game experience. You would have to make friends or, worse, have some social skills where you don't insult people because in self selected groups, they can choose to reject you.

'RichAC': "Well, since you keep wanting to talk about what cheats are more likely to be exploited, private matches will be way more exploited successfully then sync dropping.

And unlike sync dropping we can totally eliminate exploitation in private matches. Exploitation alone is not the only reason why private matches should not be rewarded. The other is so people fill a player-base in the public game modes and PGI stays in business."

• You assume Private Matches will be more exploited than sync-dropping. Since we don't have Private Matches yet, we can't know that. If you want to look for evidence, the current state of 12 mans actually suggests otherwise.
  
• If we eliminate exploitation in Private Matches by removing the rewards, we should eliminate Sync-Dropping by removing the rewards from the Public Random Queue.
  
• The general public could partake in Private Matches if done right. You have this fixation that if people flock to Private Matches then PGI will go out of business. There is no connection between those two states.

Quote

RichAC': "Nobody is talking abolishing private matches.....I don't what logic your referring to.... We know 100% for a fact private matches can be exploited."

'Nightfire': "Ok, since you want to be literal, let me restate the assertion:

Yeah, CAN. We have a strong suspicion that there is room for exploitation but people exploit the Random Public Queue now. If we apply the same logic, should we abolish the reward system in the public queue because people exploit sync dropping?"

Firstly, there is no strong suspicion, it is 100% a common sense fact that private matches can be exploited. Secondly, since you like to keep talking about how exploitable something is, it is much easy to exploit the game in a private match then it is to sync drop. Thirdly, unlike syncdropping, exploiting matches can be totally eliminated. Fourthly, of course we still need a game mode with rewards..... A ridiculous question......

See, this is where if you had of had an education you would see the pitfall that thinking leads to. Given the history of private matches elsewhere I would say that a healthy suspicion is warranted however until we see exactly what form Private Matches will take and exactly how we can exploit them, we don't know. We can only suspect. Your "common sense" may tell you that the likelihood is high but since there are examples of private matches that aren't exploitable, you can't KNOW. You may even turn out to be correct, that doesn't mean you knew, you strongly suspected based on past experience. These words have meanings and the distinction between them is important.

Quote

'RichAC': "But you bring up a good point, the excuse many have for sync dropping is "to play with friends" what people like you and ice serpent and phoenix admit and confirm, that is not what its about at all. Its about exploiting the game, and some people will still be doing this even with private matches."

'Nightfire': "Look, I'm being nice here so how about you engage some grey matter?

Just because some people can and will exploit for personal reward doesn't mean everyone does.

Action is not evidence of motivation!

IceSerpent and myself do not admit or confirm your delusional belief that all sync droppers are just in it for the C-Bills and pug stompers. Stop trying to use me as a claim for that. I've never said it and you can't me on it."

Then what is the debate about? If its only about "playing with friends" what is the problem with not rewarding private matches?

Again, you insist that you can either play with friends or play for progression. You insist that these be mutually exclusive positions. Do you not have friends? Is that why it would be unfair? Is that why you insist everyone be forced to play with you?

Quote

RichAC': "Also unlike the exploits possible in private matches. There is really nothing that PGI can do to stop sync dropping. An ELO helps a bit, a bigger community can also help. But the the only thing that would deter sync dropping, is a community that is vocal against it."

'Nightfire': "Yes, there are ways of opposing sync dropping. Not the scope of this discussion but yes, fixable. It is worth the effort to stop it? Doubtful. This is your big killer here, impact vs resource cost to remedy.

The Matchmaker is completely and utterly broken.

Being vocal would do nothing. Leaving in droves would. it is my opinion that PGI listens to their wallet."

Really? I'm all ears? How can we stop it?

It would actually take some significant effort but it is possible. The easiest way would be simply to stop fighting the behavior and embrace it so you can control it. Allow larger groups and then adjust the matchmaker to compensate. There are others but that was a bone just so we can say I addressed the point. It isn't really relevant to this discussion on Private Matches so I think it should just stop here.

'RichAC': "And So I guess you answered your own question here then. As to why we would stop private match exploitation, but not rewards for public community matches."

• As usual you either miss the point or deliberately misconstrue the point so you don't have to invalidate your position. Let me do that for you.
  
• If it is too much effort to stop people exploiting in Private Matches, we should remove the rewards.
  
• If it is too much effort to stop people exploiting (Sync Dropping) in Random Public Queue, we should remove the rewards.

'RichAC': "I disagree the matchmaker is broken, There are lower brackets I will never play in, but on the same token, because the ELO gap is wide, there are players i play with that are out of my league. But I don't complain when i lose a couple matches.....eventually it all evens out."

You can disagree all you like but many people think the Matchmaker is broken. The games it sets up are just not fun for a lot of people and when a GAME is not FUN, it has a problem. What this has to do with Private Matches is that if people can make matches that are fun for them without engaging the Matchmaker then the attrition from MWO could help be stemmed. By forcing people to only progress in a mode they don't enjoy won't keep them here. Removing rewards and progression from a mode that would make it more fun, won't keep them here. Your desire to keep people from leaving your desired game mode to support your game experience is just a way to ensure those people on the verge of leaving, do.

'RichAC': "Being vocal against unsportlike play, is why the LoL community has made their game so popular. The more players...the more money for PGI's wallet... I'm sure they don't want to have a game, only a couple rich guys play. I'm sure they want a game that is respected and played by millions."

This entire point is invalid. You are not qualified to talk about sportsmanlike behavior in any way. You talking about sportsmanship is like a serial killer espousing the virtues of law enforcement.

[RichAC]

@Nightfire, I don't see you keeping points anymore in your posts?

Heres mine.....61-8 lol

and Dev Paul also agreed.

Your replies with quotes upon quotes upon quotes are to spammy and hard to read, and I'm tired of trying to quote them. You want to compete on who can post the most, when i just want to post about competing in the game.... You win, Your the super champion troll of all forum trolls. Go have a cookie. But I'll still be posting on these forums.

and Your pretty delusional if you think I rigged this vote, or if you think they would ever change their mind about letting people exploit what they base their game on. Avoiding the grind would lose them money period.

Oh, and You absolutely have no sportsmanship, or no understanding of human nature, if you think private matches should be rewarded in the first place.

Re-read my previous reply to Ransack and quote that post if you want. I'm not going to reply to the same things over and over again, when your trying to bait me and only making yourself look like the bad guy.

I gave an in depth explanation of what makes an e-sport, and why counterstrike and LoL are the most popular ones of all time....and the most popular games on PC even to date. More so then RPG's. And how private matches are great thing for this community, even without xp and cbills.

Yes this is an E-Sport, any PVP game is, and should be treated like one. Its not the COOP RPG PVE MMO you wanted, its a PVP first person arena shooter. I think PGI has made the right moves. Deal with it. or like I said to phoenix /goodbye

Because inferiority complexes, who selfishly want to exploit the game or drive new players away, because they are sore losers, resent the game development, or want to feel some cliquish sense of superiority or ownership over the rest of society, is not good for any sport...

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 01:40 AM.

[Nightfire]

RichAC, on 22 February 2014 - 01:12 AM, said:

@Nightfire, I don't see you keeping points anymore in your posts?

Heres mine.....61-8 lol

That is not an argument, that is a deflection, an appeal to authority.
I agree, you have a good number of people agreeing in a flawed poll you made but you have not engaged on any point.
I'm not keeping points because:

• I'm attempting to be nice in your thread
  
• Do you really want me to keep count of how may times you Deceive, Lie, Use Logical Fallacies, Misrepresent, Insult and outright Libel? It doesn't make you look good when I do.

Quote

and Dev Paul also agreed.

Paul has revealed that their position matches yours. Go ahead and ask him to read this thread and then state that he wants to associate himself with your position. Additionally I'll predict that if Paul ever disagrees with you he will plummet from your saint to the devil himself. Just a prediction.

Quote

Your replies with quotes upon quotes upon quotes are to spammy and hard to read, and I'm tired of trying to quote them. You want to compete on who can post the most, when i just want to post about competing in the game.... You win, Your the super champion troll of all forum trolls. Go have a cookie. But I'll still be posting on these forums.

• So I quote you and show, step by step, how you lie and twist and argue in bad faith and your response is to dismiss it because there is too much to go through? What, there is too much of your own words showing you for a bad actor that the only option you have now is to pretend that it doesn't exist?
  
• I have put forward a premise and while you have responded you have failed to put forward any real debate on the issue. I've tried, multiple times, to redirect the conversation back to the original topic but you do insist on your diversionary comments. I respond to your comments, you're competing. I'm looking for an intellectual, reasoned argument on the issue.
  
• sorry but you're the troll here. I engaged the discussions, you insult your opponents. That is not something I think the moderators should allow. That is poor oversight on their part.
  
• I'm sure you'll keep posting, it's in your nature.

Quote

and Your pretty delusional if you think I rigged this vote, or if you think they would ever change their mind about letting people exploit what they base their game on. Avoiding the grind would lose them money period.p

Seriously, can you really not see how badly you have set your poll up? You essentially state that you either agree with Ranking AND rewards being either allowed or denied. There is never, ever anyone who could possibly think that Ranking should not apply but rewards should in your mind? Can you honestly not see how that is a biased question? Here are some other common example of bad survey questions.

When are you going to stop beating your wife?
When did you last **** someone?

Do you see how that works? It's not honest and it is manipulative.

Quote

Oh, and You absolutely have no sportsmanship, or no understanding of human nature, if you think private matches should be rewarded in the first place.

Ok, let's see. If I don't think the way you do, I am insult one and insult two. Nice, attack the person not the argument. Can you not see why you are the very antithesis of what you claim to hold in such high regard?
Again, you are not qualified to comment on sportsmanship.

Quote

Re-read my previous reply to Ransack and quote that post if you want. I'm not going to reply to the same things over and over again, when your trying to bait me and only making yourself look like the bad guy.

• I've not baited you once. I've put forward some serious, logical and reasoned arguments. You have not engaged them, you have simply dismissed them.
  
• You can not reply if you wish but you have yet to actually put forward a reasoned argument for your position. Your argument is fundamentally, No because ... exploitation. If they play Private Matches they won't play the Public Random Queue and PGI will go bankrupt because ... challenge. Seriously, connect some dots without hiding behind deflections like "it's obvious" or "anyone with sportsmanship" and also try and do it by addressing the arguments and not by insulting the person behind them. Or is that too hard for you?

Quote

I gave an in depth explanation of what makes an e-sport, and why counterstrike and LoL are the most popular ones of all time....and the most popular games on PC even to date. More so then RPG's. And how private matches are great thing for this community, even without xp and cbills.

• Yeah, your explanation of what makes an E-Sport is a shallow armchair concept and completely overlooks the importance of the audience. I tried to explain that to you. You seem to think you are some expert in this field but you have yet to demonstrate that you've actually done anything in this area to justify this standing.
  
• Counterstrike, probably the most toxic of online communities, exists competitively because the rules are stable and easy for an audience to understand, it is exciting enough for an audience to engage in and still understand what is happening and finally, the source engine allows spectating without actually playing thus allowing for commentary. After all that, there is a governing body that over sees all of this.
  
• Look at any successful example of a professional game (that includes sports) and you will find the same elements every time:
  
  • Stability and simplicity of rules that an audience can follow.
    
  • Ability to spectate without participating in the game.
    
  • Commentary to add comprehension and context for an audience.
    
  • A governing body to ensure compliance with the rules.
• Your fixation on community is premature if you really want an E-Sport.

Quote

Yes this is an E-Sport, any PVP game is, and should be treated like one. Its not the COOP RPG PVE MMO you wanted, its a PVP first person arena shooter. I think PGI has made the right moves. Deal with it. or like I said to phoenix /goodbye

• It isn't an E-Sport but it could be one. I'm glad you finally recognized the difference between a sport and an E-Sport.
  
• Yeah, projection and othering. You devalue Co-op RPGs and thus you use it as a slur against others. (I might add, attacking the person and not the argument once more) What most of us want is CW which will have a persistent world to fight over. If you call that a Co-op RPG, feel free not to participate.
  
• Eh, It's a 1st person/3rd person Sim but let's not split hairs. It really doesn't matter what it's labeled.
  
• You and I can disagree on PGI's history. You're only claiming PGI "has made the right moves" because at the moment, you have an opinion from Paul that matches yours. As soon as PGI makes a decision that puts you at odds with them, they will be the worst people on earth.
  
• Deal with it? I have a free voice, what I consider to be a reasoned argument and I am free to put this forward for consideration. You don't get to silence me.
  
• You'll find it's a little harder to make me go away than by saying goodbye.

Quote

Because inferiority complexes, who selfishly want to exploit the game or drive new players away, because they are sore losers, resent the game development, or want to feel some cliquish sense of superiority or ownership over the rest of society, is not good for any sport...

So, insult my character, impugn selfishness and exploiting tendencies, insult, impugn, insult.
Can you even go one post without insulting the person?

Now, get this perfectly straight. One can question the reasoning behind a decision and wish to examine the alternatives others vehemently oppose. doing so doesn't make that person of lesser status/value and it doesn't make them guilty of that they wish to investigate.

[RichAC]

Nightfire, on 22 February 2014 - 04:02 AM, said:

That is not an argument, that is a deflection, an appeal to authority.
I agree, you have a good number of people agreeing in a flawed poll you made but you have not engaged on any point.
I'm not keeping points because:

• I'm attempting to be nice in your thread
  
• Do you really want me to keep count of how may times you Deceive, Lie, Use Logical Fallacies, Misrepresent, Insult and outright Libel? It doesn't make you look good when I do.

Paul has revealed that their position matches yours. Go ahead and ask him to read this thread and then state that he wants to associate himself with your position. Additionally I'll predict that if Paul ever disagrees with you he will plummet from your saint to the devil himself. Just a prediction.

nothing is flawed about it. its common sense. Now you want to make one of the Devs the subject of your debate? sigh....no tks. You can also have that one with yourself. He made a statement, we can assume thats all there is to it, and I'm sure he thinks we are both nuts.

Quote

• So I quote you and show, step by step, how you lie and twist and argue in bad faith and your response is to dismiss it because there is too much to go through? What, there is too much of your own words showing you for a bad actor that the only option you have now is to pretend that it doesn't exist?
  
• I have put forward a premise and while you have responded you have failed to put forward any real debate on the issue. I've tried, multiple times, to redirect the conversation back to the original topic but you do insist on your diversionary comments. I respond to your comments, you're competing. I'm looking for an intellectual, reasoned argument on the issue.
  
• sorry but you're the troll here. I engaged the discussions, you insult your opponents. That is not something I think the moderators should allow. That is poor oversight on their part.
  
• I'm sure you'll keep posting, it's in your nature.

Whats sad, is you come off more of a troll then me....

Quote

Seriously, can you really not see how badly you have set your poll up? You essentially state that you either agree with Ranking AND rewards being either allowed or denied. There is never, ever anyone who could possibly think that Ranking should not apply but rewards should in your mind? Can you honestly not see how that is a biased question? Here are some other common example of bad survey questions.

To me ranking and rewards go hand in hand. Its not a choice. If you have both, you can't omit one and not the other. Again showing your lack of sports sense.

Quote

When are you going to stop beating your wife?
When did you last **** someone?

Do you see how that works? It's not honest and it is manipulative.

... get help.

Quote

Ok, let's see. If I don't think the way you do, I am insult one and insult two. Nice, attack the person not the argument. Can you not see why you are the very antithesis of what you claim to hold in such high regard?


Again, you are not qualified to comment on sportsmanship.

• I've not baited you once. I've put forward some serious, logical and reasoned arguments. You have not engaged them, you have simply dismissed them.
  
• You can not reply if you wish but you have yet to actually put forward a reasoned argument for your position. Your argument is fundamentally, No because ... exploitation. If they play Private Matches they won't play the Public Random Queue and PGI will go bankrupt because ... challenge. Seriously, connect some dots without hiding behind deflections like "it's obvious" or "anyone with sportsmanship" and also try and do it by addressing the arguments and not by insulting the person behind them. Or is that too hard for you?

• Yeah, your explanation of what makes an E-Sport is a shallow armchair concept and completely overlooks the importance of the audience. I tried to explain that to you. You seem to think you are some expert in this field but you have yet to demonstrate that you've actually done anything in this area to justify this standing.
  
• Counterstrike, probably the most toxic of online communities, exists competitively because the rules are stable and easy for an audience to understand, it is exciting enough for an audience to engage in and still understand what is happening and finally, the source engine allows spectating without actually playing thus allowing for commentary. After all that, there is a governing body that over sees all of this.
  
• Look at any successful example of a professional game (that includes sports) and you will find the same elements every time:
  
  • Stability and simplicity of rules that an audience can follow.
    
  • Ability to spectate without participating in the game.
    
  • Commentary to add comprehension and context for an audience.
    
  • A governing body to ensure compliance with the rules.
• Your fixation on community is premature if you really want an E-Sport.

• It isn't an E-Sport but it could be one. I'm glad you finally recognized the difference between a sport and an E-Sport.
  
• Yeah, projection and othering. You devalue Co-op RPGs and thus you use it as a slur against others. (I might add, attacking the person and not the argument once more) What most of us want is CW which will have a persistent world to fight over. If you call that a Co-op RPG, feel free not to participate.
  
• Eh, It's a 1st person/3rd person Sim but let's not split hairs. It really doesn't matter what it's labeled.
  
• You and I can disagree on PGI's history. You're only claiming PGI "has made the right moves" because at the moment, you have an opinion from Paul that matches yours. As soon as PGI makes a decision that puts you at odds with them, they will be the worst people on earth.
  
• Deal with it? I have a free voice, what I consider to be a reasoned argument and I am free to put this forward for consideration. You don't get to silence me.
  
• You'll find it's a little harder to make me go away than by saying goodbye.

You crying about being insulted, and asking the same questions over and over again are getting boring. Its not a real debate. I've not only answered them, so have many other posters. Your the one avoiding the discussion. Try replying to my reply to ransack..... So we can stay on topic and not read about your constant tears.

You trolling me for the sake of trolling me, is not only disingenuous, Trying to minimize the maliciousness of different cheat and exploits is suspicious, and wanting to reward self selected matches is absolutely unsportsmanlike.

1. Exploitation is the only reason anyone needs. Comparing that to disconnecting in a pug, is utterly ridiculous for reasons i've explained to ransack. To expect PGI to monitor private matches, is also utterly ridiculous which I've explained to you over and over and over again.

2. CS community is the most toxic? You sound like one of those RPG carebears that dont' wants stats in a game, and don't like competitive game modes, because you think they attract arrogant and rude players. Which is why ESO might fail. Meanwhile, thats how i feel about arrogant rude computer nerds....lol Competitive game modes and stats have nothing to do with anything. Do you say the same thing about the Koreans who play LoL competitively? They are some of the nicest people. Naturally the more players you have, the more trolls there are, but I don't think counterstrike would have been as popular if it was even remotely as bad as you think. Welcome to the internet in genera Mr. computer guy! Get out your bubble and grow some thicker skin!

3. Your definition of an e-sport, is confused with being played professionally. These two things are mutually exclusive. Kids playing sports in the park, are playing just as much a sport as those played professionally on tv.

This game is absolutely an e-sport, and the only difference between this game and games like LoL or counterstrike, would be the community. Those who don't treat it like a sport or want to play it competitively.

4. Coop RPG's are not a competitive player verse player game....

5. I like PGI's move to make the game not pay to win, to not make a coop RPG, and their effort to balance things as good as anyone can.... not just their stance on self selected matches and rewards.

Quote

So, insult my character, impugn selfishness and exploiting tendencies, insult, impugn, insult.


Can you even go one post without insulting the person?

Now, get this perfectly straight. One can question the reasoning behind a decision and wish to examine the alternatives others vehemently oppose. doing so doesn't make that person of lesser status/value and it doesn't make them guilty of that they wish to investigate.

Again, your tears and what you imply about my character are getting old. Can you even go one post without complaining and referring to them? You are the one showing you can't handle staying on topic.

Someone like you will always complain about losing dude. The matchmaker will never satisfy you, your too emotional. You want rewards in private matches, for the same reasons you don't like dropping solo, and probably why you don't like dropping in 12 mans.....

Please quote my replies to ransack, so we have something more to discuss on topic.

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 05:11 AM.

[Nightfire]

RichAC, on 22 February 2014 - 04:18 AM, said:

nothing is flawed about it. its common sense.

Then you should have no problem explaining it, simply and step by step. Saying it is common sense is an evasion.
Don't say that you already have because you haven't. Do you actually think that Private Matches potentially being exploitable translates to new players being able to earn 20 million C-Bills in an afternoon?

Quote

Whats sad, is you come off more of a troll then me....

Perhaps to you but it's not what I see in other people's comments of me. I usually try to attack the argument instead of the person, it is a distinct and important difference.

Quote

To me ranking and rewards go hand in hand. Its not a choice. you can't omit one and not the other. Again showing your lack of sports sense.

• Ok, and I think we have something here. Elo isn't 'ranking' in the way you imply. It isn't a ladder you can climb, this isn't a competition. You don't know your Elo score, you can't compare it. It is not there to provide some public measure of who is better than who. In fact PGI hide this metric precisely so it isn't used in the way you are implying it should! It is there simply as a means of preserving game-play.
  
• You can omit Elo and have rewards. Single player games do it all the time. Now I know you are about to instantly come back and tell me this isn't a single player game and I know that but it remains a game. Games are for entertainment and it doesn't matter how entertaining matches are formed, all that matters is that it remains entertaining. You perform the actions, you should receive the rewards. This shouldn't the point of contention since we had the rewards long before we had the Elo matchmaker.
  
• The Elo Matchmaker didn't come in to make us earn our rewards. It came in solely as a means of preserving the experience of new players. That is Elo's only function, not a determine factor on if you are worthy of rewards. If you can replace that mechanism with something else, that is all that really should change. Rewards weren't tied to Elo before Elo existed, they aren't now. Elo just happens to simultaneously exist with rewards in the only game modes we have now. You are the one making a requirement that these be tied together. I think that if you play the game, you perform the actions that garner rewards the you should receive them. The presence or absence of the Public Random Queue is meaningless, the matchmaker is an attempt at preserving the game experience of players so they don't get frustrated and leave. Nothing more.
  
• What we should be discussing, and what I would like for you to address, is how badly do you think Private Matches could be exploited? Do you imagine players netting an extra 100 C-Bills over an Elo match or do you see them netting an extra 5 Million C-Bills? This does matter.

Quote

... get help.

• Really, you think that is disturbing? Do you think I am making this stuff up? Those questions come from actual surveys and are used as teaching tools of bad question design. You feel offended when you read those questions? You should and that was the point. They break the same rules your Poll question does.
  
• I wasn't lying when a 1st year post-grad could tell you the problem with that question. I tried to show you with simple examples but you chose to deflect those with implications on my mental health.
  
• So now either read about how what you did was an error in methodology, take my word for it or keep deflecting and telling everyone that there is nothing wrong with it.

Quote

You crying about being insulted, and asking the same questions over and over again are getting boring. Is not a real debate. I've not only answered them, so have many other posters. Try replying to reply to ransack..... So we can stay on topic and not read about your constant tears.

• If you can't address the argument and insist on attacking the person then you have no real argument and you lack any sense of sportsmanship.
  
• You're right, it's not a real debate. You won't engage the discussion. You only wish to dismiss it.
  
• No, you haven't answered them. Your "answers" consist of It's bad because ... exploiting. Also: "It doesn't matter how bad it can be exploited, the fact it can be exploited is enough and anyone with a sense of sportsmanship can see that". These are not answering my questions, it is dismissing them. It is essentially saying "You're wrong because I'm right".
  
• Seriously, insulting again? Are you incapable of not insulting someone?

Quote

Again, your tears and what you imply about my character are getting old. Someone like you will always complain about losing dude. The matchmaker will never satisfy you, your too emotional. You want rewards in private matches, for the same reasons you don't like dropping solo.....

• If you don't like being confronted with how you resort to insulting people when you can't defend your arguments, perhaps you should stop insulting people and address the arguments?
  
• So you insult me again in the same paragraph about how me pointing out you insult people is getting old?
  
• Ok, so if you are unsatisfied with the matchmaker, you are emotional? Seriously, I'm not the one insulting people. I'm not the one breaching forum rules here.
  
• That I want to play the game, the full game, with my friends? That would be correct. Let me make this clear though, you are not a superior person because you drop solo.

Quote

Please quote my replies to ransack, so we have something more to discuss on topic

Would you like me to insert my questions into that reply also?
Will you actually answer them if they are in a reply to a post you directed to someone else?

[RichAC]

Nightfire, on 22 February 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:

Then you should have no problem explaining it, simply and step by step. Saying it is common sense is an evasion.
Don't say that you already have because you haven't. Do you actually think that Private Matches potentially being exploitable translates to new players being able to earn 20 million C-Bills in an afternoon?

yes exactly. Or by breakfast as another poster explained. Try reading the thread sometimes, you know what they say about people who repeat themselves and expect different results....

Quote

Perhaps to you but it's not what I see in other people's comments of me. I usually try to attack the argument instead of the person, it is a distinct and important difference.

You already said, in the other thread, that you are "trolling me for personal reasons"....lol your a nutjob, but thats ok i like to debate things I'm passionate about....carry on...

Quote

1.Ok, and I think we have something here. Elo isn't 'ranking' in the way you imply. It isn't a ladder you can climb, this isn't a competition. You don't know your Elo score, you can't compare it. It is not there to provide some public measure of who is better than who. In fact PGI hide this metric precisely so it isn't used in the way you are implying it should! It is there simply as a means of preserving game-play.

2.You can omit Elo and have rewards. Single player games do it all the time. Now I know you are about to instantly come back and tell me this isn't a single player game and I know that but it remains a game. Games are for entertainment and it doesn't matter how entertaining matches are formed, all that matters is that it remains entertaining. You perform the actions, you should receive the rewards. This shouldn't the point of contention since we had the rewards long before we had the Elo matchmaker.

3.The Elo Matchmaker didn't come in to make us earn our rewards. It came in solely as a means of preserving the experience of new players. That is Elo's only function, not a determine factor on if you are worthy of rewards. If you can replace that mechanism with something else, that is all that really should change. Rewards weren't tied to Elo before Elo existed, they aren't now. Elo just happens to simultaneously exist with rewards in the only game modes we have now. You are the one making a requirement that these be tied together. I think that if you play the game, you perform the actions that garner rewards the you should receive them. The presence or absence of the Public Random Queue is meaningless, the matchmaker is an attempt at preserving the game experience of players so they don't get frustrated and leave. Nothing more.

4.What we should be discussing, and what I would like for you to address, is how badly do you think Private Matches could be exploited? Do you imagine players netting an extra 100 C-Bills over an Elo match or do you see them netting an extra 5 Million C-Bills? This does matter.

1. ranking, ratings....semantics...makes no difference to the point. both affect rewards and both can be exploited, or affected and should not carry over.

2. singleplayer games, have nothing to do with this discussion.

3. AN ELO is for fair and competitive matches, which of course, if you had any sportsmanship, you'd understand that also correlates into a fair chance for rewards.

4. How many times are you going to ask. how badly private matches can be exploited? 20,000 million cbills by breakfast dude. refer to the first statement, refer to my many posts explaining this or those of other posters.....its not even close to disconnecting farmers, who i have a hard time believing even exist in the first place!

Quote

• Really, you think that is disturbing? Do you think I am making this stuff up? Those questions come from actual surveys and are used as teaching tools of bad question design. You feel offended when you read those questions? You should and that was the point. They break the same rules your Poll question does.
  
• I wasn't lying when a 1st year post-grad could tell you the problem with that question. I tried to show you with simple examples but you chose to deflect those with implications on my mental health.
  
• So now either read about how what you did was an error in methodology, take my word for it or keep deflecting and telling everyone that there is nothing wrong with it.

get help

Quote

• If you can't address the argument and insist on attacking the person then you have no real argument and you lack any sense of sportsmanship.
  
• You're right, it's not a real debate. You won't engage the discussion. You only wish to dismiss it.
  
• No, you haven't answered them. Your "answers" consist of It's bad because ... exploiting. Also: "It doesn't matter how bad it can be exploited, the fact it can be exploited is enough and anyone with a sense of sportsmanship can see that". These are not answering my questions, it is dismissing them. It is essentially saying "You're wrong because I'm right".
  
• Seriously, insulting again? Are you incapable of not insulting someone?

• If you don't like being confronted with how you resort to insulting people when you can't defend your arguments, perhaps you should stop insulting people and address the arguments?
  
• So you insult me again in the same paragraph about how me pointing out you insult people is getting old?
  
• Ok, so if you are unsatisfied with the matchmaker, you are emotional? Seriously, I'm not the one insulting people. I'm not the one breaching forum rules here.
  
• That I want to play the game, the full game, with my friends? That would be correct. Let me make this clear though, you are not a superior person because you drop solo.

1. offtopic tears

2. offtopic tears

3. its exploitable, to want any further reasons, is suspicious.

4. off topic crying crying crying...offtopic.....wasted page space....im insutling, you hope i get banned, its why your trolling me for personal reasons...blahblahblah

lemme just skip to your last point. Noone is stoppinng you from playing with your friends. Form a 4 man or get those 30 guys syncdropping to form a 12 man. That is the whole point of Private Matches in the first place. But if you want to get rewarded in an easily exploitable game mode, because you don't like losing in 12 mans or random pugs......then Sorry, I dont think thats fair and apparenlty "playing with friends" is not really your issue.

Quote

Would you like me to insert my questions into that reply also?


Will you actually answer them if they are in a reply to a post you directed to someone else?

I guess it doesn't matter now Since i've replied to all your points in your last two posts.... I'm sure you will be asking the same questions over again, claiming i'm ignoring them and they were never addressed, and that I'm just insulting you and breaching the rules....

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 05:43 AM.

[Nightfire]

Seems you went back and added some more! Let's address those points also.

RichAC, on 22 February 2014 - 04:18 AM, said:

nothing is flawed about it. its common sense. Now you want to make one of the Devs the subject of your debate? sigh....no tks. You can also have that one with yourself. He made a statement, we can assume thats all there is to it, and I'm sure he thinks we are both nuts.

• Then defend your position and do it by actually addressing the argument and without resorting to insulting the person.
  
• Actually, I was making an inference to how you behave and if anyone really would like to associate themselves with you.
  
• He did, I would like to know his reasoning behind it and present my position to him. He knows what they actually have in mind and I want to understand. You simply want to point to his statement and claim victory.
  
• He probably does think we're both nuts but I stand by my conduct in this thread.

Quote

You crying about being insulted, and asking the same questions over and over again are getting boring.

I know I've answered this but if you don't want me to point out every time you resort to insulting people instead of addressing the discussion, stop doing it. It's that simple.

Quote

You trolling me for the sake of trolling me, is not only disingenuous, Trying to minimize the maliciousness of different cheat and exploits is suspicious, and wanting to reward self selected matches is absolutely unsportsmanlike.

Prove where I have once trolled you in this thread! Show where I am not addressing the issues! If I've been disingenuous, you should be able to show it easily.
You have yet to prove the premise of "wanting to reward self selected matches is absolutely unsportsmanlike". What tenet of sportsmanship does it break. Don't deflect but saying "it's obvious", "if you can't see how" or something similar. Find the tenet it breaks and say why!

Quote

1. Exploitation is the only reason anyone needs. Comparing that to disconnecting in a pug, is utterly ridiculous for reasons i've explained to ransack. To expect PGI to monitor private matches, is also utterly ridiculous which I've explained to you over and over and over again.

• I've never compared it to disconnecting in a PUG, it has never been my position. However if you want to apply your rigid logic that since the Public Random Queue can be exploited, the degree is irrelevant, then you should be for rewards being removed from the Public Random Queue immediately! Remember, how badly the system can be exploited doesn't matter, only that it can be! If the exploit cannot be prevented, that is only reason for removal! These have been your position on Private Matches.
  
• PGI monitoring matches ... they already do. They already have tools to mine this data. They will keep stats on Private Matches also for reasons beyond just looking for exploitation. Claim it's ridiculous that PGI would ever do this but, they already do and will continue to do so in the new game mode. Tell me over and over and over again. Perhaps you should tell PGI that they really aren't keeping this data like they told us they were?

Quote

2. CS community is the most toxic? You sound like one of those RPG carebears that dont' wants stats in a game, and don't like competitive game modes, because you think they attract arrogant and rude players. Which is why ESO might fail. Meanwhile, thats how i feel about arrogant rude computer nerds....lol Competitive game modes and stats have nothing to do with anything. Do you say the same thing about the Koreans who play LoL competitively? They are some of the nicest people. Naturally the more players you have, the more trolls there are, but I don't think counterstrike would have been as popular if it was even remotely as bad as you think. Welcome to the internet in genera Mr. computer guy! Get out your bubble and grow some thicker skin!

• Yes, the CS community is toxic. It is well known for being so. It has always been that way as far back as I can remember and I was part of it.
  
• Yeah, insulting me again. Imply I'm against keeping stats and I don't like competitive play. All of which is wrong obviously but that's ok, go right ahead. I'm sure it makes you feel better.
  
• Arrogant and rude is pretty much the definition of a toxic community. I'm not sure what you are trying to gain here.
  
• As long as there is an audience and stable rules, professional CS will remain.
  
• "arrogant rude computer nerds", you really should stop labeling entire groups of people in language that you mean to be derogatory.
  
• You're pulling out competitive game modes and stats, not me. Make a point with them or let them go.
  
• Why draw the Koreans into this? What have they got to do with Private Matches in MWO? I know they're nice people, I've said nothing against them at all. This is all you.
  
• Counterstrike is popular because they cover the fundamental basics in regard to the audience. The same with Starcraft. How bad the community is is largely irrelevant to the fan watching a match with commentary.
  
• I've been on the Internet probably longer than you. I've been a part of the CS community in the past for a considerable amount of time. I've also grown beyond thinking that my opponents ideas are my opponent. I know what it means when people resort to attacking the person instead of the argument.

Allow me to quote the MWO Forum code of conduct:

MWO Code of Conduct said:

Harassing or Defamatory

This category includes both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which:

Insultingly refer to other characters, players, Piranha Games Inc. employees, or groups of people

Besides that attacking the idea and not the person being a mature and sportsmanlike thing to do, I'm also following the MWO forum rules.

Quote

3. Your definition of an e-sport, is confused with being played professionally. These two things are mutually exclusive. Kids playing sports in the park, are playing just as much a sport as those played professionally on tv.

Mutually exclusive? Really? So you cannot play a sport professionally because as soon as it becomes professional, it's not a sport? huh?
Look, you keep bringing up kids down the park and it really is nothing to do with this. If you want to use the E-Sport label to define MWO, go right ahead. I'm going to continue to refer to it as a game. You may think that by doing so I insult MWO, so be it. You'll just have to learn to deal with that.

Quote

This game is absolutely an e-sport, and the only difference between this game and games like LoL or counterstrike, would be the community. Those who don't treat it like a sport or want to play it competitively.

Yeah, you have no clue. When you begin to understand the importance of the audience, then we can discuss this. Back to Private Matches perhaps?

Quote

4. Coop RPG's are not a competitive player verse player game....

So? That's not why you use the term. You use the term as an insult because you don't like Co-op RPGs.

Quote

5. I like PGI's move to make the game not pay to win, to not make a coop RPG, and their effort to balance things as good as anyone can.... not just their stance on self selected matches and rewards.

Pay to Win and Co-op RPGs are not even related topics. Why would you even tie them together?

'RichAC': "Again, your tears and what you imply about my character are getting old. Can you even go one post without complaining and referring to them? You are the one showing you can't handle staying on topic."

Again, if you don't want to see them, don't insult people! Simple!

[RichAC]

Nightfire, on 22 February 2014 - 05:54 AM, said:

Seems you went back and added some more! Let's address those points also.

• Then defend your position and do it by actually addressing the argument and without resorting to insulting the person.
  
• Actually, I was making an inference to how you behave and if anyone really would like to associate themselves with you.
  
• He did, I would like to know his reasoning behind it and present my position to him. He knows what they actually have in mind and I want to understand. You simply want to point to his statement and claim victory.
  
• He probably does think we're both nuts but I stand by my conduct in this thread.

1. Yep you basically confirmed the last statement in my previous post.. with the first statement of yours! lol .claiming i'm not addressing the argument when me and many posters already have. Again, its really suspicious, you don't think the fact its extremely EXPLOITABLE< is reason enough that addresses it

2. offtopic crying.

3. His reasoning behind it, is the same as everybody elses....you know the one you keep claiming noone addressses...the reason he stated himself

4. offtopic

Quote

I know I've answered this but if you don't want me to point out every time you resort to insulting people instead of addressing the discussion, stop doing it. It's that simple.

offtopic tears....

Quote

Prove where I have once trolled you in this thread! Show where I am not addressing the issues! If I've been disingenuous, you should be able to show it easily.
You have yet to prove the premise of "wanting to reward self selected matches is absolutely unsportsmanlike". What tenet of sportsmanship does it break. Don't deflect but saying "it's obvious", "if you can't see how" or something similar. Find the tenet it breaks and say why!

• I've never compared it to disconnecting in a PUG, it has never been my position. However if you want to apply your rigid logic that since the Public Random Queue can be exploited, the degree is irrelevant, then you should be for rewards being removed from the Public Random Queue immediately! Remember, how badly the system can be exploited doesn't matter, only that it can be! If the exploit cannot be prevented, that is only reason for removal! These have been your position on Private Matches.
  
• PGI monitoring matches ... they already do. They already have tools to mine this data. They will keep stats on Private Matches also for reasons beyond just looking for exploitation. Claim it's ridiculous that PGI would ever do this but, they already do and will continue to do so in the new game mode. Tell me over and over and over again. Perhaps you should tell PGI that they really aren't keeping this data like they told us they were?

I refered to your comment about "trolling me for personal reasons" in the other thread. one can assume the same in this thread but, but its ok. carry on....

rewarding self selecting the matches the same as everyone else. is unfair period. Which is unsportlike. re-read this whole thread for the many reasons why....sigh...

1. You sure have compared it to disconnecting in a pug. You have constantly referred to the fact that a pug is exploitable, as an excuse to allow rewards in private matches.

2. I have explained time and time again, that someone stat padding is up to too much interpretation. Humans have streaks and slumps, this is not something that can be calculated. There is a chance that innocent people would get banned, so it is not something I expect PGI to do. Especially when we can just avoid the problem, by not rewarding private matches to begin with....which besides stat padding and sand bagging, is unfair if even not intentional....

Quote

• Yes, the CS community is toxic. It is well known for being so. It has always been that way as far back as I can remember and I was part of it.
  
• Yeah, insulting me again. Imply I'm against keeping stats and I don't like competitive play. All of which is wrong obviously but that's ok, go right ahead. I'm sure it makes you feel better.
  
• Arrogant and rude is pretty much the definition of a toxic community. I'm not sure what you are trying to gain here.
  
• As long as there is an audience and stable rules, professional CS will remain.
  
• "arrogant rude computer nerds", you really should stop labeling entire groups of people in language that you mean to be derogatory.
  
• You're pulling out competitive game modes and stats, not me. Make a point with them or let them go.
  
• Why draw the Koreans into this? What have they got to do with Private Matches in MWO? I know they're nice people, I've said nothing against them at all. This is all you.
  
• Counterstrike is popular because they cover the fundamental basics in regard to the audience. The same with Starcraft. How bad the community is is largely irrelevant to the fan watching a match with commentary.
  
• I've been on the Internet probably longer than you. I've been a part of the CS community in the past for a considerable amount of time. I've also grown beyond thinking that my opponents ideas are my opponent. I know what it means when people resort to attacking the person instead of the argument.

1. The internet is toxic in general. CS is a hugley popular game, the more people you have playing a game, granted, the more troll syou have. But to say that game is somehow more toxic then any other of its size is not true. Or that the majority of players is toxic is also absurd, because if that was true, it would not be as popular as it is in the first place....

2. crying...

3. I'm explaining to you, that stats and competitive game modes, are not what breeds a rude community. This is a carebear myth.

4. Being a professional game is not the debate here, and if it was the toxic community you imply it is, it would not be professional at all.

5. No different then you labeling counterstrike the same.

6. I'm explaining further, how stats and competitive game modes, have nothing to do with arrogant rude players...

7. The point has been made...

8. A community is everything. Noone wants to play with a bunch of jerks. And noone wants to sponsor them either. If Michael Jordan was an arrogant rude *****, he never would of got sponsored. The audience and fans would have no respect for them. Look what happen to tiger woods for cheating on his wife....He lost alot of endorsements...Public Image is very crucial.

9. And I bet you whined and cried about losing in that game too....

Quote

Allow me to quote the MWO Forum code of conduct:

Besides that attacking the idea and not the person being a mature and sportsmanlike thing to do, I'm also following the MWO forum rules.

Mutually exclusive? Really? So you cannot play a sport professionally because as soon as it becomes professional, it's not a sport? huh?
Look, you keep bringing up kids down the park and it really is nothing to do with this. If you want to use the E-Sport label to define MWO, go right ahead. I'm going to continue to refer to it as a game. You may think that by doing so I insult MWO, so be it. You'll just have to learn to deal with that.

On the contrary, what you were implying, is that if a sport is not professional its not a sport. Which is absurd. kids in the park, confirm otherwise. You do insult MWO. I think, like Joseph, you have little respect for video gamers in general.

Quote

Yeah, you have no clue. When you begin to understand the importance of the audience, then we can discuss this. Back to Private Matches perhaps?

Once again, an audience, or fan base, are only important for the game to go pro. Kids in the park, yes i said it again, kids in the park, do not need an audience, to play a "sport" "competitively". An audience is not nescessary for anything to be considered a sport. MWO does not need a fan base or "audience" that doesn't play the game, to give it any legitimacy.

Quote

So? That's not why you use the term. You use the term as an insult because you don't like Co-op RPGs.

Pay to Win and Co-op RPGs are not even related topics. Why would you even tie them together?

'RichAC': "Again, your tears and what you imply about my character are getting old. Can you even go one post without complaining and referring to them? You are the one showing you can't handle staying on topic."

Again, if you don't want to see them, don't insult people! Simple!

who said I dont like coop RPG's? I just don't consider them competitive sports, which i prefer more... I tied them together, because it was a reply about development decisions I liked about PGI and MWO. I'm glad they decided to not include either of those aspects in their game...

It is not my intention to make you cry. I'm not the one "trolling you for personal reasons" I just want to see pc gaming popular and respected, like any athletic sport or board game respected by society. Anonymity is not the only issue, the first step is admitting they are no different.

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 07:06 AM.

[Nightfire]

RichAC, on 22 February 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

yes exactly. Or by breakfast as another poster explained. Try reading the thread sometimes, you know what they say about people who repeat themselves and expect different results....

• I've summarized your position which amounts to:
  
  • "No rewards for Private matches because they are exploitable. It doesn't matter how much they are exploitable, the fact that they are is reason enough to remove rewards from Private matches"
• Have I got that about right? If so, that isn't a defense. It isn't an explanation. Ultimately, that same reasoning could be applied to ALL of MWO's game modes and the removal of rewards.
  
• I have read them, I don't think you actually read mine.
  
• Yeah, I know. It's insanity to think you'll actually present a reasoned argument.

Quote

You already said, in the other thread, that you are "trolling me for personal reasons"....lol your a nutjob, but thats ok i like to debate things I'm passionate about....carry on...

That is not actually what I said but I forgive you for thinking it is trolling. I said that you (demonstrably) lie, deceive, twist, straw-man, present poor reasoning, insult and generally argue in bad faith and I would tear down any of these actions of yours in other threads I encountered you in. That's not trolling. If you post in a mature fashion and behave like a moral person, you wouldn't have any of these problems.

Quote

1. ranking, ratings....semantics...makes no difference to the point. both affect rewards and both can be exploited, or affected and should not carry over.

Your Elo rating has no effect on your rewards. You don't get higher rewards for scaling up in Elo. In fact Elo, properly implemented in this case, would actually try and keep your earnings particularly average and steady.

Quote

2. single player games, have nothing to do with this discussion.

See, I told you that you'd do this! And yes, they do. It all comes back to game design theory.

Quote

3. AN ELO is for fair and competitive matches, which of course, if you had any sportsmanship, you'd understand that also correlates into a fair chance for rewards.

Yeah, insults on my character again. I've never disputed that Elo's use is for balancing teams. You seem to dispute that there is any other means of creating matches that is valid.

Quote

4. How many times are you going to ask. how badly private matches can be exploited? 20,000 million cbills by breakfast dude. refer to the first statement, refer to my many posts explaining this or those of other posters.....its not even close to disconnecting farmers, who i have a hard time believing even exist in the first place!

Actually, this is the first time you have quantified it. "20,000 million by breakfast" shows that you have no real thought on the subject, simply that you think it is bad and shouldn't happen. I've never mentioned disconnecting farmers which while they do exist, I really am not concerned about simply because they aren't getting much out of it in comparison to if they actually played. I'd be more concerned in that case about the bad effect they have on the rest of the team. It is obvious that you won't engage the discussion. You know? That whole impact on society bit.

Quote

get help

Ok, seriously. You think research methodologies are a psychological disturbance?
Do you even have any idea of what I'm talking about?

Quote

1. offtopic tears

2. offtopic tears

3. its exploitable, to want any further reasons, is suspicious.

4. off topic crying crying crying...offtopic.....wasted page space....im insutling, you hope i get banned, its why your trolling me for personal reasons...blahblahblah

• If you don't want to hear about how your only recourse is to insult people, stop doing it.
  
• If you don't want to engage in a debate, don't put your ideas up for discussion.
  
• Argument of "It's exploitable and that's all needs to be known" followed with implication that anyone who would want to understand this any deeper should be viewed with suspicion. Silencing tactic.
  
• If you don't want to hear about how your only recourse is to insult people, stop doing it.

Quote

lemme just skip to your last point. Noone is stoppinng you from playing with your friends. Form a 4 man or get those 30 guys syncdropping to form a 12 man. That is the whole point of Private Matches in the first place. But if you want to get rewarded in an easily exploitable game mode, because you don't like losing in 12 mans or random pugs......then Sorry, I dont think thats fair and apparenlty "playing with friends" is not really your issue.

I guess it doesn't matter now Since i've replied to all your points in your last two posts.... I'm sure you will be asking the same questions over again, claiming i'm ignoring them and they were never addressed, and that I'm just insulting you and breaching the rules....

• What if I want to drop with 5, or 6, or even 7 friends? You always conveniently skip those options.
  
• You have this problem with some group of 30 people syncdropping. Take it up with those 30 people. They aren't me, they aren't any of the people I know who have syncdropped. Stop projecting what you feel about those 30 people to every player you have issue with.
  
• Again, you tacitly pit Progression against playing with (more than 4) friends. I feel there should be an avenue for progression that you can play with (more than 4) of your friends.
  
• Impugn on my character and motives again because I would like a game mode that allows both progression AND playing with (more than 4) friends.
  
• If you don't want me to call you out when you throw insults, don't do it. It isn't hard to act mature.
  
• You've actually quantified something now but your claim of "20,000 million cbills by breakfast dude" is so obscene to be hyperbole. Yes, think down this path but do it with some reason. There just isn't enough points to exploit in the matches you could play in an hour to come close to that. So how about you reason about how bad these modes could actually be exploited? What would it require? One team comprising of all Atlas's? One team member doing all the damage? Do you not think one person stripping every part of 12 Atlas's wouldn't be noticed by PGI's tools? Seriously, shoot down my premise without resorting to "because ... exploiting"
  
• By insulting the people who disagree with you on these forums, yeah, you are breaching the code of conduct. The fact that you continue to do it after I have pointed out that you do it and you've been asked to stop doing shows willful disregard of the forum rules.

[Joseph Mallan]

RichAC, on 21 February 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

IF you were to earn cbills and xp in a private match, of course it would be unfair to everyone, would affect public community matches if they were carried over.


I see nothing wrong with wagering cbills if you want..... But only if they were earned in a ranked game mode..... Or if they were separate currency and not counted towards anything in the mech lab.

I know for sure you of all people, would not want this in assault mode as it is now. though...haha. Especially if your playing against a competitive team who only cares about winning

But if you want to do this in a private match, and pick your opponents, and set the gamemode and rules...sure why not? You set a certain ante for everybody, sounds like a cool idea for fun, as long as it doesn't carry over. Otherwise it can be exploited.

No more unfair than dropping $15 and have an Atlas in minutes. So f I can buy a Mech instantly with money, Why would a unit not be able to buy a member equipment that helps the unit as a whole? What I am reading is simple Jealousy.

Nobody will buy you a New Mech so Teams cannot do what teams do best. Work together. And as I say, If the Law is wiling and able to collect $500+ to buy me a computer that can actually play MW:O, A merc command should be able to pool their resources. I'll even go so far as to say that if you earn a place in a Canon House unit, you should be able to ad a new Mech/equipment to your stock pile for free. As the government provides all required equipment to its soldiers. It should be a perk that comes with LP purchases.

Also why's the game gotta be ranked for DHB and Murphy's to wager 50K C-bills on a match they wanna have? Isn't that the reason to have private matches? So long as the match does not change the face of the CW game directly... What happens on Solaris stays on Solaris.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 February 2014 - 07:17 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ransack, on 21 February 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

Currently in open drops, winner get the bigger share of the prize. In this Winning team gets ALL of the prize
Currently, no one has a stake, so are free to do curious things. In this everyone has a stake, it would minimize the Rambo complex.
I don't see what the problem would be since, The Law and 10SR have been here since closed beta, so I seriously doubt that CBills or XP would really be an issue ever. None of what we earn, lose or exchange would affect anyone else. Sure the system would be gameable by those desperate enough to find a way. But in truth, what in this isn't gameable by those desperate enough?

Personally I don't see how a winner take all rumble would be worse than a swarm of ECM lights running for a quick cap on a turret-less assault map.


Oh well, it's nice to dream

I thought the idea of a private match was so 10th SR an Murphy's could get together and fight a 12 on 12 Macth with whatever rules WE choose?

Murphy's as a whole is not hurting, I do not treat MW:O like Pokemon so I don't have one of every Mech. I mastered quite a few. Many back when I was spending $15 a week. I'd buy 3 spiders, Convert XP of my D-DC and master them in less than 15 minutes. Sell em and repeat. I have wasted tons of cash (in game and real) Buying paint and Camo, and eliting mechs I didn't keep. Now that I have it out of my system I need to find the right Battlemaster, get it to master and allow my (F)Atlas to gather dust. Having Solaris betting on Private matches could be gamed. If someone else does it... Shame on them. I won't Thats all I care about.

[Joseph Mallan]

Darklord, on 21 February 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

If i may use the military as an example here.

When training for tanks do you get paid extra in the training mission for killing the pixel tanks or what you get out of it is a better
understanding of your equipment?
So for me to become the M J of the tank world i need to learn more in the simulators before I hit the battle field and then apply what i learned there to gain real experience.

The private matches should be for training,if you want XP and Cbills wait for them to put in the Solaris arenas.

I agree with some of the thinking you have. However, Do your checks get docked while you are training in a Tank? And You train to learn the new tactics and formations so that when you hit the firing line you know the movements by rote. You have the experience of your training.

Also, when Deployed somewhere "dangerous" do you still get Hazardous Duty Pay? Something I got while Deployed Overseas. So I was paid even more to train while in a supposedly dangerous environment.

Training matchs give you the experience to to know How to use speed tweak, Heat reduction and other Player Perks that can then be Applied on the field.

Simply put, If I can take 280K XP off an Atlas and use it to master multiple Mechs how is that any different than training in Private matchs? I still play the game, I get actual game time experience, and then use it to win or lose depending on how well trained you are.

[RichAC]

Nightfire, on 22 February 2014 - 06:52 AM, said:

• I've summarized your position which amounts to:
  
  • "No rewards for Private matches because they are exploitable. It doesn't matter how much they are exploitable, the fact that they are is reason enough to remove rewards from Private matches"
• Have I got that about right? If so, that isn't a defense. It isn't an explanation. Ultimately, that same reasoning could be applied to ALL of MWO's game modes and the removal of rewards.
  
• I have read them, I don't think you actually read mine.
  
• Yeah, I know. It's insanity to think you'll actually present a reasoned argument.

1. Yes the fact its exploitable is all the explanation PGI needs to give you. But because you have insisted, You have been told repeatedly, time and time again, by me and a couple other posters, it could mean 20mil cbills by breakfast. It is way more exploitable then pugs, by an extreme margine, way more then disconnecting farmers which i've told ransack, which imo, don't even exist, or any other exploit in the game, by an absurd amount.....




2. offtopic crying...

Quote

That is not actually what I said but I forgive you for thinking it is trolling. I said that you (demonstrably) lie, deceive, twist, straw-man, present poor reasoning, insult and generally argue in bad faith and I would tear down any of these actions of yours in other threads I encountered you in. That's not trolling. If you post in a mature fashion and behave like a moral person, you wouldn't have any of these problems.

offtopic cries....

Quote

Your Elo rating has no effect on your rewards. You don't get higher rewards for scaling up in Elo. In fact Elo, properly implemented in this case, would actually try and keep your earnings particularly average and steady.

You answered your own question, so in fact, they do affect each other....

Quote

See, I told you that you'd do this! And yes, they do. It all comes back to game design theory.

Singleplayer games have nothing to do with this discussion.....we are debating fair play in a game where players verse each other...

Quote

Yeah, insults on my character again. I've never disputed that Elo's use is for balancing teams. You seem to dispute that there is any other means of creating matches that is valid.

I think you need to fix your grammar here because I don't understand. Is it just more cries? what do you mean by valid? Do you mean rewardable? not easily exploitable? fair to the rest of the community?

Quote

Actually, this is the first time you have quantified it. "20,000 million by breakfast" shows that you have no real thought on the subject, simply that you think it is bad and shouldn't happen. I've never mentioned disconnecting farmers which while they do exist, I really am not concerned about simply because they aren't getting much out of it in comparison to if they actually played. I'd be more concerned in that case about the bad effect they have on the rest of the team. It is obvious that you won't engage the discussion. You know? That whole impact on society bit.

in other words no answer I give to you matters.... Again, trying to determine how much of an impact exploitation has on the game, or to minimize its malicousness, to compare it to how some crimes are not worth prosecuting, is extremely suspicious....

Quote

Ok, seriously. You think research methodologies are a psychological disturbance?
Do you even have any idea of what I'm talking about?

• If you don't want to hear about how your only recourse is to insult people, stop doing it.
  
• If you don't want to engage in a debate, don't put your ideas up for discussion.
  
• Argument of "It's exploitable and that's all needs to be known" followed with implication that anyone who would want to understand this any deeper should be viewed with suspicion. Silencing tactic.
  
• If you don't want to hear about how your only recourse is to insult people, stop doing it.

1. crying...

2. more offtopic crying....

3. Yes, its easily exploitable, thats all that needs to be known. To search for futher clarication, is indeed suspect. Again by that same logic, anything I say can be viewed as a "silencing tactic" by you.....

Quote

• What if I want to drop with 5, or 6, or even 7 friends? You always conveniently skip those options.
  
• You have this problem with some group of 30 people syncdropping. Take it up with those 30 people. They aren't me, they aren't any of the people I know who have syncdropped. Stop projecting what you feel about those 30 people to every player you have issue with.
  
• Again, you tacitly pit Progression against playing with (more than 4) friends. I feel there should be an avenue for progression that you can play with (more than 4) of your friends.
  
• Impugn on my character and motives again because I would like a game mode that allows both progression AND playing with (more than 4) friends.
  
• If you don't want me to call you out when you throw insults, don't do it. It isn't hard to act mature.
  
• You've actually quantified something now but your claim of "20,000 million cbills by breakfast dude" is so obscene to be hyperbole. Yes, think down this path but do it with some reason. There just isn't enough points to exploit in the matches you could play in an hour to come close to that. So how about you reason about how bad these modes could actually be exploited? What would it require? One team comprising of all Atlas's? One team member doing all the damage? Do you not think one person stripping every part of 12 Atlas's wouldn't be noticed by PGI's tools? Seriously, shoot down my premise without resorting to "because ... exploiting"
  
• By insulting the people who disagree with you on these forums, yeah, you are breaching the code of conduct. The fact that you continue to do it after I have pointed out that you do it and you've been asked to stop doing shows willful disregard of the forum rules.

1. I keep answering, if you want to play with 7 friends, you can do that in a private match supposedly. But the issue to you is easy rewards, not playing with your friends obviously.

2. 30 people syncdropping is common in most units/companies or teamspeak hubs. which server do you belong to?

3. Can't get it both ways...sorry bud.

4. There is one, its called 12 man.

5. offtopic crying...

6. I'm sorry you don't believe it. Its actually not even an exaggeration...There are many ways they could do this. They could just keep ending matches quickly as one poster explained. Alot kids, especially in MMOs, and f2p's also do something called multiboxing. They can fill a server.....and let only one account do all the dmg. I mean I don't understand whats so hard to believe. Im glad you finally acknowledged this answer to your question though. Which you kept asking over and over again.....even when getting the same reply over and over agian lol

7. Oh I see, you keep asking the same question over and over in each post. Till you finally come up with a reply. Assuming PGI even has a such a tool designed for this, or that they have the time to implement one The problem with this is, where exactly do they draw the line? As I keep saying, humans have streaks and slumps, is your suggestion to only catch a few of the obvious cheaters? And let the rest slip through the cracks? Eventually most of this is up to interpretation and is very hard to prove. Are you going back to your premise of, well those crimes aren't as malicious or effective as other ones, so those are ok? Again where do you draw the line? Even though we can stop them, we will let them slide? Or they should risk banning innocent players?

I will also go back to my premise again, that even if not intentional malice, rewarding private matches is unfair to those who have to work for rewards, yes in a more challenging environment, in the pugs.

You have already admitted yourself that "ELO would actually try and keep your earnings particularly average and steady." and you also have admitted ELO does not belong in a private match.....

And unlike how Joseph feels, lone wolf players should not be penalized for not being part of some clique to get easier rewards, I don't think that should be considered their own fault or a requirement.

8. offtopic crying.... I'm insulting, you wish i was banned already, blahblahblah

Edited by RichAC, 22 February 2014 - 08:28 AM.