1126 replies to this topic

[Craig Steele]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 04:44 PM, said:

[Citation needed]

Nope, being a paying customer who made purchases under, lets say, less than ingenuous, assurances does.

I ignored the rest because I've found that I can pretty much skip to your last couple sentences to get your gist and the rest is just bullshit while trying to sound like you know what your talking about.

Small wonder then you constantly mis represent and don't understand.

Probably you should "Learn to Read" / "Learn to Forum" before you start typing next time.

Oh wait, I guess if all you want to do is argue then reading and comprehension is optional, you can just keep repeating the same rubbish over and over spinning wheels and going no where.

[Roadbeer]

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:49 PM, said:

Small wonder then you constantly mis represent and don't understand.

Probably you should "Learn to Read" / "Learn to Forum" before you start typing next time.

Oh wait, I guess if all you want to do is argue then reading and comprehension is optional, you can just keep repeating the same rubbish over and over spinning wheels and going no where.

Nah brah,
It's just that your words aren't worth reading, blah, blah, blah, blah...you do go on, don't you? IIRC, you're the one doing all the arguing, no matter how many people tell you you're wrong.

[Deathlike]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 04:48 PM, said:

it was extended to 10P Pacific

Edit:
Yup
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3321434

Excellent. I hope Heffay takes the time to L2L (Learn 2 Lobby).

[Craig Steele]

Roland, on 24 April 2014 - 04:46 PM, said:

Heffay doesn't have any knowledge of the system.

But you should be able to lay out the sequence of steps that must be taken to play a match with 5 other friends using the new system. You claim it can be done, so just lay out how the players would go about doing it.

No special knowledge is required. Just explain the process by which a player would do it, to the best of your understanding.

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

Couldn't really say, don't have Heffays apparent knowledge on the system.

All I know is that they said it is a function of the Launch Module due on 29th (I'm sure you can read the official blurb as well as I can). I'll try it when it gets here and let you know.

Is no one reading anything today?

[Roadbeer]

Deathlike, on 24 April 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:

Excellent. I hope Heffay takes the time to L2L (Learn 2 Lobby).

I lol'd

[Deathlike]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

I lol'd

This is a pre-patch day test, so... what we see now (bugs and all) will be seen on Tuesday.

[Craig Steele]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:

Nah brah,
It's just that your words aren't worth reading, blah, blah, blah, blah...you do go on, don't you? IIRC, you're the one doing all the arguing, no matter how many people tell you you're wrong.

Keep patting yourself on the back then Roadbeer, posting for likes is your thing so you are all about drafting stuff that's "worth reading".

I'm still waiting for someone to get past telling me I am wrong and actually show me that I am. A point of distinction that is pretty important to me.

For example, you can't argue with anything I just put down can you. Cause it is actually correct.

[Roadbeer]

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

Couldn't really say, don't have Heffays apparent knowledge on the system.

All I know is that they said it is a function of the Launch Module due on 29th (I'm sure you can read the official blurb as well as I can). I'll try it when it gets here and let you know.

You can try it right now, it's on test.
God forbid you actually use a function to know what you're talking about.
Us, we've already played with it and know EXACTLY how it works, what it does and does not do. you know... actually experience the system.

[Deathlike]

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:53 PM, said:

Keep patting yourself on the back then Roadbeer, posting for likes is your thing so you are all about drafting stuff that's "worth reading".

I'm still waiting for someone to get past telling me I am wrong and actually show me that I am. A point of distinction that is pretty important to me.

For example, you can't argue with anything I just put down can you. Cause it is actually correct.

I just explained your "suggestion" would still force solo players that hate premades to play with premades regardless.

There isn't an option for solos to play exclusively with other solos as publically demanded by solo players that wish no part with premades whatsoever.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 April 2014 - 04:56 PM.

[Craig Steele]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

You can try it right now, it's on test.
God forbid you actually use a function to know what you're talking about.
Us, we've already played with it and know EXACTLY how it works, what it does and does not do. you know... actually experience the system.

And surprise surprise, you're bitchin about it.

Let me guess, it doesn't do everything you want it to.

It's substandard, PGI minimally viable. All the same old lines you trot out every time.

Honestly, you are just a festering pool of hate and venom, nothing and no one is ever good enough.

Your self righteous indignation is obnoxious. I used to think you had a good head on your shoulders but now I can see quite clearly why PGI "blocked you".

Deathlike, on 24 April 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

I just explained your "suggestion" would still force solo players that hate premades to play with premades regardless.

There isn't an option for solos to play exclusively with other solos as publically demanded by solo players that wish no part with premades whatsoever.

And I pointed out directly after that that argument cuts for the 2 and 3 man teams as well. My point in that disussion was to give people more choice, not limit them.

Are you saying that we should give people less choice? That I am wrong to argue for people to have more empowerment?

Edited by Craig Steele, 24 April 2014 - 05:01 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Deathlike, on 24 April 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

He's doing a terrible job, since he doesn't understand and isn't demonstrating proof of reality... kinda like a particular thread you wrote.

which thread, i wrote a few. None of them have turned out like the last one i wrote. Actually it is probably because of my disposition towards some who i argued against in the ask the devs who were making lousy arguments. Decided to troll the thread that i made. All i wanted was for people to follow the outline. I am past that.

[Roadbeer]

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:

And surprise surprise, you're bitchin about it.

Let me guess, it doesn't do everything you want it to.

It's substandard, PGI minimally viable. All the same old lines you guys trot out every time.

Honestly, you are just a festering pool of hate and venom, nothng and no one is ever good enough.

Your self righteous indignation is obnoxious. I used to think you had a good head on your shulders but now I can see quite clearly why PGI "blocked you".

Nope, it had it's good and bad points, like everything in the game. I gave concise feedback about all the systems I tested, you can go find it if you like, and I left out the features it was missing because they were never advertised in the first place.

Here is the trap you always fall into, you make assumptions and you basically come off looking very neckbearded (though I doubt you're of the age to actually grow one)

But at least I know what I'm talking about... new guy.

BLOOD WOLF, on 24 April 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

which thread, i wrote a few. None of them have turned out like the last one i wrote. Actually it is probably because of my disposition towards some who i argued against in the ask the devs who were making lousy arguments. Decided to troll the thread that i made. All i wanted was for people to follow the outline. I am past that.

LOL
Nope.
You got trolled because you deleted the first thread. I don't know how many different ways people have to tell you that. But thanks for the entertainment, that thread has become the best K Town thread not actually in K Town

[BLOOD WOLF]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

LOL
Nope.
You got trolled because you deleted the first thread. I don't know how many different ways people have to tell you that. But thanks for the entertainment, that thread has become the best K Town thread not actually in K Town

But i Apologized. I apologized over a few times. For deleting the thread and it is still there. That wasn't the issue.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 24 April 2014 - 05:07 PM.

[Roadbeer]

BLOOD WOLF, on 24 April 2014 - 05:06 PM, said:

But i Apologized. I apologized over a few times.

Didn't matter at that point.
It was a huge forum faux pas. I think the reason it's been left to remain in GenDesc and not actually in K Town is the MODs want to leave it as a reminder of what happens when you get douchy with your own thread.

[Roland]

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

Is no one reading anything today?

Craig, I pointed out, you don't need any special knowledge.
You can just lay out what you believe the steps to be.

(if you actually read the post by me that you quoted, you'll see that this is exactly what I said)

[BLOOD WOLF]

Roadbeer, on 24 April 2014 - 05:08 PM, said:

Didn't matter at that point.
It was a huge forum faux pas. I think the reason it's been left to remain in GenDesc and not actually in K Town is the MODs want to leave it as a reminder of what happens when you get douchy with your own thread.

i wasn't getting douchy. Despite deleting the thread i do so with the best intentions. countless threads get turned into player battlegrounds and multiple pages get wasted with back and fourth arguments. That is not what i wanted. I remained respectful throughout and every word was objective. i think people take things way to personal at times.

[Roland]

Blood Wolf appologized and admitted he did wrong, so that's cool and we should let it slide.

[Craig Steele]

Deathlike, on 24 April 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

I just explained your "suggestion" would still force solo players that hate premades to play with premades regardless.

There isn't an option for solos to play exclusively with other solos as publically demanded by solo players that wish no part with premades whatsoever.

Actually this is worth expanding imo.

Here's the thing.

ATM PGI have said they are working towards a vision which is Solo + 2-4 queue (PUG queue) and a Teamplay queue (2-10)

Some people have presented they want more choice, that if they are a Solo player then they want the option to play in the group queue.

I get why "Pro Group" players would support this. On face value (PGI's stats) they face lots of "failed to find" exercises because what PGI are saying is that there is not a lot of players in the demographic. "Pro Group" players would want to have more people in the queue and would embrace anyone wanting to fill out the numbers so thay can play.

Bhaels submission in this thread focussed on the heavier number groups, MM pulls bigger groups and back fills with smaller groups / Solo's. It's not a bad system, I like it (and have previously supported it) but what it does do is force smaller groups into matches against 6+ sized groups.

We all know these groups are mainly on comms and that they are "selecting" the heavier mech classes so this forces those smaller group players to choose lighter mechs or not get a game (or wait lengthy times to get one) which is not ideal. Also the effect of those team advantages as force multipliers puts the smaller groups at a significant in game disadvantage.

Other threads identified there are many players who just want to log on and blow stuff up, they don't want to be waiting for MM or forced into particular mechs (even worse if they bought them, PGI suffers then)

So how then to ensure these players have equal opportunity to play their mech of choice and get in and out of games?

I don't like dividing the queue into 12 buckets, it puts more pressure on larger team queues and results in them getting failed MM.

We could try a system that matches 2 groups of equal numbers, back filled by solos, but I see this as only perpetuating the whole "Premade ate my baby thing".

My preference is to give the choice to the player, but have a structure that minimises risk of abuse.

A "PUG" queue for quick MM, in and out mech of your choice type players that accesses CW that is open to solo's and small groups (capped at one per side) would have some advantages. This is the demographic that "Plug and Play"

A seperate queue for the deeper / more co ordinated teamwork is also required, and I support this being open to everyone (Solo + 2-12) and accessing CW.

But if people are arguing that small group "Plug and Play" players should be second fiddle to the small number of "The evil Pre made ate my baby" complainants, then they really shouldn't have a problem with what PGI are proposing.

After all, if they are happy to force a demographic into a disadvantageous game play, they should have no problem with PGI forcing its structure. They only complaint is that they are on the wrong side of the arbitary line that PGI have drawn but as a consumer, they have the ultimate say on using the product that PGI provide.

Not that I am of this view, I want more choice.

[Craig Steele]

Roland, on 24 April 2014 - 05:10 PM, said:

Craig, I pointed out, you don't need any special knowledge.
You can just lay out what you believe the steps to be.

(if you actually read the post by me that you quoted, you'll see that this is exactly what I said)

And if you actually read my post (here, I'll quote it again for you)

Craig Steele, on 24 April 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

Couldn't really say, don't have Heffays apparent knowledge on the system.

All I know is that they said it is a function of the Launch Module due on 29th (I'm sure you can read the official blurb as well as I can). I'll try it when it gets here and let you know.

I have already said that I don't know the step by step function. Indeed, I quite openly tell you what I do know, which is the official blurb from whenever it was.

Not all of us are in your timeline and have been on the Test Server, not all of us have nothing else to do but *****. I did say I would try it, and I will. But as of right now I am freely admitting that I have not tried it yet.

Why do you want me to make stuff up I have already said I don't know?

So you can say you're right when something I fabricate proves to be false?

Argumentative?

Oh wait, I guess it's probably just that you have some pre disposed agenda or point to prove and reading my response doesn't suit that?

OK, go ahead with your point. Don't let the facts interfere with your story.

Edited by Craig Steele, 24 April 2014 - 05:35 PM.

[Roland]

Craig, even without the specific buttons, what is the process you would go through in terms of setting up the match? In terms of the logistics.