1126 replies to this topic

[Craig Steele]

Sandpit, on 14 April 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

no it's just another example of
"I really have no rational reason or argument against anything they've said so I'll resort to attacking them to try and distract from their ideas and maybe even get them baited into attacking me so I can either derail the thread or get them moderated"

It's a pretty common tactic used around here

Agreed, I also wish Roadbeer would cease with the personal stuff and focus on the issues.

Can you have a word to him off line?

[Roadbeer]

From hyperbole to martyr in one page, that beats MHWs record

[Zolaz]

Bhael Fire, on 14 April 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

SOLO ONLY queue

• Solo players only
  
• No groups

GROUPS (2-12) + SOLO Queue

• Allows groups with 2-12 players
  
• Allows solo players with groups enabled in launch preferences (+10,000 C-Bill "Hazard Pay" bonus)
  
• Matches large groups first, then small groups, then solo players (so 12-mans are likely to face other 12-mans)
  
• Matches groups on a 1:1 basis (or as close as possible)
  
• Never more than 1 solo player per team (to minimize PUG stompage in the group queue)
  
• Never more than 3 groups per team (i.e. no teams made up entirely of 2-mans or 3-mans)
  
• Drawback: Wait times longer than solo only queue

PGI wouldnt like this ... it would ruin their "stats" about groups. Most players would be playing in the team queue because you would make more money. PGI just finds it hard to believe that their community will act in their own self interest.

[King Arthur IV]

if we had some of these, then it could clear up some of the marriage banter.

number talk

[Sibs]

Quote

We have in our backburner an idea for the Group Only queue. This system will allow groups of any size match against each other. It would probably replace the current 12-man public queue.

That is AMAZING!

I had no idea - you never even hinted before that there might be a FRONT BURNER!

PROGRESS HO!

Edited by Sibs, 14 April 2014 - 06:45 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Sibs, on 14 April 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

That is AMAZING!

I had no idea - you never even hinted before that there might be a FRONT BURNER!

PROGRESS HO!

I lol'd

[Sandpit]

Craig Steele, on 14 April 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

There are several threads around with Group Players (5 - 11) bemoaning how little love they get and this post has highlighted not only the vision but some of the hurdles on the way to that outcome.

Notwithstanding the "I want it my way and I want noooooooowwwwwwwww" screams from the little kids with tears spilling down their cheeks

Craig Steele, on 14 April 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

Agreed, I also wish Roadbeer would cease with the personal stuff and focus on the issues.

Can you have a word to him off line?

try again dude, at least delete or edit your original post attacking people if you're going to try and put it off on them when they retaliate

Edited by Sandpit, 14 April 2014 - 06:48 PM.

[Heffay]

Sandpit, on 14 April 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

and then you get jewels like this that just can't resist personal attacks. lol

You could always go back to misogynistic posts. Seems to work well for you.

I mean, it's all ok as long as it's not directed towards someone, right?

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 06:52 PM, said:

You could always go back to misogynistic posts. Seems to work well for you.

I mean, it's all ok as long as it's not directed towards someone, right?

Nope, you haven't responded to questions put to you from several pages back.

Respond then you can catch up.

[Heffay]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Nope, you haven't responded to questions put to you from several pages back.

Respond then you can catch up.

Sorry, been busy having a life. Can you repeat the questions?

[Craig Steele]

Sandpit, on 14 April 2014 - 06:47 PM, said:

try again dude, at least delete or edit your original post attacking people if you're going to try and put it off on them when they retaliate

I guess it's hard to be impartial when your ally is involved?

Just like that other thread when you were arguing that neither you nor Roadbeer where telling solo PUG's to leave the game if they don't like being stomped by Pre Mades in the PUG queue and Roadbeer was clearly saying exactly that.

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

Oh, by the way Paul,

Thanks for coming off as condescending and completely dismissive......

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

I'm actually being serious and not mocking or looking to set up a troll here, but

Is English your primary language?

Take that at face value, or hypocritical? Roadbeer is a self confessed Troll after all?

I didn't attack anyone, expect to point out that in this thread there are people saying I want MY WAY and I want it NOW.

If you or Roadbeer inferred that meant yourselves, OK, so be it. I didn't name or quote anyone, so why did you associate yourself with it?

See the problem here, when I attack "no one" and just point out the bleedin obvious, "everyone" gets their panties in a twist.

People should focus on reading the post, and not overlaying their agenda to read what they want.

[Bhael Fire]

Zolaz, on 14 April 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:

PGI wouldnt like this ... it would ruin their "stats" about groups. Most players would be playing in the team queue because you would make more money. PGI just finds it hard to believe that their community will act in their own self interest.

Solo players would not be able to opt in to play only in the GROUP queue; the idea is that solo players that enable group drops would drop with other solo players most of the time, but they would be on "stand-by" if the group queue needed a solo player to fill in a gap.

The extra money they'd get is recompense for being the fodder.

There really is no legitimate reason to not allow this.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 14 April 2014 - 07:00 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 06:57 PM, said:

Sorry, been busy having a life. Can you repeat the questions?

Nah brah,
You can't just open books at random. You need to go back to the last place you were at then move forward.
It works like this. You click on a thread then click on "Go to first unread post", it'll take you right to where you left off.

L2Forum

Edited by Roadbeer, 14 April 2014 - 07:00 PM.

[Amsro]

TygerLily, on 14 April 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:

Yuck...back in the day, running with an 8-man in a public queue was ridiculous...

I think having more than a 4-man in a public should always be a no-go...

Yeah because there wasn't a solo only que as well, so you had non team players in a team match. That doesn't mix well.

AlexEss, on 14 April 2014 - 10:02 AM, said:

And then we have a 12-man on coms team vs a 2.man on coms + pugs,,, And even if that does not happen very often it will. Not only that people will think it happens more often then not. And as with all matters of perception the only ways to stop it is by setting up solid boundaries.

So while i can understand why you would like it... It would not work at all in the long run.

That simply can't happen, ensure that matchmaker matches teams of similar size +/- 2 (12vs10/11+1/2)

This way one side won't be lopsided.

Remeber that there will be a solo que for those not ready for a more in depth tactical match.

[Heffay]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 06:59 PM, said:

Nah brah,
You can't just open books at random. You need to go back to the last place you were at then move forward.
It works like this. You click on a thread then click on "Go to first unread post", it'll take you right to where you left off.

L2Forum

Probably meaningless drivel about how group features PGI is implementing doesn't meet your particularly entitled sense of what a group feature should have, therefore they aren't providing group features.

Heard any good misogynistic jokes lately?

Edited by Heffay, 14 April 2014 - 07:01 PM.

[Triordinant]

Mechwarrior Mousse, on 14 April 2014 - 10:33 AM, said:

To eliminate the excuse that "evil pre mades" are ruining solo player's fun and that if stomps happen in a solo only queue, it's due to some other mysterious reason?

Why, the reason is premades sync-dropping solo of course. They've been doing it for years and some brag about how easy it is to make sure they end up in the same matches. When Community Warfare kicks in, they'll even be assured of being on the same team because they're all the same Faction.

Edited by Triordinant, 14 April 2014 - 07:06 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

Probably meaningless drivel about how group features PGI is implementing doesn't meet your particularly entitled sense of what a group feature should have, therefore they aren't providing group features.

Heard any good misogynistic jokes lately?

Actually, it was more along the lines of something you'd never be able to answer. One of those really hard questions like, "Where did it say we were getting group support anywhere in that post". Because the post doesn't say that, the post says "Hey, this is why we don't want to do it, but we want you to discuss it anyway while we completely ignore it"

You know, it's a Paul post.

[Belorion]

I certainly support the idea of a group que. I would even be willing to drop solo in the group que if it means being able to have groups with 11 people in them.

[Heffay]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 07:03 PM, said:

Actually, it was more along the lines of something you'd never be able to answer. One of those really hard questions like, "Where did it say we were getting group support anywhere in that post". Because the post doesn't say that, the post says "Hey, this is why we don't want to do it, but we want you to discuss it anyway while we completely ignore it"

You know, it's a Paul post.

Let me sum up your position:

[Asmudius Heng]

Bhael Fire, on 14 April 2014 - 06:59 PM, said:

Solo players would not be able to opt in to play only in the GROUP queue; the idea is that solo players that enable group drops would drop with other solo players most of the time, but they would be on "stand-by" if the group queue needed a solo player to fill in a gap.

The extra money they'd get is recompense for being the fodder.

There really is no legitimate reason to not allow this.

Did not think of extra incentives for solo - dont make it huge but make it something and you are right no reason not to allow opt in fillers.

If they get VOIP working as they have said they would in the NGNG podcast recently then those solos would be communicating with groups and the disadvantage would go down even further