126 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2014 - 01:32 AM, said:

quietly nothing, if you'll notice my posting habits that's my "gaming time"

I told you I'd apologize if I don't find it and I will if I don't.

still waiting for those damning tweets. One would think an entire weekend adequate time?

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 November 2014 - 02:16 PM, said:

still waiting for those damning tweets. One would think an entire weekend adequate time?

and I was busy, so this particular issue wasn't high on my priorities.

With that said, I was mistaken. I got you confused with Imp in a tweet conversation a few months ago. I found what I was looking for and I got you mixed up with him.

I apologize for the mix up and I should have verified before I said anything. So there you have it, you were right and I humbly apologize. It did take several hours of combing to find it though as it was a few months ago.

Still, no excuse for having accused you of something before checking my facts. So again, I apologize and I was wrong

[Kain Demos]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

and I was busy, so this particular issue wasn't high on my priorities.

With that said, I was mistaken. I got you confused with Imp in a tweet conversation a few months ago. I found what I was looking for and I got you mixed up with him.

I apologize for the mix up and I should have verified before I said anything. So there you have it, you were right and I humbly apologize. It did take several hours of combing to find it though as it was a few months ago.

Still, no excuse for having accused you of something before checking my facts. So again, I apologize and I was wrong

I can see how that could be, I could easily make a mistake like that. I've never used twitter but I see people reference it to show news or an announcement or something and I can't follow it for anything. It usually goes something like:

@bob@mike@steve@juan@bill@harry OMFG!! NEW MECHS TODAY#mechs#mwo@chris@aaron

I don't know how the **** anyone keeps up with that ****.

Edited by Kain Thul, 24 November 2014 - 06:52 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

and I was busy, so this particular issue wasn't high on my priorities.

With that said, I was mistaken. I got you confused with Imp in a tweet conversation a few months ago. I found what I was looking for and I got you mixed up with him.

I apologize for the mix up and I should have verified before I said anything. So there you have it, you were right and I humbly apologize. It did take several hours of combing to find it though as it was a few months ago.

Still, no excuse for having accused you of something before checking my facts. So again, I apologize and I was wrong

Thank you. Believe it or not, I was not wanting to be a D-Bag about this (though I am very aware I can be). But it was certainly something I felt needed set straight. I am many things, but a griefer, is not one of them.

But thank you for having the spine to admit it. That is exceedingly rare in this day and age.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 November 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

Thank you. Believe it or not, I was not wanting to be a D-Bag about this (though I am very aware I can be). But it was certainly something I felt needed set straight. I am many things, but a griefer, is not one of them.

But thank you for having the spine to admit it. That is exceedingly rare in this day and age.

I told ya I'd admit if I was wrong. I have no problem with that at all.

The original point still stands though. Without a survive clause, people consistently and constantly rambo in and just die within seconds leaving their teammates short-handed and screwed over. This has been the one and only event ever that required people to survive to the end in order to get a free mech.

I firmly believe and hope that it's a bit of a "preparation" to get people acclimated to losses actually meaning something in CW.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 12:00 AM, said:

I told ya I'd admit if I was wrong. I have no problem with that at all.

The original point still stands though. Without a survive clause, people consistently and constantly rambo in and just die within seconds leaving their teammates short-handed and screwed over. This has been the one and only event ever that required people to survive to the end in order to get a free mech.

I firmly believe and hope that it's a bit of a "preparation" to get people acclimated to losses actually meaning something in CW.

It would be nice if there was a "greater purpose" to it.

The problem is, it just showed the real issue: Players. Yes, they didn't rambo and die and leave their team short handed. Instead they went all cowardly lion, and hid and left their team stranded and short handed.

In neither scenario, on average, did it improve actual play. In most cases, (from my admittedly limited info pool), outside of larger teams, it caused more problems than it solved. (And Russ even commented on twitter last night as to how divisive and hot topic it actually was).

I think, in honesty, we can agree that at the end of the day, the majority of players are selfish and greedy. And why not? If you are not on a Team, you are, at the end of the day, playing for yourself. Not the end of the world...as surviving and winning and doing what will secure that, is in one's best interest.....

Except time and again, here, on Eve Online, CoD, etc.....we also see most players are just plain BAD, myopic, tactically challenged and worst of all? Short Sighted. Which is where the "cowardice" this weekend originated, as most could not grasp the big picture, that fighting hard, TRYING to survive, but yes, occasionally dying or risking getting killed, "for the greater good" would be required to truly, and consistently succeed.


And such a rule, punishes the good players, who occasionally ate it for the team.

When you have 12 guys, and most are the guys who get their kill, then run away to survive, who is left to fight to get the other mandatory part: THE WIN? I got a LOT of people their points.... because eventually, someone has to man up and fight the other team and win. So I should be happy that I fought my butt off, did what I could to survive, but eventually died, while taking half the Enemy with me..... and get nothing....while the guys who hid in the back and then cultured the remains after get their game point? Without the guys willing to fight and often die....those other mooches don't get the win, and nobody gets a point.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 November 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

It would be nice if there was a "greater purpose" to it.

The problem is, it just showed the real issue: Players. Yes, they didn't rambo and die and leave their team short handed. Instead they went all cowardly lion, and hid and left their team stranded and short handed.

In neither scenario, on average, did it improve actual play. In most cases, (from my admittedly limited info pool), outside of larger teams, it caused more problems than it solved. (And Russ even commented on twitter last night as to how divisive and hot topic it actually was).

I think, in honesty, we can agree that at the end of the day, the majority of players are selfish and greedy. And why not? If you are not on a Team, you are, at the end of the day, playing for yourself. Not the end of the world...as surviving and winning and doing what will secure that, is in one's best interest.....

Except time and again, here, on Eve Online, CoD, etc.....we also see most players are just plain BAD, myopic, tactically challenged and worst of all? Short Sighted. Which is where the "cowardice" this weekend originated, as most could not grasp the big picture, that fighting hard, TRYING to survive, but yes, occasionally dying or risking getting killed, "for the greater good" would be required to truly, and consistently succeed.


And such a rule, punishes the good players, who occasionally ate it for the team.

When you have 12 guys, and most are the guys who get their kill, then run away to survive, who is left to fight to get the other mandatory part: THE WIN? I got a LOT of people their points.... because eventually, someone has to man up and fight the other team and win. So I should be happy that I fought my butt off, did what I could to survive, but eventually died, while taking half the Enemy with me..... and get nothing....while the guys who hid in the back and then cultured the remains after get their game point? Without the guys willing to fight and often die....those other mooches don't get the win, and nobody gets a point.

What many call "cowardly" I call strategically. Do you drop in groups or solo more?

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

What many call "cowardly" I call strategically.

It depends on what is done.

If the guy is moving to reposition himself for a better firing lane, it's strategic.
If the guy is moving to hide from all fire because he has zero interest in engaging the enemy (because they hurt him), it's probably leaning a lot towards cowardly.

Context is important.

I see people hiding around the corners, which is fine, except if there's a teammate under constant fire AND that this player is fully healthy and could have helped his teammate out... well, the implications are what they are.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 November 2014 - 10:37 AM.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 25 November 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

It depends on what is done.

If the guy is moving to reposition himself for a better firing lane, it's strategic.
If the guy is moving to hide from all fire because he has zero interest in engaging the enemy (because they hurt him), it's probably leaning a lot towards cowardly.

Context is important.

I see people hiding around the corners, which is fine, except if there's a teammate under constant fire AND that this player is fully healthy and could have helped his teammate out... well, the implications are what they are.

Of course it is, but there's a huge difference in playing cautiously and shutting down in a corner as well.

You have just as many (AT LEAST) who enjoyed having to play more strategically in this one singular event over the past 2 years as you do who didn't.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

Of course it is, but there's a huge difference in playing cautiously and shutting down in a corner as well.

You have just as many (AT LEAST) who enjoyed having to play more strategically in this one singular event over the past 2 years as you do who didn't.

I will say this.

While I hated the challenge parameters (and the event to a degree) in the sense that it would "increase" the likelihood of cowardice (and, I've seen a lot of it that weekend, on both sides), I did have fun with people that played aggressively with me, and take advantage of said cowardice in the group queue. The game was completely unbearable in the solo queue due to the extremes being exhibited more often than not.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 November 2014 - 11:02 AM.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 25 November 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

I will say this.

While I hated the challenge parameters (and the event to a degree) in the sense that it would "increase" the likelihood of cowardice (and, I've seen a lot of it that weekend, on both sides), I did have fun with people that played aggressively with me, and take advantage of said cowardice in the group queue. The game was completely unbearable in the solo queue due to the extremes being exhibited more often than not.

That's more a mechanic of a random system that puts you into a match with 11 strangers and no way to coordinate BEFORE you drop. Lobbies would alleviate that mess a great deal

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 11:15 AM, said:

That's more a mechanic of a random system that puts you into a match with 11 strangers and no way to coordinate BEFORE you drop. Lobbies would alleviate that mess a great deal

I'd rather have the commo rose added first (not VOIP, due to language barriers) and an improved Command Map interface (Have you ever used to 'i' key after opening the command map? It's almost illegible) to improve basic pug play.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 25 November 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

I'd rather have the commo rose added first (not VOIP, due to language barriers) and an improved Command Map interface (Have you ever used to 'i' key after opening the command map? It's almost illegible) to improve basic pug play.

That's getting into a whole 'nother ball of wax though

I'd love ot see much better comm tools, lobbies, voip, etc.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

That's getting into a whole 'nother ball of wax though

I'd love ot see much better comm tools, lobbies, voip, etc.

That ball of wax has been in PGI's ear for a while now... not even a Q-tip will fix that.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 25 November 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

That ball of wax has been in PGI's ear for a while now... not even a Q-tip will fix that.

yes and no
In the first townhall Russ agreed that they needed to improve it, but they're focusing everything on CW and after the first of the year they'll begin tackling those issues.

[F4T 4L]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

You have just as many (AT LEAST) who enjoyed having to play more strategically in this one singular event over the past 2 years as you do who didn't.

Source for this please?

[Sandpit]

F4T 4L, on 25 November 2014 - 12:50 PM, said:

Source for this please?

source to refute please?

[F4T 4L]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

source to refute please?

You made the statement. Given your tendency to fabricate, or misremember, the truth I'd say the burden is yours.

[Sandpit]

F4T 4L, on 25 November 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

You made the statement. Given your tendency to fabricate, or misremember, the truth I'd say the burden is yours.

sure thing hoss.

Notice how every one of these threads and the ones that like to complain try to represent themselves as a majority?

[F4T 4L]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 01:19 PM, said:

sure thing hoss.

Notice how every one of these threads and the ones that like to complain try to represent themselves as a majority?

You made the statement. Yes, I see your point.