Do Ghost Wins Happen During Peak Hours?
#81
Posted 02 January 2015 - 12:31 PM
The reasoning that the other three factions have more numbers that Davion is also kind of true, but at the peak hours this is hardly the case. Also remember that Davion does not have to worry yet about the clans taking territories from them. I think that was a mistake on the part of PGI. Now if clan Ghost Bear was bordering Davion, then it might have changed things overall. It would have actually made more sense, with those being two of the higher population factions/clans having to brawl it out over territories that they actually cared about. I mean they could have spread out the clans so that they were less concentrated in one spot. it is not fair for the three IS factions to be honest.
In closing there is only one reason to do CW if you are Liao now, that's to make some money. We are not going to win planets, we will lose more planets, that is the way it will go. Eventually people who care about the planets in their faction will get exhausted with trying to win a losing fight, and will not play or go to another faction. At that point the ghost drops will increase , and more planets will be lost. i personally do not like to lose but it happens from time to time. I like to be the underdog , but even an underdog has a chance to win at some point. Winning battles is nice , but having no chance in a War sucks.
#83
Posted 02 January 2015 - 12:51 PM
Grynos, on 02 January 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:
Seeing as they have already changed the history and the like I think they should shift things around so that every IS power has the same number of clans "invading" them if possible.
#84
Posted 02 January 2015 - 01:03 PM
Alexander Steel, on 02 January 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:
Seeing as they have already changed the history and the like I think they should shift things around so that every IS power has the same number of clans "invading" them if possible.
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement, they could actually base it off of populations, I mean it would make more sense.
#85
Posted 02 January 2015 - 02:57 PM
#86
Posted 02 January 2015 - 03:48 PM
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the FedCom doesn't exist.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the clan gear in the game doesn't match the clan gear from the table top.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the ST Ives doesn't exist.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because CW isn't happening like the story in the books.
I think the "Lore Nerds" are either all gone or have come to grips with the fact that things are different in this game than in the BT Lore.
Edited by Alexander Steel, 02 January 2015 - 03:48 PM.
#87
Posted 02 January 2015 - 04:23 PM
StillRadioactive, on 02 January 2015 - 02:57 PM, said:
Sorry but the results of the current map state have absolutely nothing to do with the lore, if they were then I imagine the map would look a lot different, and it would hamper the game in general. Those who think that this game is going to run the exact course of whatever lore they have read are dreaming. Any MMO that did so would be limiting outcomes and options which by a developers point of view is a very very bad thing to do. I have no issue for those that choose to RP and those that are " lore nerds " as you described but they also have to realize that actual players determine the outcomes not the books they have read in the past.
#88
Posted 02 January 2015 - 04:43 PM
Alexander Steel, on 02 January 2015 - 03:48 PM, said:
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the FedCom doesn't exist.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the clan gear in the game doesn't match the clan gear from the table top.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because the ST Ives doesn't exist.
Nah, all the lore nerds quit because CW isn't happening like the story in the books.
I think the "Lore Nerds" are either all gone or have come to grips with the fact that things are different in this game than in the BT Lore.
Na, not all of us old school "lore nerds" are gone
#90
Posted 02 January 2015 - 06:54 PM
Alexander Steel, on 02 January 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:
Changing available tech is small. Changing the invasion corridors during literally the largest single event in BT history? HELL NO.
#91
Posted 02 January 2015 - 09:17 PM
Alexander Steel, on 02 January 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:
Well, if they came to terms with the fact that some battles in TT only take place over the course of "40 seconds," and in order to not have lame %^&*% like that, the armor was doubled, then they can get over themselves over anything (I still play TT btw)
#92
Posted 02 January 2015 - 11:48 PM
StillRadioactive, on 02 January 2015 - 10:12 AM, said:
Team A queues at 0:00 and tells teams B and C that they're dropping.
Team B queues at 9:45 and tells teams A and C that they're dropping.
Team C queues at 19:30 and tells teams A and B that they're dropping.
Team A ends their match at 26:00, queues at 29:15 and tells teams B and C that they're dropping.
Really not that difficult, especially since teamspeak puts a time stamp on text chat messages.
So basically violate tos in both letter and spirit, display very poor sportsmanship and the reverse of the famous davion ghost drop campaign of world conquest, thought so.
#93
Posted 03 January 2015 - 12:32 AM
Abivard, on 02 January 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:
So basically violate tos in both letter and spirit, display very poor sportsmanship and the reverse of the famous davion ghost drop campaign of world conquest, thought so.
How is that a violation of TOS? I'm looking for "Letter" here as people can make whatever weird argument for spirit they want, but saying you are violating the LETTER of the TOS is a pretty serious charge.
#94
Posted 03 January 2015 - 01:00 AM
StillRadioactive, on 02 January 2015 - 06:54 PM, said:
Changing available tech is small. Changing the invasion corridors during literally the largest single event in BT history? HELL NO.
Were you able to get over the fact that there is no Fed Com? Probably the biggest event in Battletech lore was the formation of it and the fall out because of it. Yet here we are in MWO and no Fed Com....
#95
Posted 03 January 2015 - 01:05 AM
#96
Posted 03 January 2015 - 04:12 PM
Abivard, on 02 January 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:
I think you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. You're tilting at windmills, buddy.
#97
Posted 03 January 2015 - 11:20 PM
Well-played.
We'll be ready tomorrow.
#98
Posted 04 January 2015 - 01:55 AM
Acario, on 03 January 2015 - 11:20 PM, said:
Well-played.
We'll be ready tomorrow.
Those 48 ended up having a lot of incompatible group sizes and a bunch of them (myself included) dropped out... At the end it was 24-12, and the planet was decided by 2 territories. The one ghost drop didn't flip it.
Great fights all around though. You'll be hearin' from us
Edited by StillRadioactive, 04 January 2015 - 02:17 AM.
#99
Posted 05 January 2015 - 02:18 AM
Regardless PGI must fix and patch this immediately. This is the Fail Mary repeated every day of the week multiple times.
http://youtu.be/HInIZ4CdVOw
#100
Posted 05 January 2015 - 04:14 AM
Consider two equal sized factions. Each has 120 pilots and they are perfectly co-ordinated. Without a Ghost Drop Mechanic, Side A invades a planet with 60 pilots. Side B to defend sends... 0 pilots. Why? No Ghost Drops means that Side A can NEVER take the planet unless Side B wants to let them have the chance.
Same situation but you have it toned back to no Ghost Drops if anybody defends. Side A Sends 60 pilots.... and Side B wanting to defend and knowing something about time... sends 1 group. This one group constantly stays fighting and basically makes each drop take roughly 30 minutes. They have delayed 60 people for *4* hours, instead of having the planet taken in an hour or two. That again is an even worse mechanic then what we have now.
There MUST be some mechanic to punish a side for deciding not to defend.
6 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users