Jump to content

Community Warfare Behavior


186 replies to this topic

#121 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 15 January 2015 - 05:01 PM

View PostRustyBolts, on 15 January 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

My appologies, I misunderstood this post based on your original post where you changed my quotes. I failed to see the smiley face on my phone and took it the wrong way.


No problem. There is a reason I use tablets and not smartphones.


View PostRustyBolts, on 15 January 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

But my point still stands. There is a line that should not be crossed, regardless of the intent. I have a special needs child and when I see poor sports throwing the slang around, regardless of pug or team, I tend to take it personal. I dont see that as being thin skinned either. If you call a black guy the N word, does it make it ok since its over the internet? No.


I understand what you are saying. Poor sports will be what they are and they I disapprove of. But, words said as RP are a different matter altogether as far as I am concerned, although I admit it may be hard to distinguish if words and timing are not well chosen.

Also, I disagree with your position on intent. Context is everything. Should certain be words be banned from all works, including dictionaries, fiction, documentaries, and satire? I sure hope not, especially because I consider words spoken as RP as part of fiction.

And finally, I save my last comment for the "N" word. I find it extremely perplexing, not to mention really disturbing, that many people find it ok when they use it among themselves, but become very outraged -- sometimes even threatening -- when someone else "not like them" uses it in any other manner.

#122 Gorgo7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,223 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 15 January 2015 - 05:02 PM

Oh, I see...Rustys posts are about things other then the game.
Sorry dude, my sympathy.
People can be frightfully ignorant at times and people can be extremely sensitive in return.
Writing a post about the lack of civility in society is all well and good in the right circumstances but when you continue to ***** after some sensible advice is offered and others have make explanations for poor behavior on the part of fools in chat and you suddenly throw the special kid out on the table...well.
Take a break for a while, this game is not relaxing you.

#123 RustyBolts

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Deadly
  • The Deadly
  • 1,151 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 05:11 PM

View PostMystere, on 15 January 2015 - 05:01 PM, said:


No problem. There is a reason I use tablets and not smartphones.




I understand what you are saying. Poor sports will be what they are and they I disapprove of. But, words said as RP are a different matter altogether as far as I am concerned, although I admit it may be hard to distinguish if words and timing are not well chosen.

Also, I disagree with your position on intent. Context is everything. Should certain be words be banned from all works, including dictionaries, fiction, documentaries, and satire? I sure hope not, especially because I consider words spoken as RP as part of fiction.

And finally, I save my last comment for the "N" word. I find it extremely perplexing, not to mention really disturbing, that many people find it ok when they use it among themselves, but become very outraged -- sometimes even threatening -- when someone else "not like them" uses it in any other manner.


I will concede context instead of intent being the right word. Like I said, Role play is one thing. Out right insults is another. For example, Clanners say "Freebirth scum" and IS calling Clanners "Test tube babies". Too me this is role play because it is in context to the game. Now a pilot starts calling people "Window lickers" "**** heads" and such, this is not role play and should not be allowed.

I also agree on a word that is used casually amongst one group,but forbidden for all other groups does not make sense.

View PostGorgo7, on 15 January 2015 - 05:02 PM, said:

Oh, I see...Rustys posts are about things other then the game.
Sorry dude, my sympathy.
People can be frightfully ignorant at times and people can be extremely sensitive in return.
Writing a post about the lack of civility in society is all well and good in the right circumstances but when you continue to ***** after some sensible advice is offered and others have make explanations for poor behavior on the part of fools in chat and you suddenly throw the special kid out on the table...well.
Take a break for a while, this game is not relaxing you.


I agree and this is the line that some people just dont understand should not be crossed.

#124 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 15 January 2015 - 05:25 PM

View PostTywren, on 15 January 2015 - 04:06 PM, said:

When such a "Do anything i can (within the rules) to win" mindset, starts driveing players out of CW, and maybe even out of the game, it needs to stop. And guess what, it's reached that point.


The following might not seem relevant at first look, but they actually are. You and others might even find it extremely crass given the subject matter. But here I go anyway because I think the fundamental principles are exactly the same.

Should Charlie Hebdo not have published their cartoons?

What limits should they have followed?

Who defines those limits?

Does everyone agree with those same said limits?

Finally, do you agree with those same limits?



#125 Tywren

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 297 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 06:41 PM

View PostMystere, on 15 January 2015 - 05:25 PM, said:


The following might not seem relevant at first look, but they actually are. You and others might even find it extremely crass given the subject matter. But here I go anyway because I think the fundamental principles are exactly the same.

Should Charlie Hebdo not have published their cartoons?

What limits should they have followed?

Who defines those limits?

Does everyone agree with those same said limits?

Finally, do you agree with those same limits?






Good question, and the answers are...

Yes.

The limits of their readership. If one of their cartoon strips was the direct result in say a 30% drop in readers, it's time to rethink things.

The readers do.

No. it's understood that the chance of getting an entire group of people to agree on anything is inverse of the number in said group.

I'm a capitalist so, Yes. I fully suport the power of voting with one's wallet.

Edited by Tywren, 15 January 2015 - 07:33 PM.


#126 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 07:02 PM

View PostTywren, on 15 January 2015 - 04:06 PM, said:


When such a "Do anything i can (within the rules) to win" mindset, starts driveing players out of CW, and maybe even out of the game, it needs to stop. And guess what, it's reached that point.


Yep. It amazes me how many people forget that if they are the only ones having fun, they'll soon be the only ones playing. Whining complaints about PUG players not joining up with the very people who spat in their face won't change this.

These types exist in all games. I play Magic casually, and there are certain tools I will not play with. We all know the types - they copy-paste their decks from the internet and play whatever deck is the perfect combination of mind-numbingly easy for them to play and miserably un-fun for everyone else. They trumpet their "skills" - despite simply copying others and avoiding any real challenges - and are baffled when they run out of opponents. Nobody likes a toolbag, and that holds true in tabletop games as well as online games. CW is full of these types, and rapidly running out of casual players.

#127 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 16 January 2015 - 12:05 PM

View Postoldradagast, on 15 January 2015 - 07:02 PM, said:


Yep. It amazes me how many people forget that if they are the only ones having fun, they'll soon be the only ones playing. Whining complaints about PUG players not joining up with the very people who spat in their face won't change this.

These types exist in all games. I play Magic casually, and there are certain tools I will not play with. We all know the types - they copy-paste their decks from the internet and play whatever deck is the perfect combination of mind-numbingly easy for them to play and miserably un-fun for everyone else. They trumpet their "skills" - despite simply copying others and avoiding any real challenges - and are baffled when they run out of opponents. Nobody likes a toolbag, and that holds true in tabletop games as well as online games. CW is full of these types, and rapidly running out of casual players.

had the same types in Pokemon card leagues. My daughter and i used to play in one. When Playing against the older kids/young adults I didn't hold back, against the lil ones (5-8 year olds) I always used my weakest decks. and played foolish but to much so.

I don't know how old everyone is here and so I treat them like competent adults. In spite of the how much they whine. Cause I expect they ARE trying to win as much or more than I am.

Fun story.
Got challenged by a 6 year old at one of the Pokemon Leagues. Noticed he had a Fire Deck I grabbed my Grass (weak to his cards) His mom watched intently. His energy cards were not showing up and I had kept the game close to allow him to draw. I had him down to his last Pokemon vs my last. I kept using a power up move (Stalling) cause "I wanted to just hit him once for the win!" On teh 4th turn he drew the energy card he needed, and came from behind to Win. After the match I helped him out giving him a stack of energy cards and Early Evo cards that he needed. Thanked him for a good game

A late teen came over and for what ever reason, beat me so hard I barely knew what happened. I thanked him and offered him some cards too.

in a tournament at a different venue I came across a player(late teens maybe 20) using the dread Mewtwo stall deck. I almost beat him by rattling his cage mocking his style of play, causing him to make mistakes. He didn't make enough, and I ended up in third place he was the champion but that's how it goes.

None of you are children, I don't have to allow a chance to win, you want a win earn it, just like I do 47% of the time.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM.


#128 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:01 PM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 16 January 2015 - 12:05 PM, said:


None of you are children, I don't have to allow a chance to win, you want a win earn it, just like I do 47% of the time.


*Sigh* Most people are not interested in playing games with "no chance to win" - or at least no real chance. Witness the empty CW queues as an example.

The only people who are fine with the current setup and do not want any options added are: the thugs doing the rolling, the masochists who like to be rolled, and the people who hope to someday be the ones doing the rolling. Same crud as everywhere else in life: nobody wants the rules to change to clamp down on the abusers of power and the troublemakers because they someday hope to be the one above the law and doing the abusing.

And, for the record, I have no problem losing - heck, I often run Hunchbacks and Awesomes, so how serious can I be? - but when the only hope of victory is if the other team hands it to you - which you agree they should not do - what's the point of playing the game? That's all my optional matchmaker proposal would do - prevent such idiotic games from happening.

Edited by oldradagast, 16 January 2015 - 01:08 PM.


#129 Ax2Grind

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 816 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:09 PM

I guess your win rate percentage proves to Radagast that you need to give up Joseph. It's over. Your done. You can't win all the time. Whats the point of even playing? Stop fooling yourself! Do something useful and just sit on the forums crying about how impossible the game is, because clearly playing it is not working for you. You foolish old man. :o

#130 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:18 PM

View PostAx2Grind, on 16 January 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

I guess your win rate percentage proves to Radagast that you need to give up Joseph. It's over. Your done. You can't win all the time. Whats the point of even playing? Stop fooling yourself! Do something useful and just sit on the forums crying about how impossible the game is, because clearly playing it is not working for you. You foolish old man. :o


Wow... nothing like the internet to make people lose faith in humanity.

A few simple things to consider:

1) Most people play games for fun. They do not play them to be stomped over and over again particularly at 30-minutes+ per stomp and when the stomping often happens for reasons outside their control (matchmaking, or lack of it.)
2) CW does nothing to prevent frequent stomps.
3) CW "mysteriously" is bleeding out players at a high rate, particular casual and new players.

The casual observer might suspect that points 1 and 2 - which are facts - might have something to do with point 3.

But, no. Instead let's use the following "logic" to defend the current setup:
1) Some people like being stomped, so everyone should like it. "Life sucks" excuses it all.
2) Pitting foes of comparable skill against each other - like every other non-professional game out there - is now "handing out wins" for some reason.
3) CW is the land of infinite skill and "real war", but free wins via PUG stomps and ghost drops are a vital part of that "skill"

If PGI wasn't bleeding resources over this mess, the above illogic train would almost be laughable... whatever, guys.. .keep dreaming. Maybe, someday, all the casual players will suddenly *want* to lose over and over again, and they'll come back... or not...

#131 xxREVxx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 436 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:25 PM

Hmmm, PGI reported 20% increase in CW last month.

#132 Ax2Grind

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 816 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:28 PM

Your clearly out of touch with reality Radagast. Hunchbacks are decent mechs again. :ph34r:

#133 Sprouticus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,781 posts
  • LocationChicago, Il, USA

Posted 16 January 2015 - 01:33 PM

Here is what it boils down to:

Dont be a ****. (NOTE: I was saying this way before WW, so Im not plagiarizing).

Err on the side of nice. Heavily. (intent is impossible to read, especially when you are getting your butt kicked and are frustrated).

side note: a couple of folks indicated that SJ people were talking smack. If that happens, please post it in the SJ forums, at smokealliance.com, or let the unit leader know. Every single large SJ unit in on board with the good sportsmanship thing, and we will all bring social pressure to bear upon the transgressors.

We all cross the line at times. We all get mad. I have done it, I am sure all of you have done it. But at the minimum we can give the person who was rude a chance to apoligize and make amends.

#134 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 16 January 2015 - 02:07 PM

View Postoldradagast, on 16 January 2015 - 01:01 PM, said:

*Sigh* Most people are not interested in playing games with "no chance to win" - or at least no real chance. Witness the empty CW queues as an example.

The only people who are fine with the current setup and do not want any options added are: the thugs doing the rolling, the masochists who like to be rolled, and the people who hope to someday be the ones doing the rolling. Same crud as everywhere else in life: nobody wants the rules to change to clamp down on the abusers of power and the troublemakers because they someday hope to be the one above the law and doing the abusing.

And, for the record, I have no problem losing - heck, I often run Hunchbacks and Awesomes, so how serious can I be? - but when the only hope of victory is if the other team hands it to you - which you agree they should not do - what's the point of playing the game? That's all my optional matchmaker proposal would do - prevent such idiotic games from happening.


I am just posting my words in another thread for the benefit of those reading this one:

View PostMystere, on 16 January 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

Sigh! There is just so much one-dimensional thinking going on in here that I felt compelled to step right back in.

There are ways to mitigate the slaughter of PUGs without -- again -- resorting to a matchmaker. Better battle search tools, better maps, better games modes, all these things can be use to help even out the odds for PUGs.


#135 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 16 January 2015 - 02:10 PM

View Postoldradagast, on 16 January 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:

1) Most people play games for fun. They do not play them to be stomped over and over again particularly at 30-minutes+ per stomp and when the stomping often happens for reasons outside their control (matchmaking, or lack of it.)
2) CW does nothing to prevent frequent stomps.
3) CW "mysteriously" is bleeding out players at a high rate, particular casual and new players.

The casual observer might suspect that points 1 and 2 - which are facts - might have something to do with point 3.


And I am willing to bet that #3 is caused more by things other than #1 and #2. In fact I will name one: boredom. I leave the rest to you folks.

#136 Tywren

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 297 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 02:53 PM

View PostMystere, on 16 January 2015 - 02:10 PM, said:


And I am willing to bet that #3 is caused more by things other than #1 and #2. In fact I will name one: boredom. I leave the rest to you folks.


I'll agree with that, a 20 min wait for a 6 min stomp is quite boring. If only there where some way to make sure the teams faceing each other where on par so that the stomps didn't occure...

Edited by Tywren, 16 January 2015 - 02:53 PM.


#137 Ax2Grind

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 816 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 03:48 PM

View PostTywren, on 16 January 2015 - 02:53 PM, said:


I'll agree with that, a 20 min wait for a 6 min stomp is quite boring. If only there where some way to make sure the teams faceing each other where on par so that the stomps didn't occure...


I agree about the queue time. I think it's the biggest detractor to playing CW.

Respectfully, there is no way to stop one team from losing, that's part of the game...one team loses and one team wins...and often because of the number of mechs and large alpha's it's rare that even a close win will look close. Do you really think ELO and matchmaker in the public queue makes teams that are on par with each other? I go into a game knowing that I have a wide variety of opponents to face. Some will stomp me. Some will get stomped. I don't think we need to demand that game designers ensure that I win some games...isn't that up to me, the player? If I never got to fight anyone better than me this game would get boring real quick and there would be no incentive to get better.

#138 Mirkk Defwode

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 748 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationSeattle, Wa

Posted 16 January 2015 - 03:55 PM

View PostAx2Grind, on 16 January 2015 - 03:48 PM, said:


I agree about the queue time. I think it's the biggest detractor to playing CW.

Respectfully, there is no way to stop one team from losing, that's part of the game...one team loses and one team wins...and often because of the number of mechs and large alpha's it's rare that even a close win will look close. Do you really think ELO and matchmaker in the public queue makes teams that are on par with each other? I go into a game knowing that I have a wide variety of opponents to face. Some will stomp me. Some will get stomped. I don't think we need to demand that game designers ensure that I win some games...isn't that up to me, the player? If I never got to fight anyone better than me this game would get boring real quick and there would be no incentive to get better.


It is up to you to win. It's up to the designer to make the fight balanced so that skill becomes the deciding factor, not having one side start with a terrible disadvantage that either takes luck or stupidity to get past.

#139 Jakob Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,286 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 04:12 PM

View Postoldradagast, on 16 January 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:


Wow... nothing like the internet to make people lose faith in humanity.

A few simple things to consider:

1) Most people play games for fun. They do not play them to be stomped over and over again particularly at 30-minutes+ per stomp and when the stomping often happens for reasons outside their control (matchmaking, or lack of it.)
2) CW does nothing to prevent frequent stomps.
3) CW "mysteriously" is bleeding out players at a high rate, particular casual and new players.

The casual observer might suspect that points 1 and 2 - which are facts - might have something to do with point 3.

But, no. Instead let's use the following "logic" to defend the current setup:
1) Some people like being stomped, so everyone should like it. "Life sucks" excuses it all.
2) Pitting foes of comparable skill against each other - like every other non-professional game out there - is now "handing out wins" for some reason.
3) CW is the land of infinite skill and "real war", but free wins via PUG stomps and ghost drops are a vital part of that "skill"

If PGI wasn't bleeding resources over this mess, the above illogic train would almost be laughable... whatever, guys.. .keep dreaming. Maybe, someday, all the casual players will suddenly *want* to lose over and over again, and they'll come back... or not...



It's not really a mystery that there aren't as many players in CW as there were when it launched. This happens when any new feature is added to any game. Everyone wants to try it.

Then those people who find the new feature isn't for them return to the parts of the game that they prefer, resulting in a decrease in population as those who probably shouldn't have been there in the first place leave until something else new brings them in for another look.

The important thing is, unlike quite a few other games out there, MWO doesn't prevent any player from accessing any part of the game content, even parts not intended for their level of play or preference of play. A brand new, Day One player can jump into a starter mech and run into CW, if they choose to do so. If their skill is up to the task, they can challenge anyone in the game without any serious penalties (I don't think you will find anyone who thinks some of the current Starter mechs aren't very good machines even for vets to use) because it is the player's own abilities and knowledge that primarily drive their capabilities in the game, not some arbitrary level system.

However, just because someone can jump into a part of the game intended for players with experience in the game who are part of a full 12-man team does not mean that they should have an expectation to have equal odds of success when they enter it as a player without the experience and/or as a PUG. They go in with the full knowledge of what they are facing, or they have to accept the consequences of not researching what they are choosing to do.

So, is it a mystery that the numbers of players in the CW portion of the game have dropped from the initial surge when it was released? No. It is the simple result of attrition of those who tried it and found it did not offer them the game conditions that interested them, and those who simply are not ready for CW yet. Neither of these should have been in CW to begin with under the rules most top-end/hard core content operates under in other MMOs, but this game allows the -player- to make that decision, and to make the determination if they can or will play this part of the game. That's a very large amount of freedom granted to the player, and with that freedom comes the responsibility for the outcome of their own actions and choices.

Also, as has been noted, the initial release of CW occurred when a very large number of the playerbase had a number of days that were completely free of time to play as much as they wanted due to a holiday. Now that the holiday has passed, the amount of time many players have to participate in the game at all has been sharply reduced, resulting in yet another reason for the numbers in the CW queues to drop.

Lastly, it is instructive to note this is still the initial version of CW. Many players have overlooked this and already passed judgement on it as though it were a final product. As well, many players simply lack the patience to wait for things, and the moderate wait time of 20 minutes at the outside for a match is simply beyond their capabilities. For both of these players, CW will never be an acceptable mode of play.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 16 January 2015 - 04:16 PM.


#140 Ax2Grind

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 816 posts

Posted 16 January 2015 - 04:56 PM

View PostMirkk Defwode, on 16 January 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:


It is up to you to win. It's up to the designer to make the fight balanced so that skill becomes the deciding factor, not having one side start with a terrible disadvantage that either takes luck or stupidity to get past.


But what is the terrible disadvantage outside of skill? The fact that a team is on comms? Comms are available for everyone. The fact that the enemy team is a group? Everyone can join a group. Both of these things are completely player choice, just like when my fellow pugs decide they wanted to bring their LRM Cataphracts instead of a more competitive mech to the battleground. Sure, it would be awesome if my LRM Ctatphracts friends got their own special match catered to balance with a weird mech build, but that's just not realistic.

In terms of dealing with the parameters that PGI has created, outside of skill it comes down to each individual's choice about how they want to play the game. That's not PGI's fault, that's PGI enabling folks to take responsibility for how they want to enjoy the game. If someone joins any of the "group" queues, public or CW, and doesn't want to use comms, or doesn't want to join a group and get to know the people they drop with, or doesn't want to run a competitive mech, they need to recognize that they are choosing to put themselves, and likely their team, at a disadvantage. It is no one else's fault but their own. However, if folks enjoy the challenge then more power to them...but they shouldn't qq about these things if that is the case.

And matchmaker hardly equals balance. That's just matching tonnage. Nothing can match mech builds, nor can matchmaker know how well someone is in a particular build. Those are qualities it does not track. The equalizer is us. We can all choose to bring whatever we want, and to play however we want. In fact, that is part of the "skill" for this game. How you prep for battle matters.

To keep this book of a post on topic, having more respect for our fellow players includes not being sore losers.

Edit: and Jakob, nice sig -"Battles are decided by the mistakes of the combatants."

Edited by Ax2Grind, 16 January 2015 - 05:05 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users