Vlad Ward, on 30 January 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:
Because the only thing that will come out from your "Faction politics" is fewer fights to be had for everyone else. It's not like there are NPC ceasefires in place right now for the Factions to nullify in order to open more fronts. All you can do is close fronts and reduce other people's play options.
ALL the fights/read Deathmatches a gamer could want are available in the Public Queues.
Community Warfare... C O M M U N I T Y warfare connotes the undergirding rules, norms and consequences that ANY (save Pirate and Kingon
) community requires a necessary precursor to member/Unit interaction.
Like it or not, PGI is already on record as stating that COMMUNITY warfare will be the "hard mode", objectified for gamer immersion and tilted toward 12-man Teams when it comes to ease with witch to find games/gain games.
The single mechanism that will level LOYALIST playing fields with LARGE UNITS is the Faction Grouping. In the truest since of "COMMUNITY" the Faction Grouping brings together Soloist, Small Group and Individuals from Large Units (who just don't have their Unit on yet.)
The longer a Faction has and increasingly invest time and talent in TeamSpeak-enabled Faction Groups, the better the average level of play in that Faction will become.
This is a primary reason what so much credit is due LB and the -SA- for funding and tailoring Strana Mechty in order to aggregate Coan Gamers in a very well kitted out TS3 server resource. CSJ benefits at all levels from LB's largesse. It directly benefits NOT just CSJ but ALL Clans and their gamers.
Think how easy it is for me to "Call the Banners" from across Strana Mechty and give rise in 2-minutes to 50-gamers ready to execute OPN CLAN UNITY (
http://mwomercs.com/...ion-clan-unity/) and bring online an aggressive Clan Common Defense of a CSJ world...
How many DIFFERENT (and largely, parochial exclusive) TeamSpeaks would my Inner Sphere counterpart need to visit in order to do the same thing... and after 40-minutes and 3 lost sectors, just how many of those he spoke with would end up coming to his aid?
COMMUNITY WARFARE - it ain't your father's public queue!
You want endless-Deathmatches?
Go the way of the Public Queuss.
Community Warfare already comes with #POLITICS
...and #MWOpoliticsIsSoOP!
Seyla...
hybrid black, on 30 January 2015 - 02:29 PM, said:
but there are no alliances and treaties for factions only units with in a faction have them, what gives someone like you for example the right to say a faction can not attack someone else. because your loyal? or want to RP more then someone else? you loyalist all think you control your faction when really you have no power and should not, your in a unit in a faction if anything the people not in a unit and are in a faction are really the people playing for that faction you play for your tags they play for there faction.
I have NEVER prevented a single gamer from dropping into a match.
I have debated, discussed and given rise to discourse in favor of the CSJ Seniors' (NOT my own, really important distinction here) agreement with their CGB counterpart-Seniors that for the good of the Clan Drive on Terra, NO aggression will EVER be condoned between their respective Units... I then take this agreement and actively advocate in favor of it on these forums. I work to craft posts that bare witness to the MUCH GREATER benefits to Clan gamers of "going along" with this decision than instead for largely short-sighted, PAROCHIAL reasons taking actions detrimental to CLAN UNITY AND PEACE.
The "reluctance" some gamers feel when privy to these forum's debates on the topic is a direct result of your (and others) debates, discourse and dialogue with myself and those much more senior in the community than I, who just so happen to agree with some of what I write.
Guess what?
That is 100% a "COMMUNITY" derived interaction, right there.
PGI is OP, we already have top-tier CW interaction at multiple levels - Kudos Russ!
Peter2000, on 30 January 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:
The point is that these military members are not responsible for diplomatic actions such as declaring war or peace with neighboring countries (factions in MWO). Similarly, to pretend like perm-con units (which are *at best* parts of a RCT or Touman) are responsible for directing foreign policy seems like intentional misinterpretation of "reality". Their successes and actions may shape foreign policy (much like the 101st airborne, or any Merc running the faction's colors at the time), but they are not the political arm of the faction.
CONSTITUENCIES.
Think of them as military drones if ONE wishes to, but as COMMUNITY Warfare continues, it is becoming increasingly clear that Faction members are CONSTITUENCIES.
With all the vile and vitriol sometimes (think DC partisan politics ATM) but also all the hope and intents of those within out gaming community that are trying to BUILD something of worth for their own CONSTITUENCIES.
Just as I am trying to do so for Clans First, Smoke Jaguars Always!
And you and others are doing for your own sets of championed Factions/Faction-subsets/Units.
Neither of us is completely wrong.
Neither of us is completely right.
But it will be in OUR compromises and PGI's carefully crafted CW Phase 3 that long-term VIABILITY of MWO rests.
I look at it this way, I ALONE am to blame if in a year MWO isn't a game I want to play any longer.
I advocate and post these #WallsOfText to communicate across multiple audiences my hopes for MWO and the potential of certain game interactions over (and sometimes at the expense of) other game interactions.
And I have enjoyed each match and every post that I have thus far had the opportunity to contribute.
Thank you for reading to the vey conclusion of yet another #WallOfText!