169 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

I'll go ahead and re-re-re-read it...

Don't know how many times you've "read" it, but if you got the opinion you stated before from it, then you are not reading it. One can read something, without actually reading it.

Quote

To Summarize:

• Competitiveness and competition are not bad. It is healthy and normal.
  
• Respect, honor and integrity should never be compromised for competitiveness. This doesn't mean not to use everything you can, it means to treat others respectfully. I'd rather people know me as a helpful person rather than "that jerk".
  
• Be helpful to others. This not only can improve your future teams and opponents, but also improves new/other player experiences.
  
• Have fun. Never forget it's just a game. Try to make it fun for yourself and for others.

I think I've said it well enough there that I shouldn't have to explain my points, but if you desire me to explain these points more, I can. Just ask.

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

I thought you were choosing to take the name "Percival" as a complement. Changed your mind?

I never said I was taking it as a compliment. I was saying maybe it was being delivered as one as it is the name of a noble knight of the round table. Either way, it's name calling, which is bullying. You are, in fact, bullying me here. But, the bullies never see it that way, do they?

Edited by Tesunie, 02 February 2015 - 11:10 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

I'll go ahead and re-re-re-read it...

I've re-re-re-read it again and from what I read you try to re-define 'competitiveness' as a 'desire to improve one's self.'

I disagree with that definition, and I think most dictionaries do too, as so far none of the definitions of the word I've read so far say anything like that.

You then start going into how 'too much' of it can be 'bad'... You have to stipulate that 'too much' is for the most part subjective. Then you start using words like 'obsession', 'poison', 'suffer', etc. etc. etc.

Again, to me a diatribe against those who in playing a competitive game, on a team, expecting their fellow team members to be playing up to the same level as they are, taking the game at least as seriously as they do.

You might as well have the same complaint against the NFL, that the tight ends don't get to do what they want, when they want, and should be allowed to wear a motor cycle helmet instead of a football helmet if they want, instead of what the rest of the team is doing and expecting.

I find it ironic how you continuously harp on respect and fun, yet you can't see that not complying with the how the 11 other players intend to play is much more disrespectful than a blunt, "Load up the Champion Firestarter, now!" in the final moments before the game launches.

How you can feel a "we got this" is a declaration of "you're off the team"...

You had a chance to redeem yourself, or prove your point, in the match.

Instead, you DC'd.

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 11:09 AM, said:

...

I never said I was taking it as a compliment. I was saying maybe it was being delivered as one as it is the name of a noble knight of the round table. Either way, it's name calling, which is bullying. You are, in fact, bullying me here. But, the bullies never see it that way, do they?

I stand by the name.

Even more so now.

[Tesunie]

Question: If the goal is to win, how does one achieve that?
Answer: By improving one's skills and becoming better.

Thus, Competitiveness in it's base form is a desire to become better to improve one's skills.

[Joseph Mallan]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

I've re-re-re-read it again and from what I read you try to re-define 'competitiveness' as a 'desire to improve one's self.'

If I am competitive:

com·pet·i·tive adjective \kəm-ˈpe-tə-tiv\
: of or relating to a situation in which people or groups are trying to win a contest or be more successful than others : relating to or involving competition

: having a strong desire to win or be the best at something

: as good as or better than others of the same kind : able to compete successfully with others

I have to want to compete to be able to. I need to have the skills to get in teh mix. If I don't possess them, my competitive nature will make me get them.
So if i want to compete and be teh best, I have to become the best, and that is a self improving way of thinking.

[Tesunie]

Question: When does competitiveness, or the desire to win, become "too much?
Answer: When it starts to drive the purpose of a game, which is to have fun, away because the desire to win overrules the purpose of a game.
Answer: When your desire to win overrules other people's feelings. This is called Sportsmanship, or poor sportsmanship in this example.
Answer: When your desire to win provides a reason to defy the intent or the rules of the game. IE: Excuses the use of aim-bots, hacks and cheats, as you wish to win.

There are many answers to this. Some are subjective. The line on how far is too far is a large grey one. Each person defines this area differently, but I believe many of us can agree that there are points where the desire to win can become a bad thing.
Example: If someone knifes an opponent's car's tires before a race so that they can't race, thus giving them a victory, that is competitiveness taken too far.
Example: If someone puts a substance on their boxing gloves that will knock out an opponent who smells it to win, thus giving them a victory, that is also taking competitiveness too far.
Example: If one waits for their opponent to be injured or sick before challenging them into a single one on one combat, to guarantee victory, then competitiveness has once more gone too far.

If this was a real life fight or war, fine. Cheat and survive. However, we are talking about a game designed for people to have fun with (and for a company to create money off of). There are some extents of the competitive spirit that is just wrong in this kind of environment. Insulting a fellow player is one such added example. It diminishes their fun of the game. If they leave, it diminishes your potential game play, as if enough players leave you will have no one left to play with (in an extreme case). Or, if they feel bad enough that they feel they have to leave the match, then it hurts your own chances of winning that match.

Cause = Effect

[Joseph Mallan]

Quick note... Not everything is fair in war. Hence War crimes.

[Tesunie]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 February 2015 - 11:31 AM, said:

Quick note... Not everything is fair in war. Hence War crimes.

You just made me laugh, again. And it's very true.

[Dimento Graven]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

...

Thus, Competitiveness in it's base form is a desire to become better to improve one's skills.

Again we disagree.

Please look up the latin root of compete, and rethink your answer.

Dictionaries and I agree that competiveness, is the desire to compete and win.

You are correct in that a desire to compete will also have a corresponding desire to improve yourself so that you can actually BE competitive, BUT, the desire to compete and the desire to improve one's self, is NOT the same thing. I've seen PLENTY of people who have the desire to compete, but have absolutely ZERO interest in improving themselves as they already believe they are the best at the game (this is a fact of life for ALL computer games, not just MWO).

Then there's people like me, who like to compete, and like to improve them selves, but, for the most part are competing with those achievements (oh guillotine achievement, how your 1000 headshot requirement MOCKS ME!!!).

Ultimately I believe you are wrong from the beginning because of your incorrect definition of 'competitive' and of the use of the subjective terms like 'over-competitiveness'.

[Joseph Mallan]

Actually a interesting perspective D. I am not sure a agree but you got me thinking.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 02 February 2015 - 11:50 AM.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

Oh darned, he found out that we bought some of those self aware turrets from Liao! We must have him assassinated at once!

So let me get this straight now. You* were a jerk to him, he was a jerk to you* (irregardless of who started it)? OK, so why drag all this here in the forums once again if both of your behaviors was less then sterling? The Original Post does not mention the game that 'inspired' it, does not say that competitiveness is bad in and of itself (which has nothing to do with that game once again). It says that when another feels the need to force their competitive game play onto another is when the competitiveness gets to be bad (which yet again does not mention that game AGAIN in its references. No details of it, no names, no nothing about that game. He could be talking about another group or game entirely, as he didn't just stop playing CW after those two matches, nor where those his first two matches of CW). So once again, why drag that game into this thread to begin with! Others have already posted that were not involved in said game, and they have also stated that that game was not mentioned in the Original Post and if anything only helps to prove the Original Posts statement (in one way, shape, or form).

(*You being the team in general, not necessarily you...)

Now as for his own words. He said he DCed from the group because he felt so insulted and that the atmosphere was so toxic that he could not stand to play with that group again, considering (according to his words once again) that the group had just continued to be hostile from the get go of the second match, instead of giving him a 'second chance'. He did not DC because he couldn't include we in "We got this". If you are going to use his own words then please use his own words, not your interpretation of those words.

As for not bullying him. I do believe that name calling is indeed bullying. We won't mention the other rude behavior that is being thrown his way, and from a strictly thread point of view, it would appear that your teammates started it by accusing him of things (rather it happened or not) that had nothing to do with the Original Post, and then continued to degrade and digress from there into harassment and insulting him.

As for the LP. You do get LP for your performance in match rather you win or lose. You only get a 'contract boost' if you win (which is not multiplied by Phoenix mechs bonus). As for the Mech, once again there are a bunch of strategies that could be employed by a group that has one wrong mech in the mix. Its just a matter of mixing it up a little from time to time. Also what do you expect from the average pugger? Them to be the best performer on the team? or them to trail along and try to fit in with the rest of the team (in game tactics of course as normally you don't have a chance to get them to change mechs). Would you have had the same behavior if this was one of your teammates that was in the drop deck editor and had forgotten to save it, dropping in with his DDC atlas first with everyone else in those light jumping mechs? Would you have given your own teammate (who may not have TS in this example) as much of a hard time while he was trying to accommodate you buy going through that horribly set up 'mech select' menu to find the appropriate mech? (as one would likely not reply in team chat while scrolling through that horrid mess, being more occupied trying desperately to find the right mech?)

[Nathan Bloodguard]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 February 2015 - 11:03 AM, said:

The point is to win. But at what cost do we win? And then what is fun for some is not fun for others. So if Winning is goal How we are as winners should also be important. And even more what Kind of loser we are. Losses are much funner when joked about than obsessed over.

Losses are even better when you learn from them, as opposed to blaming everything/one for the lose. (What did I do wrong to lose this match? Was there anything that I could have done better to make that match into a win?) And yes, sometimes you did everything right, but someone(s) on the team did something to make you lose. In those games, you try to include a backup plan for players like that or just move on if there was truly nothing you could have done to change the outcome of that game.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 February 2015 - 09:26 AM, said:

The Server or Devs?

Would the server be considered active? Must make me a Dev! That's it! Time to smite you all with my BANHAMMER MWAHAHAHAH!

[Tesunie]

To become competitive though, one would have to improve. Thus, by competitiveness, one aims to improve. If they don't improve while trying to be competitive, then they are not really being competitive. Desire and action are different things. I'm taking Competitiveness as the desire to be competitive. That desire to be competitive drives one to improve their own abilities so that they can compete.

When joining into a competitive event, if you are competitive then you work on your skills and try to bring yourself to that level of expected competitiveness. You don't plan to join the Olympics without training and working on raising your skills. Thus, the competitive nature presents the desire to improve your skills.

This article, though posted within this game's forums, is not intended strictly for MW:O, or even video games. However, I do feel there is a place for this article within this forum and this game and was written with a flare and examples for this game. If nothing else, it was written to make people think about things.

In the end, it's a request for a little better sportsmanship within the game, even if you are trying to be competitive. There is nothing wrong with competitiveness. There is something wrong when competitiveness overrides sportsmanship and respect for your fellow players. One can remain competitive, while at the same time retaining sportsmanship and respect. One can even issue orders while remaining respectful.

You also have to consider how the word is being used, and the actions produced from that word. In this case, competitive. Competitive, when taken into action, leads to one aiming to improve their abilities. One directs you to the other.


However, I'd like to also take a look at the Latin root word for Compete, Competitive and Competition, if you have links to their definitions. I did a brief search on Google translate from English to Latin and didn't exactly receive anything new that wasn't already in the dictionary.

[Burktross]

Lily from animove, on 02 February 2015 - 05:30 AM, said:

Tesunie I recommend you to not play MWO for 2 month after the day it launches on steam, because then you will probably have a lot issues with getting insulted.

I figure the l33t scrubs will be insulting the p34s4an1s more than vice versa.

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

Dictionaries and I agree that competiveness, is the desire to compete and win.

Here we come to a connotation / denotation debate.
Both of you are right depending on where the topic is based--- however, more often than not it would be connotation, because that has more relevance to the world/game than denotation.

TL;DR Connotation usage is more appropriate as we are talking about subjective matters.

[Dimento Graven]

Nathan Bloodguard, on 02 February 2015 - 12:05 PM, said:

Oh darned, he found out that we bought some of those self aware turrets from Liao! We must have him assassinated at once!"

I have NEVER been headshot so consistently except when running towards the generators and crossing the paths of the turrets.

Beyond that, there was this ONE TIME, I was gonna get revenge on the turret, I was waiting for it to pop up so's I could lay a strike on it and get it for max damage in one shot and destroy.

The little fugger never popped up. I was like 30 meters in front of it, in my Jenner K, and the little jerk never popped up so I could make sure the strike killed it!

There I am standing in front of this turret, like a jack ass, instead of helping finish off O-gen...

That thing KNEW I was out to kill it, hence, self-aware...

Quote

So let me get this straight now. You* were a jerk to him, he was a jerk to you* (irregardless of who started it)? OK, so why drag all this here in the forums once again if both of your behaviors was less then sterling? The Original Post does not mention the game that 'inspired' it, does not say that competitiveness is bad in and of itself (which has nothing to do with that game once again). It says that when another feels the need to force their competitive game play onto another is when the competitiveness gets to be bad (which yet again does not mention that game AGAIN in its references. No details of it, no names, no nothing about that game. He could be talking about another group or game entirely, as he didn't just stop playing CW after those two matches, nor where those his first two matches of CW). So once again, why drag that game into this thread to begin with! Others have already posted that were not involved in said game, and they have also stated that that game was not mentioned in the Original Post and if anything only helps to prove the Original Posts statement (in one way, shape, or form).

(*You being the team in general, not necessarily you...)

Well at this point it makes no difference if I'd made the statement that, even if I had not been a participant in the events that spawned his rant, and had found this post, I'd STILL have responded.

Competition involves a seriousness of attitude, and while yes, we all want to have fun, ultimately the goal is to win, and winning is fun. Typically for the most part, losing is not fun. If the loss is caused by everyone not cooperating to their fullest, or playing at the same or higher level than you, even less fun.

How dare you to presume to tell me, or anyone else in this game not cheating, that you're 'too competitive'.

Quote

Now as for his own words. He said he DCed from the group because he felt so insulted and that the atmosphere was so toxic that he could not stand to play with that group again, considering (according to his words once again) that the group had just continued to be hostile from the get go of the second match, instead of giving him a 'second chance'. He did not DC because he couldn't include we in "We got this". If you are going to use his own words then please use his own words, not your interpretation of those words.

So he made a suggestion and was given a response of something like, "Don't bother we got this" and felt this was toxic and insulting?

That's my understanding of the event...

Quote

As for not bullying him. I do believe that name calling is indeed bullying. We won't mention the other rude behavior that is being thrown his way, and from a strictly thread point of view, it would appear that your teammates started it by accusing him of things (rather it happened or not) that had nothing to do with the Original Post, and then continued to degrade and digress from there into harassment and insulting him.

<shrug> If he chooses to feel bullied and offended by being called 'Percival', that's on him.

Quote

As for the LP. You do get LP for your performance in match rather you win or lose. You only get a 'contract boost' if you win (which is not multiplied by Phoenix mechs bonus).

This is true I failed to consider those, though the difference for one 'mech when a win is made up for by the bonus at the end of a winning match is it not?

Quote

As for the Mech, once again there are a bunch of strategies that could be employed by a group that has one wrong mech in the mix. Its just a matter of mixing it up a little from time to time. Also what do you expect from the average pugger? Them to be the best performer on the team? or them to trail along and try to fit in with the rest of the team (in game tactics of course as normally you don't have a chance to get them to change mechs).

That's the thing, there was MORE than enough time to switch out while sitting in lobby had he been paying attention when strat was discussed and all the other pug players switched to their jump capable lights.

I don't ever expect a random pug to be as good as me, most of us feel we're better than the random solo scrubs, BUT, we expect them to do their best to attempt to play up to general level of the group and to use at least the minimal common sense 'strategies' that go along with 'dropping blind in a group of people you don't know and haven't spoken to' like: Following your lance, targeting the enemies with solid 'doritos' (which indicate someone else on your team is targeting them), etc. etc.

Quote

Would you have had the same behavior if this was one of your teammates that was in the drop deck editor and had forgotten to save it, dropping in with his DDC atlas first with everyone else in those light jumping mechs? Would you have given your own teammate (who may not have TS in this example) as much of a hard time while he was trying to accommodate you buy going through that horribly set up 'mech select' menu to find the appropriate mech? (as one would likely not reply in team chat while scrolling through that horrid mess, being more occupied trying desperately to find the right mech?)

LOL, the crap we give people in our unit when they screw up like that PALES in comparison to what Percival got, by tons and tons. Keep in mind all Percival got was text, if you're a member of our unit, you're in our TS channel and if you screw up something as simple as mech selection...

LOL! You'll know about it in no uncertain terms.

My experience dropping in various unit channels on the Davion/Commstar servers while I did my own solo CW drops indicates it ain't much different with the other units.

[Dimento Graven]

Burktross, on 02 February 2015 - 12:26 PM, said:

...

Here we come to a connotation / denotation debate.
Both of you are right depending on where the topic is based--- however, more often than not it would be connotation, because that has more relevance to the world/game than denotation.

TL;DR Connotation usage is more appropriate as we are talking about subjective matters.

If you can find me an actual definition of the word 'competitive', 'compete', or 'competition' that includes "desire to improve one's self" I'll concede the 'context' stipulation.

Otherwise, you're both wrong.

While the desire to compete and the desire to improve one's self can be related, it DOES NOT make them equal or the same thing.

The best example I can come up with in my protein starved state (forum warrior needs food, badly) is a guy saying, "I have 100 hundred horses, it's the same thing as the 100hp engine."

Hardly...

[Tesunie]

Context:
con·text
ˈkäntekst/
noun
noun: context; plural noun: contexts

• the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed.
  
  "the decision was taken within the context of planned cuts in spending"
  synonyms: circumstances, conditions, factors, state of affairs, situation, background, scene, setting More
  "the wider historical context"
  
  frame of reference, contextual relationship;
  text, subject, theme, topic
  "a quote taken out of context".
  
  • the parts of something written or spoken that immediately precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning.
    
    
    "word processing is affected by the context in which words appear"

Denotation:<p class="lr_dct_ent" data-hveid="30">

de·no·ta·tion

ˌdēnōˈtāSHən/

noun
noun: denotation; plural noun: denotations

• the literal or primary meaning of a word, in contrast to the feelings or ideas that the word suggests.
  
  
  "beyond their immediate denotation, the words have a connotative power"
  
  • the action or process of indicating or referring to something by means of a word, symbol, etc.
    
  • Philosophy
    
    
    the object or concept to which a term refers, or the set of objects of which a predicate is true.

I have taken Competitiveness in a contextual manner, to present a point when it follows a logical course of action. In that course of reasoning, the term Competitiveness can mean to improve one's skills/self.

You are taking it as a completely detonated term, trying to remove the connections presented within the OP of this thread. This is where you are mistaken.

Yes, Competitiveness, competition and competitive do not actually mean to improve one's skills/self. But by it's actions in the context of the article, it leads logically from one state to the other, connecting the meanings together and linking one action to the result of the other definition.

You are basically either trying to remove the context of the article, or you are trying to take the article pieces out of context.

Edit: Something went broke with the copy and paste. Correcting it.

Edited by Tesunie, 02 February 2015 - 01:10 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

To become competitive though, one would have to improve. Thus, by competitiveness, one aims to improve. If they don't improve while trying to be competitive, then they are not really being competitive. Desire and action are different things. I'm taking Competitiveness as the desire to be competitive. That desire to be competitive drives one to improve their own abilities so that they can compete.

When joining into a competitive event, if you are competitive then you work on your skills and try to bring yourself to that level of expected competitiveness. You don't plan to join the Olympics without training and working on raising your skills. Thus, the competitive nature presents the desire to improve your skills.

No, you're wrong. If you have a desire to be more competitive you will NORMALLY also have a desire to improve your own level of game play, BUT, if you already BELIEVE yourself to be THE BEST, you would have no desire to "improve" yourself, BUT, still desire to compete.

You can have one, or the other, and you can have both. BUT, having both DOES NOT make them same thing, and having ONE doesn't AUTOMAGICALLY mean you have the other.

Sorry man. I know where you want to go with this, and it IS an admirably high road you're trying to take, BUT, it's vapor as it's based on an incorrect assumption.

Again to put it short, having a 100hp engine does NOT mean you need 100 saddles...

Quote

This article, though posted within this game's forums, is not intended strictly for MW:O, or even video games. However, I do feel there is a place for this article within this forum and this game and was written with a flare and examples for this game. If nothing else, it was written to make people think about things.

In the end, it's a request for a little better sportsmanship within the game, even if you are trying to be competitive. There is nothing wrong with competitiveness. There is something wrong when competitiveness overrides sportsmanship and respect for your fellow players. One can remain competitive, while at the same time retaining sportsmanship and respect. One can even issue orders while remaining respectful.

Yes, but being a 'sportsman' doesn't lock you into a singularly subjective track of conduct either. If you don't think professional players don't berate the living bejeezus out of team mates for making stupid mistakes and no playing up to their abilities, I invite you to follow CNN during football season.

While for the most part the public face will be all 'PC' you will find the reports of the behind the scenes (perhaps see it televised during games even) of one or more players being read the riot act because of some bonehead maneuver they pulled.

And if you think their fellow players and coaches are using "please and thank you's" holding their pinkies out during the process, lol... Well, I'm sure you don't think that.

At its basic level what's at stake in MWO, any other video game, or professional sporting event is a Win.

We all want and will work for that win, and we all expect our teammates to also want and work for it at least as badly as we do. When our teammate's fail to meet that expectation, either through inaction, attitude, or absolute lack of skill, it won't ALWAYS be polite.

Quote

You also have to consider how the word is being used, and the actions produced from that word. In this case, competitive. Competitive, when taken into action, leads to one aiming to improve their abilities. One directs you to the other.

Again, not automatically. While yes, the desire to compete COULD lead you to improving yourself, it can also lead to that actual, everyone agrees on, dark side of ACTUAL over-competitive behavior, cheating.

But we really don't need to have a debate on cheating. We all agree, it should not be done, in any form be it hacking, exploiting, or sabotage.

Quote

However, I'd like to also take a look at the Latin root word for Compete, Competitive and Competition, if you have links to their definitions. I did a brief search on Google translate from English to Latin and didn't exactly receive anything new that wasn't already in the dictionary.

Here's a pretty good one:

http://www.etymonlin...hp?term=compete

Quote

1610s, " to enter or be put in rivalry with," from Middle French compéter "be in rivalry with" (14c.), or directly from Late Latin competere "strive in common," in classical Latin "to come together, agree, to be qualified," later, "strive together," from com- "together" (see com-) + petere "to strive, seek, fall upon, rush at, attack" (see petition (n.)).

Rare 17c., revived from late 18c. in sense "to strive (alongside another) for the attainment of something" and regarded early 19c. in Britain as a Scottish or American word. Market sense is from 1840s (perhaps a back-formation from competition); athletics sense attested by 1857. Related: Competed; competing.

As you can see, nothing about self improvement.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 02 February 2015 - 01:10 PM.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

So you are telling me that Tesunie's OP would have prompted you to rehash that one incident even though the OP has nothing to do with that incident? I don't recall the OP telling you that YOU are "over competitive". it just states that taking things (even competitiveness) to far is never healthy for both you and those around you (or those you interact with in this case). If you translate it as you being "over competitive" that is not my nor Tesunie's fault, and would still have nothing to do with that incident.

Now as for me telling you that "anyone else in this game not cheating, that you're 'too competitive". I have not done so. I have not even touched that subject, nor named you as such. So please refrain from putting words in my (or Tesunie's) mouth as neither one of us has said that.

Now about the event. You where not there and is hearing this via a third party, just like me on some of this. This leads to very inaccurate 'facts' being shared and tends to color it in one sides favor or the other depending upon who gets to you first. As was stated numerous times by Tesunie (as you are replying to the point of my post that was what Tesunie had stated) that there was more going on besides the one phrase "we got this". According to him, as he has stated again, he was being treated poorly before this statement was said. Now as for what really happened, the only way to know that would have been to be an unbiased person that would have had to have been there (on your team, but not unit) for both the first and second game, or a recording/screen shots (once again, if these do exist, then please remember to get permission from those involved to prevent a name and shame problem) of the full chat log for both games. As no one has or wants to post these things then it is still impossible for any real, full, unfiltered facts to be reached by anyone in this matter.

As for bullying. You have called him more then that (although some of it may have been shorthand for you 'nickname' of him), and you have also done other things that classify as such.

As for the LP, I guess that would depend upon your performance. I would have to admit that it would be better to field the full phoenix mech line only on a defense, as you generate more LP then you would in a zurg rush. However you still can't think of any other tactics that could have been employed with one mech not being a jumping light? How much would you get from a victory? I think its something like 75 or so (each faction is different and keeps changing). I have been known to get 300 or more LP from performance alone. (I will double check when the cease fire is over, if possible, do also remember that would be a total of 40% LP boast if fielding all four Phoenix mechs and another 8% potential from medallions.)

As for the pugger stuff. Did he stick with the team for the first match? Did he Rambo off into the horizon or go through a different gate (unless told to of course)? How did his match score at the end look. Was he bottom, best, or somewhere in-between? I think you guys focused to much on this light mech stuff and forgot about the rest of the game. Like stated, there are more tactics available that could have easily been employed.

Now for unit mates. If this is how you treat your friends, its amazing that they stick with you. I know my unit this behavior would not be tolerated. I know because we did drop as a unit and one of our unit mates dropped in his DDC Atlas while the rest of us were in our lights. We didn't give him garbage for the mistake, we just had him sit and wait for wave two instead. Sometimes you have to change tactics. I always liked Joseph Mallen's sig. All plans are plan B. Battle plans are the first casualty of any conflict.

I do apologize for not quoting, but when I quote, it all just becomes one paragraph for some odd reason right now.

[Dimento Graven]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 01:03 PM, said:

...

I have taken Competitiveness in a contextual manner, to present a point when it follows a logical course of action. In that course of reasoning, the term Competitiveness can mean to improve one's skills/self.

No, no it really can't. Not even if you're properly applying the context you want to apply to the situation.

It's like saying: apple = tree.

"Well you sometimes get apples from trees, therefore trees and apples are the same thing."

It just doesn't work out.

Quote

You are taking it as a completely detonated term, trying to remove the connections presented within the OP of this thread. This is where you are mistaken.

That's because it is a completely separate term with its own definition. For god's sake let's not do to competition and self-improvement what was done to the words literally and figuratively.

Pretty soon no one will no what anyone is taking about if we continue to muddy up the language.

Quote

Yes, Competitiveness, competition and competitive do not actually mean to improve one's skills/self. But by it's actions in the context of the article, it leads logically from one state to the other, connecting the meanings together and linking one action to the result of the other definition.

You are basically either trying to remove the context of the article, or you are trying to take the article pieces out of context.

Edit: Something went broke with the copy and paste. Correcting it.

Actually I see it as you trying to misapply the terms.

Completely ignoring any and all references to the two matches we've all been referencing as inspiring the OP, taking that OP in and of itself and using the same level of liberal 'context' and 'logic' application as you, I can interpret your words to equate "being rude" to an underperforming/uncooperative team member at the same level as cheating.

IE: If someone berates a team member for being a bone head they're a cheater.

AND WE ALL KNOW, you don't really mean that.

Now in general going back to the subject of CW, out of the possibly hundreds of CW matches you could have played since CW was made available you had incidents where you were insulted and what not, and you feel that it's NEVER ok to that...

Really?

Can I call a team member on my bowling team who happens to drop his 16 pound ball on my foot a jack ass without being considered "overly competitive"?

Can I call a team member on my softball team, standing out in right field, flirting with some girl in the stands an idiot because he wasn't paying attention and got beaned in the head by a fly ball?

I'm pretty sure I can, I will, and it would be appropriate.

Most, reasonable, people would see it the same as I do.