116 replies to this topic

[Soy]

Brosquito what are you even on about. My buddy sittin here wonderin what the hell you talkin about lasers for like fifteen times, what the ****. Numbers are numbers, plug one in and if it's good ok if not tweak it, not laserrocket science.

So if it's something you could live with, cuz you wouldn't play it etc, who's really got an agenda here.

Yeah you should harden the **** up, get on my level. Cuz I honestly don't care if risk vs reward is lost as an opportunity in CW, but I know it's a 'shoulda woulda coulda' thing.

Btw look at Armored Core; derp.

Doodoo Head?! You really underestimate my gimmick;

Edited by Soy, 30 March 2015 - 03:53 PM.

[FupDup]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

Brosquito what are you even on about. My buddy sittin here wonderin what the hell you talkin about lasers for like fifteen times, what the ****. Numbers are numbers, plug one in and if it's good ok if not tweak it, not laserrocket science.

The only values that would make my "3 Criticisms™" disappear would have to be cost numbers that are so small that they would essentially be irrelevant...and that would make the whole affair pointless to begin with.

Also, I probably mentioned lazors 16 times, not 15.

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

So if it's something you could live with, cuz you wouldn't play it etc, who's really got an agenda here.

Yeah you should harden the **** up, get on my level. Cuz I honestly don't care if risk vs reward is lost as an opportunity in CW, but I know it's a 'shoulda woulda coulda' thing.

My "agenda" is to vote in favor of things that I feel would improve the game and vote against things that I feel would reduce the quality of the game.

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

Btw look at Armored Core; derp.

I don't particularly care about that game, and don't see how it even pertains to the topic of how something would affect MWO's gameplay.

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 03:52 PM, said:

You really underestimate my gimmick;

Your face is a gimmick.

[Burktross]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 02:29 PM, said:

Good, you actually spoke with meaning behind what you said.

First off, immersion is not some semantical ****. It's the MW/BT at large. For example, if you removed MW from MWO, it would already be dead. Not double down on that for CW with stuff like RnR is a waste.

The grind that new players have to give to this game could be changed. Dismissing that as some sort of impossibility is ******* asinine you autist. The same exact thing goes for timidity of play - if rewards dictate that assertive or strong plays are rewarded properly, in mechs that should be vanguarding as such instead of borked hitboxers being FILO, that **** would be on the level even more.

How you don't see this is beyond me, but whatever, carrying on being a complete moron.

"My opinion / theory is fact, and you are moronic for not acknowledging this. I am above you, spacepoor/bad peasant, thus my input matters, not yours!"

Boot up the game and go to Frozen City man. You need to chill out.

[Burktross]

FupDup, on 30 March 2015 - 03:58 PM, said:

Your face is a gimmick.

It's okay, Fupdup, he's lost. I was joking around on CS:GO and making MWO references--- he must of been one of the tryhards in my matches and, in his confusion, wound up here to enlighten us on how pro and correct he is.

[Soy]

TubThumb so when you say "cuz Paulconomy" gg promoting things you like.

You got a real knack for only talking about things you think add to your argument, and ignoring other things like other's right to anecdotal evidence, actual data, preference, logic, etc.

I dunno why I bothered asking to be unbanned from forums before returning, with so many mongos abound I'm prolly gonna bite another ban sooner or later. With threads like this, I'd risk on sooner for reward.

ps - Counterstrike also says 'hi' to riskvsreward..

Edited by Soy, 30 March 2015 - 04:15 PM.

[Burktross]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:12 PM, said:

TubThumb so when you say "cuz Paulconomy" gg promoting things you like.

You got a real knack for only talking about things you think add to your argument, and ignoring other things like other's right to anecdotal evidence, actual data, preference, logic, etc.

I dunno why I bothered asking to be unbanned from forums before returning, with so many mongos abound I'm prolly gonna bite another ban sooner or later. With threads like this, I'd risk on sooner for reward.

Womp.

[Soy]

Also LoL, kills matter regarding gold rvr, in MWO they don't. Unless you include events.

Match to match it's just a washed out grind you don't even notice how much you're making unless you're some sort of miserly you know.

So far I've mentioned several more competitive games, some non linear classic persistant state universe games, and some other randoms that have more risk vs reward than MWO. CW should have some mechanics working on this **** that make the stakes seem a bit more intimate, it would add more depth to a critically shallow game mode.

Good job arguing about how the newbie grind is a glass ceiling as it relates to a mode they should be getting ***-pumped for stepping into early on principle, anyways.

Edited by Soy, 30 March 2015 - 04:22 PM.

[FupDup]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:12 PM, said:

TubThumb so when you say "cuz Paulconomy" gg promoting things you like.

You got a real knack for only talking about things you think add to your argument, and ignoring other things like other's right to anecdotal evidence, actual data, preference, logic, etc.

Do you have any data for this topic? Or any specific logic? So far you've just said something to the effect of "But it's totes risk/reward and immersion brah. It just is man." You haven't actually given an in-depth explanation of why or how beyond "because of reasons."

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:12 PM, said:

I dunno why I bothered asking to be unbanned from forums before returning, with so many mongos abound I'm prolly gonna bite another ban sooner or later. With threads like this, I'd risk on sooner for reward.

It's the Forumwarrior's Itch™ and forum withdrawal.

The forums have a seductive allure that tricks us into thinking that our opinions actually matter in the grand scheme of things, and that we're important and stuff. It's the feeling you get when you know you gotta make "just one more" shitpost before going to bed. The forums are more or less just a support group for disgruntled Forumwarriors to cry on each other's shoulders because they want their text messages to be read by someone, anyone.

[Burktross]

FupDup, on 30 March 2015 - 04:20 PM, said:

Do you have any data for this topic? Or any specific logic? So far you've just said something to the effect of "But it's totes risk/reward and immersion brah. It just is man." You haven't actually given an in-depth explanation of why or how beyond "because of reasons."



It's the Forumwarrior's Itch™ and forum withdrawal.

The forums have a seductive allure that tricks us into thinking that our opinions actually matter in the grand scheme of things, and that we're important and stuff. It's the feeling you get when you know you gotta make "just one more" shitpost before going to bed. The forums are more or less just a support group for disgruntled Forumwarriors to cry on each other's shoulders because they want their text messages to be read by someone, anyone.

When's the next Forumwarrior's Anonymous? I think I uh... *looks at rising postcount* have a problem...

[Burktross]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

Actually, I can prove it.

Lets duel in game and the loser permanently logs out. I think that would be highly immersive, as well as fairly risky.

Get at me, nothing else to add to this pile of trash with random underhivelings suckling your postcount.

Wait... what does that prove, exactly, m'lord?

[FupDup]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

I can prove it.

Lets duel in game and the loser permanently logs out. I think that would be highly immersive, as well as fairly risky.

Get at me, nothing else to add to this pile of trash with-

I don't see the logical connection between a 1v1 match and an argument about making damage and ammo cost C-Bills to maintain.

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

random underhivelings suckling your postcount.

Ujelly?

[Alistair Winter]

WM Quicksilver, on 30 March 2015 - 03:35 PM, said:

Who would've thought that people would not want to pay bills....in a game.

Well, at least not in this game. It's a pretty central part of a lot of other games.

WM Quicksilver, on 30 March 2015 - 03:35 PM, said:

It worked for MW2 because it as a single player game who's only combatents were AI and there was a clear end. This however is an online arena shooter and CW just adds a purpose to that arena.

There are other games with R&R even though they're not single player games.

As for clear end, I fail to see how that's relevant at all. Yeah, it sucks that we don't have proper missions, but a fair number of MW2:Mercs missions were just search and destroy missions or defend missions. The lack of objectives is about as relevant to the discussion of R&R as the low number of maps.

Davers, on 30 March 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

Was MW2 a completely online PvP game where all your earnings are partially decided by your ping? No? Then it doesn't count in this discussion.

Wow, I actually haven't heard that argument before. I could be wrong, but I think it's the most ill-conceived argument against R&R that has ever been made.

R&R doesn't work for MWO because ping is a factor in online games? So... because people have different ping values, it would be unfair that some of us aren't as successful and thus pay more for R&R?

Can you please explain how that is in any way different from the fact that people with low ping and good hardware have an edge in online PVP games? Whether it's because of R&R or the income calculation, players with high ping and bad hardware will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage and have a lowe C-bill income than everyone else.

[Alistair Winter]

Soy, on 30 March 2015 - 04:12 PM, said:

ps - Counterstrike also says 'hi' to riskvsreward..

I have 3 possible explanations, given the arguments I just responded to.

1) CounterStrike is not an online multiplayer game where you're actually competing with other players.
2) CounterStrike has a clear end goal and is not an arena shooter like MWO.
3) Ping is not a factor in CounterStrike as in MWO.

[Davers]

Alistair Winter, on 30 March 2015 - 04:27 PM, said:

ould be unfair that some of us aren't as successful and thus pay more for R&R?

Can you please explain how that is in any way different from the fact that people with low ping and good hardware have an edge in online PVP games? Whether it's because of R&R or the income calculation, players with high ping and bad hardware will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage and have a lowe C-bill income than everyone else.

Because you just doubled down on the disadvantage?

Also, pretty sure mission rewards in MW2 increased as the game progressed. They wouldn't in a game like MWO.

[Burktross]

Alistair Winter, on 30 March 2015 - 04:30 PM, said:

I have 3 possible explanations, given the arguments I just responded to.

1) CounterStrike is not an online multiplayer game where you're actually competing with other players.
2) CounterStrike has a clear end goal and is not an arena shooter like MWO.
3) Ping is not a factor in CounterStrike as in MWO.

You're incorrect... on all counts?
http://blog.counter-strike.net/

Edited by Burktross, 30 March 2015 - 04:32 PM.

[Soy]

Alistair Winter, on 30 March 2015 - 04:30 PM, said:

2) CounterStrike has a clear end goal and is not an arena shooter like MWO.

have you forwarded this to PGI as a CW memo yet, orrrrrrrr

[Alistair Winter]

Davers, on 30 March 2015 - 04:31 PM, said:

Because you just doubled down on the disadvantage?

Did you make that calculation with some arbitrary numbers in your head or did you leave room for some variables that can be manipulated?

Davers, on 30 March 2015 - 04:31 PM, said:

Also, pretty sure mission rewards in MW2 increased as the game progressed. They wouldn't in a game like MWO.

At this point, I have to wonder if you're actually trolling. As long as the costs are in proportion to the rewards, it doesn't matter whether that single player campaign had different missions with different rewards.

[Alistair Winter]

Burktross, on 30 March 2015 - 04:32 PM, said:

You're incorrect... on all counts?
http://blog.counter-strike.net/

I was also being sarcastic on all counts.

You'll notice that Davers and WM Quicksilver used those 3 arguments as reasons why R&R worked for MW2:Mercs but not MWO. PVP, ping and arena shooter.

Any good PVP arena shooter with ping involved cannot have have negative consequences for dying (e.g. repairing or losing all your gear). That's why CounterStrike was never popular.

(I was being sarcastic again there)

Edited by Alistair Winter, 30 March 2015 - 04:40 PM.

[Burktross]

Alistair Winter, on 30 March 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

I was also being sarcastic on all counts.

You'll notice that Davers and WM Quicksilver used those 3 arguments as reasons why R&R worked for MW2:Mercs but not MWO. PVP, ping and arena shooter.

Any good PVP arena shooter with ping involved cannot have have negative consequences for dying (e.g. repairing or losing all your gear). That's why CounterStrike was never popular.

(I was being sarcastic again there)

Oh.
Forgive me, it's been a long day

[Soy]

I was just making an example of TubThumper and ignoring other derps to be honest, but...

Alistair Winter, on 30 March 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

ping

I know you're quoting someone else or something, w/e.

Imo, MWO is one of the least effected FPS by ping. It's not a twitch game. These people should go try and play old Unreal Tourny with 500 ping on some lunar server; gg.

Btw every single ******* time I see your location I think of your boy:



Ima make a habit of quoting songs at him when we speak.

Edited by Soy, 30 March 2015 - 04:47 PM.