86 replies to this topic

[Summon3r]

Lily from animove, on 11 May 2015 - 03:54 AM, said:

I made 3 games on saturday, took a while to fill the group, then we had 3x in a row a match vs a 12 man premade of -MS-

Guess without MS we wouldn't even had any opponents.

truly strange that an event makes people steam in like crazy. Yet CW is basically a permanent event, because there are mechbays and even MC's to get via faction loyality ranks.
But then I wonder how many even know this.

the miniscule amount of MC you earn and the mech bays are not even remotely worth the monotony of play in CW, and the utterly appalling map design.. imho of course

[Mystere]

Summon3r, on 10 May 2015 - 08:26 PM, said:

whats CW? is that the game mode we all were waiting for that was possibly the biggest let down in gaming history? with the well designed maps and what not?

Ahem. Diablo 3 is the greatest let down in gaming history, as far as I was concerned anyway. I waited 10 freaking long years for that, only to drop it after seven days of disappointment. MWO is far much more fun.

As for CW, it is just a shell. I needs more game modes, maps, and most of all depth.

Edited by Mystere, 11 May 2015 - 07:59 AM.

[Adamski]

IraqiWalker, on 10 May 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

There are no "cash-only" mechs in this game, aside from the hero mechs, and none of them use ECM (Except Pirate's bane, but if you wanna call the Pirate's Bane P2W, go ahead).

Also, ECM has been nerfed to the ground now. No jokes, I'm at the point where I'm wondering if the 1.5 ton investment is even worth it anymore.

Really? Try buying a GRF-2N before June without using real money, or the upcoming CTF-0X or BLR-2C which will also be ECM variants that will require cash only to start with.

And saying ECM has been over nerfed is perhaps the dumbest thing I have read on these forums in a LONG time.

[STEF_]

I cannot understand why community prefers the "always-the-same-5-minute" skirmish mode, from 3 years on.

CW is a great mode, with a permanent campaign!
What da hell do you want more than this?!?!?! It's awesome!

At least matches have a sense.

5minutes-skirmish doesn't.

[R Razor]

Stefka Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 10:55 AM, said:

I cannot understand why community prefers the "always-the-same-5-minute" skirmish mode, from 3 years on.

CW is a great mode, with a permanent campaign!
What da hell do you want more than this?!?!?! It's awesome!

At least matches have a sense.

5minutes-skirmish doesn't.

Yeah, that "permanent campaign" just had a map reset, planets mean nothing, it's one additional game mode on different maps, nothing more than that.

[STEF_]

R Razor, on 11 May 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

Yeah, that "permanent campaign" just had a map reset, planets mean nothing, it's one additional game mode on different maps, nothing more than that.

But of course there is a reset.
Imo a campaign should last 6 months, maximum, and then reset.

It's very easy to give a sense to planets: a little amount of c-bills every day, for each planet with a tag on it, and these c-bills should be given to the players of that team.
But, honestly, I really enjoy CW even withouy income, when I see -ms- tag in those planets I fought.

[Telmasa]

Tasker, on 09 May 2015 - 04:06 PM, said:

****** meat grinder that favor defending team even more than Boreal.

Is map that force attacking team to trudge through funnel from which can be shot by defenders with near impunity. Bad map design. Encourage pug team to sit back and do nothing when on attack or counter attack.

LOL

wait wait wait, you're having a serious cry because you can't manage to just rush by the enemy team and start a spawncamp like you do on every other map? You actually have to stop and *shoot back* at a team that has the chance to engage you before you can start your cheese farming fest?

And that's why you lose, because you and your NVKA groupies don't have any actual ability past that cheese farming meta?

ROFL.
QQ more, wow, try getting good at the game for once

[R Razor]

Stefka Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 11:05 AM, said:

But of course there is a reset.
Imo a campaign should last 6 months, maximum, and then reset.

It's very easy to give a sense to planets: a little amount of c-bills every day, for each planet with a tag on it, and these c-bills should be given to the players of that team.
But, honestly, I really enjoy CW even withouy income, when I see -ms- tag in those planets I fought.

Okay, so as long as you get to see a "tag" on a planet you're happy.......some people are very easily amused........myself, I prefer a game that has meaning, if a unit takes a planet there should be a benefit accrued that means more than an e-peen measuring device like a tag.

[MischiefSC]

Tags are irrelevant. Faction memebership is irrelevant. Who wins or loses is irrelevant save for payout at end of match. Has no overall "campaign" relevance.

How about we just close cw and have it be a 3rd queue with no matchmaker and a leaderboard. That is all we have now just with a map for the leaderboard. You get the reward of name on a leaderboard. What faction you belong to means nothing save your unit. Factions are irrelevant though. PGI has created a faction warfare environment with no real 'warfare' and no point, purpose or relevance to the factions.

[Mystere]

Appogee, on 10 May 2015 - 08:14 AM, said:

• Wildly imbalanced matches, often putting randoms up against 10 or 12 man premades
  
• Maps and modes which force the same kind of approach to every battle.
  
• Lower CBill rewards per match, and no benefit to actually capturing territory.
  
• 10 minute waits for a 20 minute matches.

Those are the problems with CW in its current incarnation.

Community Warfare was intended neither to be eSports for the jocks nor a farm for the peasants.

[Mystere]

CyclonerM, on 11 May 2015 - 03:49 AM, said:

Strike madness? There is even a cooldown..

Now imagine if there was no cooldown. Then we would have artillery barrages. It would be glorious! <maniacal >

[Harathan]

Stefka Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 10:55 AM, said:

I cannot understand why community prefers the "always-the-same-5-minute" skirmish mode, from 3 years on.

CW is a great mode, with a permanent campaign!
What da hell do you want more than this?!?!?! It's awesome!

At least matches have a sense.

5minutes-skirmish doesn't.

Same reason why Dust is still the most played CS map of all time. While it beggars belief, there are an astonishing number of people who genuinely do want to just run around doing the same thing over and over again for 5 minute stretches, and an equally astonishing number of people who want *all* games to play that way.

Edited by Harathan, 11 May 2015 - 12:07 PM.

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 11 May 2015 - 11:53 AM, said:

Tags are irrelevant. Faction memebership is irrelevant. Who wins or loses is irrelevant save for payout at end of match. Has no overall "campaign" relevance.

How about we just close cw and have it be a 3rd queue with no matchmaker and a leaderboard. That is all we have now just with a map for the leaderboard. You get the reward of name on a leaderboard. What faction you belong to means nothing save your unit. Factions are irrelevant though. PGI has created a faction warfare environment with no real 'warfare' and no point, purpose or relevance to the factions.

Now that's what I call a defeatist attitude.

I'd rather have tags be relevant, faction membership be relevant, wins be relevant, and campaigns be relevant ... something like this.

[Harathan]

Mystere, on 11 May 2015 - 12:08 PM, said:

Now that's what I call a defeatist attitude.

I'd rather have tags be relevant, faction membership be relevant, wins be relevant, and campaigns be relevant ... something like this.

Personally I think tags should be irrelevant, except as a purely cosmetic acknowledgement of which unit contributed most to a planet. We're supposed to be fighting for our Faction (or on behalf of them, in the case of Mercs). Owning a planet should give the unit that took it nothing other than bragging rights. Any bonuses to captured planets should be Faction-wide.

[MischiefSC]

Mystere, on 11 May 2015 - 12:08 PM, said:

Now that's what I call a defeatist attitude.

I'd rather have tags be relevant, faction membership be relevant, wins be relevant, and campaigns be relevant ... something like this.

Would LOVE them to be relevant. Love it. It's been six months. More than. It's not even on the radar. It's on the same list with PvE and 'a complete ecm rework'.

That list has better odds of being filled if mail it to Santa Claus.

[Appogee]

MischiefSC, on 11 May 2015 - 12:48 PM, said:

It's been six months. More than. It's not even on the radar. It's on the same list with PvE and 'a complete ecm rework'.

Most of their resources appear to be devoted to pumping out Mech packs. As a result, the actual game development moves at a glacial pace.

It will catch up with them at some point. Resistance 3, with its 12 versions of remixed hardpoints on energy boats, could be that point.

I'm not buying it because laser hitreg is borked, and levelling those Mechs will be 12 levels of hell.

Edited by Appogee, 11 May 2015 - 01:34 PM.

[jaxjace]

Adamski, on 11 May 2015 - 10:22 AM, said:

Really? Try buying a GRF-2N before June without using real money, or the upcoming CTF-0X or BLR-2C which will also be ECM variants that will require cash only to start with.

And saying ECM has been over nerfed is perhaps the dumbest thing I have read on these forums in a LONG time.

Insinuating content that will eventually be free and those who are buying it now are P2W is about on par for stupidity though.

[R Razor]

jaxjace, on 11 May 2015 - 04:01 PM, said:

Insinuating content that will eventually be free and those who are buying it now are P2W is about on par for stupidity though.

Actually, insinuating that someone is stupid because you lack the intellectual fortitude to come up with a concise and coherent argument is a far better indicator of ignorance and/or outright stupidity.

[jaxjace]

R Razor, on 11 May 2015 - 04:03 PM, said:

Actually, insinuating that someone is stupid because you lack the intellectual fortitude to come up with a concise and coherent argument is a far better indicator of ignorance and/or outright stupidity.

He said, whilst doing exactly that.

[R Razor]

jaxjace, on 11 May 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

He said, whilst doing exactly that.

Not at all, I wasn't calling you stupid or ignorant, I was pointing out that rushing out and attacking someone as you did could indeed make you appear to be so, nothing more. Of course if you'd like, please feel free to reinforce that appearance, no skin off my back either way.