Jump to content

Townhall Show Notes 6/25 - Done Live


129 replies to this topic

#101 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,245 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 26 June 2015 - 08:51 AM

View Postmadhermit, on 26 June 2015 - 08:27 AM, said:


So that's exactly what you say. Or are you saying you are masochistic and enjoy not enjoying the stomp games? Or why are you playing?


Well I get c-bills from playing, and at least I get to shoot something. I guess you could say I enjoy it since I would rather do it then nothing at all, but you are trolling pretty hard here.. But give me a break, a good 12 man will stomp other 12 mans as well, so what do you want? A given top tier 12-man should ONLY get to play against other top-tier 12 mans? That's a tall order, given there are only so many of those.

View Postmadhermit, on 26 June 2015 - 08:38 AM, said:


That means such gamemode/content shouldve not been introduced into such game with so few players. More research shouldve gone into it before start of implementation.


Or you know, people could stop sucking. Imagine that.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 26 June 2015 - 08:53 AM.


#102 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 26 June 2015 - 08:57 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 26 June 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:


Well you are very cynical. Not really. Its more because they are cognizant of the fact that if a matchmaker was implemented, they would never get to play. The organized groups want to play other organized groups, there just isn't enough organized groups. At least you can make money playing against pugs, and you can make money as a pug as well if you play smart.


Circular reasoning. The main reason so few people play CW is because of the endless stomps and idiotic matches that technically last 30 minutes (not counting wait times) but which are decided at match pairings. They have better things to do then waste time on that. Adding some level of match-making would only help bring those people back - and get rid of rolls, which is the real problem here.

Same idea on your "stop sucking" comment. This is a game. We can either admit to that and make it fun for all player levels, or we can continue to be deluded into thinking that PGI should focus solely on the top 1% of player skill levels and that somehow having 100 people playing this game is going to keep the lights on and the bills paid.

It's laugh - the self-proclaimed elite don't want "noobs and PUGs" in their game, but then they back-pedal when match-making concepts are proposed for CW that would force them to only play people of a similar skill level. Nah, we know what it is based on that evidence: they don't want noobs and PUG's on THEIR team, but they sure want them on the other team. Free wins, and plenty of chances to whine about "terrible players" on the forums and spout off about "get gud or get reckt."

Edited by oldradagast, 26 June 2015 - 08:58 AM.


#103 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,245 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 26 June 2015 - 09:06 AM

View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 08:57 AM, said:


Circular reasoning. The main reason so few people play CW is because of the endless stomps and idiotic matches that technically last 30 minutes (not counting wait times) but which are decided at match pairings. They have better things to do then waste time on that. Adding some level of match-making would only help bring those people back - and get rid of rolls, which is the real problem here.

Same idea on your "stop sucking" comment. This is a game. We can either admit to that and make it fun for all player levels, or we can continue to be deluded into thinking that PGI should focus solely on the top 1% of player skill levels and that somehow having 100 people playing this game is going to keep the lights on and the bills paid.

It's laugh - the self-proclaimed elite don't want "noobs and PUGs" in their game, but then they back-pedal when match-making concepts are proposed for CW that would force them to only play people of a similar skill level. Nah, we know what it is based on that evidence: they don't want noobs and PUG's on THEIR team, but they sure want them on the other team. Free wins, and plenty of chances to whine about "terrible players" on the forums and spout off about "get gud or get reckt."


No not really, but you can keep assuming you know what you are talking about. In my unit at least (Night's Scorn), we have taken in pugs that we have picked up in CW matches (even some that use trackballs and track pads) and helped teach them what works and what doesn't and improved there performance a little bit.

I know for a fact that most units don't want to smash pugs. In a perfect world, everyone would be interested in communicating and working together, but people refuse to do that and it is a shame.

In any case, it is ultimately the solo players fault for not trying to use communication and teamwork, or grouping up on their respective faction teamspeak servers. Forcing everyone else to have to wait ungodly amounts of time so they can be spoon fed matches against similarly skilled opponents so they can stay in their shell and not use teamwork is selfish and isn't what a team game should be all about. If you want matchmaker matches like that, see the solo public queue. Seriously NO ONE wants to beat up on rabbles of pugs. Every 12 man wants to play other 12 mans.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 26 June 2015 - 09:07 AM.


#104 madhermit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 159 posts

Posted 26 June 2015 - 09:15 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 26 June 2015 - 08:51 AM, said:


Well I get c-bills from playing, and at least I get to shoot something. I guess you could say I enjoy it since I would rather do it then nothing at all, but you are trolling pretty hard here.. But give me a break, a good 12 man will stomp other 12 mans as well, so what do you want? A given top tier 12-man should ONLY get to play against other top-tier 12 mans? That's a tall order, given there are only so many of those.

Not really trolling. Just asking you not to sit on the fence and stay honest not to me but to yourself.

As for what I would want? Game to have enough players so it could have proper matching implemented. At this point I think the LACK of matchmaking is what is keeping players away from it. How many? I don't know. They should actually do some research on it and consider if adding matchmaking would actually improve CW population.

They can't develop a game with large 12 man groups as the core focus of the game and expect it to be popular. By that I mean Russ might have to consider whether or not try to improve CW player numbers at the expense of some units. Russ (or some other dev, not really the point) even said he rather see some large units (200 people or so) fall apart and spread the 'wealth' to increase the number of units.

View PostGas Guzzler, on 26 June 2015 - 08:51 AM, said:

Or you know, people could stop sucking. Imagine that.


No. Needs more players. "Sucking in a game" is relative. There are always people who are better/worse than others. CW is clearly too large concept to implement in such a small game.

#105 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 26 June 2015 - 09:17 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 26 June 2015 - 09:06 AM, said:


I know for a fact that most units don't want to smash pugs. In a perfect world, everyone would be interested in communicating and working together, but people refuse to do that and it is a shame.



Then why is there so much opposition by the self-professed elite to any form of match-making? If big, skilled teams really want to only play other skilled teams, why do they cry like children when there's a chance their free wins will be taken away?

No, no - it's apparently more logical to allow the free wins to continue and just blast PUG's and casuals for "not being gud nuf!" - and then wonder why everyone left CW.... and then use that - the low population - as an excuse to avoid match-making instead of address the actual reason, which is the lack of match-making in the first place. Fail reasoning is fail - people left CW because of the rolls, not because of the low population.

Edited by oldradagast, 26 June 2015 - 09:18 AM.


#106 Zeece

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 446 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 26 June 2015 - 09:36 AM

View PostBigBenn, on 26 June 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

So regarding Russ's comment on the unseen mechs not in game.... are we SOL on the Warhammer, Crusader, Phoenix Hawk, and Marauder being added to MWO??? :(


Ben Harmony Gold owns the rights to those mechs which means we will only see them in one of two conditions.. HG allows PGI to license them for a reasonable fee (which is unlikely due to their history on the subject) OR PGI completely redesigns them into unique versions that only kinda sort look like the originals which would still involve going to court vs. HG because HG will still ***** about it.

#107 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,245 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:02 AM

View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:


Then why is there so much opposition by the self-professed elite to any form of match-making? If big, skilled teams really want to only play other skilled teams, why do they cry like children when there's a chance their free wins will be taken away?

No, no - it's apparently more logical to allow the free wins to continue and just blast PUG's and casuals for "not being gud nuf!" - and then wonder why everyone left CW.... and then use that - the low population - as an excuse to avoid match-making instead of address the actual reason, which is the lack of match-making in the first place. Fail reasoning is fail - people left CW because of the rolls, not because of the low population.


I've already explained that it is because there is not enough population to make that feasible. That is why I don't want it at this point. If we had more population, then sure why not. I just want to be able to play CW in a timely manner, not have to sit through 6 ghost drops to get a match.

#108 BigBenn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 571 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls, SD

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:06 AM

View PostZeece, on 26 June 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:


Ben Harmony Gold owns the rights to those mechs which means we will only see them in one of two conditions.. HG allows PGI to license them for a reasonable fee (which is unlikely due to their history on the subject) OR PGI completely redesigns them into unique versions that only kinda sort look like the originals which would still involve going to court vs. HG because HG will still ***** about it.


I hope so. After re-reading the "unseen/re-seen" info on the BTwiki page, it appears PGI has done well enough already to include many of the "unseen" mechs in to MWO. Here is a copy and paste from BTwiki:

MWO has unseen mechs (7!) prior to the 3067 timeline (all of MWO is currently 3050 iirc), so lets hope they continue to introduce unseen mechs on a timely basis. ESPECIALLY the Warhammer -6R(B). :D

#109 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:08 AM

View PostJman5, on 26 June 2015 - 08:10 AM, said:

I'm a bit suspicious of these numbers TBH. I wouldn't be surprised if they are counting groups as units of 1 rather than counting raw players involved in different group size. So instead of counting that 12 man as "12" it gets the same weight as one 4-man.


PGI's accounting of those #s of questionable every single time, because it's never contextualized, and we're left to "guess" or "make up" what we think of the numbers.

It's been consistent on PGI's part.


Quote

I have recently started playing CW a little more and I have to admit I'm having some fun figuring out if I can design a PUG-proof-dropdeck. For example, one primary concern I have is that my mechs need to be fast. Pug teams will collapse all around you in seconds so it's critical that you are fast enough escape the slaughter.

It's a work in progress and so far I have nothing to show for it. However if I ever figure it out, it will be worth it just to shove it in the faces of some of these groups that treat CW as glorified seal clubbing.


There's no such thing... it's truly a unicorn sighting.

What ends up ultimately happening is that you end up having to carry upon the PUGs backs basically by using them as meat shields. While this seems sad as a response, but oftentimes a good player or a good team picks up the slack of the teammates that don't perform well.

In an "optimal" situation where there are no PUGs and competent teammates, the damage/kills are distributed more evenly.

You essentially find that someone else does "have to do work" in order to make up said deficiencies of the team.

This has always been true of MWO... where you could be the PUGStar of a match, mostly because your teammates are generally worse than you.

That's how those 1k damage games with bad mechs happen.



View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:


Then why is there so much opposition by the self-professed elite to any form of match-making? If big, skilled teams really want to only play other skilled teams, why do they cry like children when there's a chance their free wins will be taken away?

No, no - it's apparently more logical to allow the free wins to continue and just blast PUG's and casuals for "not being gud nuf!" - and then wonder why everyone left CW.... and then use that - the low population - as an excuse to avoid match-making instead of address the actual reason, which is the lack of match-making in the first place. Fail reasoning is fail - people left CW because of the rolls, not because of the low population.


I don't have a problem with an MM, but the main problem is that the MM's effectiveness is DICTATED if there's enough people to fill the MM.

Since the majority of time, the queues struggle to EVEN GET PLAYERS, then this is literally what you get. This issue gets compounded further in the current MM in some ways... seeing the same faces over and over again (although that's indirectly related to dropping at about the same time you finish a match).

Even Russ admitted to this @ the Town Hall regarding the population of CW.

You got to think this logically through... if you don't have the people, no MM or MM change will fix what ails it.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 June 2015 - 10:08 AM.


#110 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,245 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:10 AM

View Postmadhermit, on 26 June 2015 - 09:15 AM, said:

Not really trolling. Just asking you not to sit on the fence and stay honest not to me but to yourself.

As for what I would want? Game to have enough players so it could have proper matching implemented. At this point I think the LACK of matchmaking is what is keeping players away from it. How many? I don't know. They should actually do some research on it and consider if adding matchmaking would actually improve CW population.

They can't develop a game with large 12 man groups as the core focus of the game and expect it to be popular. By that I mean Russ might have to consider whether or not try to improve CW player numbers at the expense of some units. Russ (or some other dev, not really the point) even said he rather see some large units (200 people or so) fall apart and spread the 'wealth' to increase the number of units.



No. Needs more players. "Sucking in a game" is relative. There are always people who are better/worse than others. CW is clearly too large concept to implement in such a small game.


I am being honest to myself when I say that I would rather have a competitive match with another 12 man, than stomp pugs. I would also rather stomp pugs then not play at all or ghost drop. I would also rather drop solo and get rolled but farm 2000 damage then stomp pugs or not play at all.

About sucking, sure it is relative, but people who do 0-400 damage in an entire CW match on a regular basis really need to go to the public queue and figure their stuff out. Also, there is no real excuse to not try to coordinate and work as a team, other than not wanting to talk to anyone.

I understand about not designing it around 12-man groups, and I don't know what the solution is. The 2 primary reasons people don't play CW is because:

1.) Long wait times
2.) Pug stomps

If you implement matchmaking, you "fix" (lets be real there will still be plenty of unbalanced matches) #2 but exacerbate #1. So yeah I will admit I don't know what the golden solution is if people want to continue to do things that they are told are bad (like taking LRM Atlases in CW, or in general BAD builds). You don't have to bring meta mechs, but you do need to bring a loadout that is useful, and you do need to work with your team and not go it alone, or stream in by yourself when you die.

#111 Argent Usher

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 154 posts

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:11 AM

CW means "Playing without Free Will"


I don't want to loose (often) - i need to join a group.
I don't want any downtime - i need to join a specific faction.
I don't like some mechs - i need to play this mechs cuz the META™.
I don't like Blob, Zergs etc. - wide range of tactics in CW ? ...cough...cough

#112 Dawnstealer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 3,734 posts
  • LocationBlack Earth

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:42 AM

View PostZeece, on 25 June 2015 - 04:32 PM, said:


#Dawnstealer - Destructible Gates? Tanks? Conquest Mode in CW?

[snip]

* New Scouting mission(in particular Counter Scouting mode) version similiar to that


Not totally sure he understood my question, but I'll see what happens on that Scout Mode.

And thanks for the write-up, Zeece!

#113 madhermit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 159 posts

Posted 26 June 2015 - 10:56 AM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 26 June 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:


I understand about not designing it around 12-man groups, and I don't know what the solution is. The 2 primary reasons people don't play CW is because:

1.) Long wait times
2.) Pug stomps

If you implement matchmaking, you "fix" (lets be real there will still be plenty of unbalanced matches) #2 but exacerbate #1.


I think that at this point, considering there are only 400-500 players ever playing CW (so I heard), it might not be insane to consider fixing #2 with MM and at the same time somehow 'reintroduce' people into CW in order to populate it. They are already lowering the number of planets being fought over down to 10 total (down from like 40) to funnel people into more concentrated queues.

Negative would be that large groups (say +7 man groups) would see a hit, possibly big one, in queue times. But would this be reasonable sacrifice in order to make CW more popular? Right now it's more or less "big unit" gentlemans club where everything smaller is.. Well. You know what.

I don't know either. It might be an idea though. And there would certainly be risks. Hence research would need to go into this and hopefully will. Not doing anything will probably kill CW off completely and eventually probably the whole game.

Edited by madhermit, 26 June 2015 - 10:59 AM.


#114 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,245 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 26 June 2015 - 11:01 AM

Maybe if they incorporate it along with some other big improvements AND a weekend event with huge payouts we might see enough population with the matchmaker. I guess the other thing they could do is have it auto-loosen the MM when populations are low just to launch matches..

#115 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 26 June 2015 - 11:11 AM

View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 07:31 AM, said:

True, although PPC's are useless when compared to lasers: more heat, same or less damage, slow flight time, and dead-zone close in. LRM's are also useless without strong teamwork thanks to ECM and Radar Derp being everywhere.

PPCs are certainly less popular in the current meta. And especially low-slung PPCs like the Thunderbolt is supposed to have. Thunderbolt pilots tend to put their PPC in the torso, because the value of having the PPC in the arm is negligible. Another unfortunate side-effect of hyper-agile heavy mechs in MWO. Everyone puts the big guns in the torso.

View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 07:31 AM, said:

As for me, I'm NOT looking forward to this "rebalancing" of mech weapon hardpoints and locations. So, what exactly are the mechs I've bought going to turn into once we're done "fixing" them, and will this be as "balanced" and "well thought out" as the Quirks - you know, the ones that raised some mechs to god-tier while other mechs got total junk?

What? I didn't see any information about that. Rebalancing mech hardpoints and locations? They're going to actually change the hardpoints? I thought they were just going to assign battle values based on those numbers.

#116 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 26 June 2015 - 11:15 AM

View PostAlistair Winter, on 26 June 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

PPCs are certainly less popular in the current meta. And especially low-slung PPCs like the Thunderbolt is supposed to have. Thunderbolt pilots tend to put their PPC in the torso, because the value of having the PPC in the arm is negligible. Another unfortunate side-effect of hyper-agile heavy mechs in MWO. Everyone puts the big guns in the torso.

Actually it's because of the difference between high mounts and low mounts. Who wants to be a knuckledragger when you can be a ridgepoker?


View PostAlistair Winter, on 26 June 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

What? I didn't see any information about that. Rebalancing mech hardpoints and locations? They're going to actually change the hardpoints? I thought they were just going to assign battle values based on those numbers.

If I had to guess, I think that what Russ means is that they're going to replace the quirks tier system and instead use their own "BV" system to determine how severely to quirk a mech. I don't expect them to actually try to use the BV's for matchmaking or such purposes...

#117 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 26 June 2015 - 11:25 AM

View PostFupDup, on 26 June 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

Actually it's because of the difference between high mounts and low mounts. Who wants to be a knuckledragger when you can be a ridgepoker?

Maybe it's because I'm not playing CW or because I'm confined to the Lovecraftian nightmare of the steering wheel underhive, but the ridgepoking meta seems so exaggerated to me. So many situations where high hardpoints don't really matter.

But I guess it partially explains it. I think it's a combination of several factors. There's also the fact that you have mechs like the Grasshopper with 120 degree torso twist on a 70 ton mech. Super agility, and a lot of people like to keep arms without weapons because it lets them shave off extra armour too.

#118 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 26 June 2015 - 11:39 AM

View PostAlistair Winter, on 26 June 2015 - 11:25 AM, said:

Maybe it's because I'm not playing CW or because I'm confined to the Lovecraftian nightmare of the steering wheel underhive, but the ridgepoking meta seems so exaggerated to me. So many situations where high hardpoints don't really matter.


Well, the underhive is real, and the ridgepoking meta exists... only if you don't push on the targets.

The thing many people complain about the Stalker is kind real, except very often they don't know how to push and push effectively vs them... especially in CW.

So, the timid team tends to get farmed in the process, a sad but expected result in these matters.


Quote

But I guess it partially explains it. I think it's a combination of several factors. There's also the fact that you have mechs like the Grasshopper with 120 degree torso twist on a 70 ton mech. Super agility, and a lot of people like to keep arms without weapons because it lets them shave off extra armour too.



I kinda like arm weapons... only for lasers (the Grasshopper-5P is kinda meddling compared to 5N when all the weapons are in the torsos - the DHS must go in the arms and don't cool/operate in the same manner - but you get full torso convergence).

It depends on your typical/optimal usage patterns to maximize the mech's strength or at least mitigate its weaknesses...

#119 Jakob Knight

    Member

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

Posted 26 June 2015 - 02:31 PM

View Postoldradagast, on 26 June 2015 - 08:57 AM, said:


Circular reasoning. The main reason so few people play CW is because of the endless stomps and idiotic matches that technically last 30 minutes (not counting wait times) but which are decided at match pairings. They have better things to do then waste time on that. Adding some level of match-making would only help bring those people back - and get rid of rolls, which is the real problem here.

Same idea on your "stop sucking" comment. This is a game. We can either admit to that and make it fun for all player levels, or we can continue to be deluded into thinking that PGI should focus solely on the top 1% of player skill levels and that somehow having 100 people playing this game is going to keep the lights on and the bills paid.

It's laugh - the self-proclaimed elite don't want "noobs and PUGs" in their game, but then they back-pedal when match-making concepts are proposed for CW that would force them to only play people of a similar skill level. Nah, we know what it is based on that evidence: they don't want noobs and PUG's on THEIR team, but they sure want them on the other team. Free wins, and plenty of chances to whine about "terrible players" on the forums and spout off about "get gud or get reckt."


First off, the reasons people have fallen off playing CW are multiple.

For the casual player, the effort was too much, requiring too much dedication when all they want is a quick game they don't have to provide much effort for. For the dedicated player, the reset of the map proved that their dedication is currently pointless as all gains will be erased and all time spent nullified whenever the Devs decide things are progressing too far or players are achieving too much. For the tactical player, CW has been continuously changed to eliminate tactics to the point that it has become a simple deathmatch, with any tactics other than those approved by the Devs eliminated as not 'winning properly'. For the strategic player, CW has remained a mode where there -are- no strategic aspects. The targets of their faction remain decided by automated algorithms and the CW maps themselves remain channeled terrain that deny any strategic movements beyond being channeled right into the opposing enemy hardpoints or waiting passively for the enemy to come into those hardpoints.

Thus has CW lost the largest percentage of its playerbase due to the limited nature imposed upon it by the Devs. The emphasis on CW as an E-Sport has done more damage to it than any other factor, leaving only those who can accept one-dimensional play that they know has little point. with the promise from the Devs that it isn't going to get any better.

This has been explained to you before, time and again, along with the fact that CW was never meant to be the place for new players, those without the skill to be in it, or the casual player. Time and again, we have tried to explain to you what CW is and is supposed to be, but you have constantly played the victim card, never once listening as we have explained why your suppositions and held beliefs are wrong. I am quite frankly tired of you constantly ignoring the truth, and the fact that you endorse the inclusion of a MM in CW, a function that is entirely dependent on the concept that some players will never be able to beat other players because they don't have the skill and should not be -allowed- to fight against them, and then claim elitism, the concept that some players are inherently better than others due to skill and talent, is a thing that you imply should not be in the game is a hypocrisy that boggles the mind. You are using terms without knowing their meaning, and endorsing actions without believing in them yourself.

I am through trying to explain things to a fool. This is my last reply to one of your posts, and I can only hope others will disregard all further communications from a person who will not see the truth and who decries the very thing he wants to impose on everyone. I suggest you go back to Public games, which offer everything you seem to want in CW, and leave CW to those who want and understand it. You do not, and never will.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 26 June 2015 - 02:36 PM.


#120 SgtMac

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 64 posts
  • LocationMorgantown, West Virginia

Posted 26 June 2015 - 09:32 PM

Something I see alot, the Harmony Gold issue. Harmony Gold got the rights to the original artwork back when the lawsuit happened. FASA got the names, the loadouts, and the descriptions but had to redraw them. All those mechs got redesigns by FASA, Iron Wind Metals, and Mechwarrior Dark Age. Why is there an Issue with using them if PGI should have the FASA rights? Do they have the rights? If they do, then they can go and pull up any of the mech redesigns (the drunken sitting Warhammer from MWDA, or the Rifleman thats wider then an Awesome) do a little art tweaking and they should be ready to release. I know FASA, IWM and such had the name, loadout and basic description rights becuase they were still using them into the MWDA book series. I stopped reading them about the invasion of Terra by the Steel Wolves. I freely admit I played tabletop since it was Battledroids, and greatly enjoyed the MW2 3 and 4 titles on computer. If PGI has access to all these resources, are they even using them? if this was all discussed elsewhere, can someone please link it. THanks for reading.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users