228 replies to this topic

[NGxT]

So MS was originally an alliance of a bunch of different units, right? If the unit limit is capped at 108, why would they not go back to their individual unit tags? I know that it was a huge point of contention when MS first formed, and as AFAIK, MS still has a unit based internal structure.

I mean, I'm sure they would continue to drop together and such, but what would be the point of doing MS1, MS2 etc, when they can just go back to their individual unit tags and continue to drop with each other?

[TWIAFU]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 03:08 AM, said:

So MS was originally an alliance of a bunch of different units, right? If the unit limit is capped at 108, why would they not go back to their individual unit tags? I know that it was a huge point of contention when MS first formed, and as AFAIK, MS still has a unit based internal structure.

I mean, I'm sure they would continue to drop together and such, but what would be the point of doing MS1, MS2 etc, when they can just go back to their individual unit tags and continue to drop with each other?

Because Russ and the Community want to break up large Units so one or more large and active Units do not dominate the Leaderboards. They hope that people from the large Units that are kicked out by PGI will go off and form new, smaller units, in different factions. They hope that friends will fight friends and compete against each other for leaderboard placement.

Clearly, they do not understand how in-game friendships work nor the value people place on them.

Seriously, how can they think friends that have been playing together for years will suddenly stop?

No, and mark my words, if they do this instead of seeing MS in the top spot, we will see MS1, MS2, MS3, and more(?), in spot 1, 2, 3. So, instead of one Unit having the top spot, you will now have one Unit under different names in all top spots.

Does anyone think that will go over well? The rage and hate toward them in ONE top spot is bad, wait until they have all top spots. Seriously, has anyone thought this through?

I kinda hope this happens so they can take all top spots just so players can get what they asked for, again.

[NGxT]

You say that the top spots will be held by all MS, but I'd put my unit against a divided MS division, any day, even if we'd be outnumbered by 70 members. We probably log the most hours individually during events, and have one of the highest win rates.

I'd also put 228A and 228B against any MS unit too. You think that MS would control the top spots? Really? Is this hyperbole or do you know something about the strength of 108 MS members that I don't?

Edited by NGRT, 11 July 2015 - 03:42 AM.

[TWIAFU]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

You say that the top spots will be held by all MS, but I'd put my unit against a divided MS division, any day, even if we'd be outnumbered by 70 members. We probably log the most hours individually during events, and have one of the highest win rates.

I'd also put 228A and 228B against any MS unit too. You think that MS would control the top spots? Really? Is this hyperbole or do you know something about the strength of 108 MS members that I don't?

I am using MS as an example because they are the current Unit boogeyman by outscoring all Units by a wide margin.

Break up large unit into smaller parts and yes, I do think you will see multi of same unit on leaderboard, be it 228, MS, or NPT. Yes, I do think players will be upset again, when they see multi listing of same unit on leaderboards crying for more changes.

And yes, if was leadership, I would form the smaller units with the sole goal to place as many sub units on the leaderboard as possible if this changes. Be great to see the nerdrage if MS took all top spots, 228, 420, or any CW Unit after this changes.

[Necromantion]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

You say that the top spots will be held by all MS, but I'd put my unit against a divided MS division, any day, even if we'd be outnumbered by 70 members. We probably log the most hours individually during events, and have one of the highest win rates.

I'd also put 228A and 228B against any MS unit too. You think that MS would control the top spots? Really? Is this hyperbole or do you know something about the strength of 108 MS members that I don't?

A lot of MS top comp players are currently vacationing or bored with the game. I am not sure what unit you represent but if you take an A-team from MS ranks and you really wouldnt have a good time... like really wouldnt have a good time at all against them. Even 108 players while it wouldnt encompass solely competitive players it would be a very competent roster that most other units would have a hard time fielding as far as activity and competency, granted right now it is summer and a lot of players are in and out of the game around family, vacation and other commitments like... enjoying the summer weather

Thing is MS players enjoy playing together, its a great community, organized with lots of laughs and good times to be had. If PGI wants to force large units to break up it is very likely that any unit that is functional and large will still work as a single entity despite being split up into smaller ones.

[Kin3ticX]

TWIAFU, on 11 July 2015 - 03:20 AM, said:

Because Russ and the Community want to break up large Units so one or more large and active Units do not dominate the Leaderboards. They hope that people from the large Units that are kicked out by PGI will go off and form new, smaller units, in different factions. They hope that friends will fight friends and compete against each other for leaderboard placement.

Clearly, they do not understand how in-game friendships work nor the value people place on them.

Seriously, how can they think friends that have been playing together for years will suddenly stop?

No, and mark my words, if they do this instead of seeing MS in the top spot, we will see MS1, MS2, MS3, and more(?), in spot 1, 2, 3. So, instead of one Unit having the top spot, you will now have one Unit under different names in all top spots.

Does anyone think that will go over well? The rage and hate toward them in ONE top spot is bad, wait until they have all top spots. Seriously, has anyone thought this through?

I kinda hope this happens so they can take all top spots just so players can get what they asked for, again.

I don't think MS could still take 1-3rd place with all its divisions. You seem pretty off base here.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 11 July 2015 - 09:17 AM.

[Kin3ticX]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 03:08 AM, said:

So MS was originally an alliance of a bunch of different units, right? If the unit limit is capped at 108, why would they not go back to their individual unit tags? I know that it was a huge point of contention when MS first formed, and as AFAIK, MS still has a unit based internal structure.

I mean, I'm sure they would continue to drop together and such, but what would be the point of doing MS1, MS2 etc, when they can just go back to their individual unit tags and continue to drop with each other?

Good point. I still think MS would be a thing with a 108 unit cap. Not every sub unit has enough players of its own to go off into the wild blue yonder. Of course, the key thing will be active roster rather than paper roster under those conditions. Just more work for the unit leaders of big units and they are all probably dying for something to do anyways.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 11 July 2015 - 10:09 AM.

[NGxT]

Necromantion, on 11 July 2015 - 08:47 AM, said:

A lot of MS top comp players are currently vacationing or bored with the game. I am not sure what unit you represent but if you take an A-team from MS ranks and you really wouldnt have a good time... like really wouldnt have a good time at all against them. Even 108 players while it wouldnt encompass solely competitive players it would be a very competent roster that most other units would have a hard time fielding as far as activity and competency, granted right now it is summer and a lot of players are in and out of the game around family, vacation and other commitments like... enjoying the summer weather

Thing is MS players enjoy playing together, its a great community, organized with lots of laughs and good times to be had. If PGI wants to force large units to break up it is very likely that any unit that is functional and large will still work as a single entity despite being split up into smaller ones.

KCom. I'd love for ms to field an A team consistently and battle it out with us. Even outnumbered, it would only be by 70, so with out higher activity rate, I think we would still be competitive.

As it stands, ms has no reason to even build an A team to send against us, because the number disparity is so huge, win or loss, one game matters nothing to them. If dividing up ms leads to the formation of an A team that they would deploy against teams like us or 228,I would be all for it because it means more competitive games and more fun for everyone involved.

I'd much rather work at beating an A team for leaderboard spot rather than grind pugs and realize that we were never in the race to begin with.

Edited by NGRT, 11 July 2015 - 12:04 PM.

[NGxT]

Kin3ticX, on 11 July 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:

Good point. I still think MS would be a thing with a 108 unit cap. Not every sub unit has enough players of its own to go off into the wild blue yonder. Of course, the key thing will be active roster rather than paper roster under those conditions. Just more work for the unit leaders of big units and they are all probably dying for something to do anyways.

So you're saying that the culture and identity of ms has become stronger than that of the units they started out as. I'm sure that some units will return to their original tags like clan Kodiak did, but if people consider themselves more of a member of ms over their internal unit, I'm sure ms will still exist in some form.

Now I'm actually wondering what differences in opinion about returning to original unit tags would be between the unit leaders, the old members of said units before the merge, and new people who joined ms post merge.

Edited by NGRT, 11 July 2015 - 12:15 PM.

[UberStuka]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

I'd also put 228A and 228B against any MS unit too. You think that MS would control the top spots? Really? Is this hyperbole or do you know something about the strength of 108 MS members that I don't?

228 wouldnt really have to shed any weight. but if they were to grow this would be the case. a monthly unit purge keeps the active player base up and unit #'s down aroud 100. id say there are a few who still hold spots that arent active but not many.

[TWIAFU]

Kin3ticX, on 11 July 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

I don't think MS could still take 1-3rd place with all its divisions. You seem pretty off base here.

Trying to make a point with the example; instead of just one entry, we could and prolly would see multiple due to skill and activity.

Not trying to make them to be any sort of boogeyman.

[TWIAFU]

NGRT, on 11 July 2015 - 12:02 PM, said:

I'd much rather work at beating an A team for leaderboard spot rather than grind pugs and realize that we were never in the race to begin with.

Who wouldn't?

Well, who wouldn't that is involved in Unit/Group play in CW?

[VoodooLou Kerensky]

As it stands now CW reminds me of Professional Paintball Competitions. https://youtu.be/uZf2SlVP4OI Its the same exact thing over and over no matter what planet it is.
When I played paint ball they didnt have the twitchy triggers Constant 'air' was new and people still used the Rifle. We also played huge piece of ground that had a few basic structures. We had fun. What it is now I cant call fun. Its spray and pray in a confined area.

[ShadowWolf Kell]

Well in the end, it won't accomplish what Russ thinks it will. Not unless those sub units decide to spread their resources around and cause chaos on multiple fronts. Since tagging will work in favor of loyalists and not mercs, I really don't see that happening unless a unit gets very bored.

Maybe he's doing it thinking the larger units will have more vote power or something, but again that works against his idea as well because all they have to do is go loyalist and still have the same voting power they would now as some giant sized unit.

I guess the real burden will be on donating to the coffers since that'll have a direct impact on gameplay and how lucrative contrats for mercs/loneworlves will be. It also means skilled pilots would have to be split to keep the smaller units on an even keel. For a large unit, this won't be a problem. As an added bonus, it makes scheduling practice events easier since it adds in a little inter unit rivalry into the mix which brings out a more competitive spirit.

Net effect is, big units that are forced to split up will likely boost their performance. It'll just be more of a headache for the staff to coordinate everything and nothing more.

Personally, I think breaking up large units is a big mistake. I've seen leagues try to do that in earlier BTech games and it really doesn't change anything. Trying to divide friendship and loyalties kind of has the opposite effect so this is going to backfire on Russ.

[Darth Hotz]

My personal opinion (i am not speaking for the 12th Donegal Guards):

The problem is that its too easy for mercaneries to jump from faction to faction. Not only farming mechbays and cbills in a way that no loyalist could ever do, but also going completly against the lore when working for clans. MS, as the biggest group can turn the CW map in each direction they want. Dont get me wrong, i congratulate MS for forming such a succesfull unit, but its killing CW and im not sure if hired helpers should be that influential in galactic warfare.

My fix on this would be:

Loyalist units can get as bis as the want, does not matter if Clan or IS.

Merc units will get a member cap. If the member cap has been exceeded, subunits have to be formed.

Factions can only have XX Merc units under contract at the same time. Find a working number, or make the number depending on the factions member numbers: e.g. FRR needs more help than Steiner.

If one faction has no more contracts left, Mercs have to look for another faction to work for. This can also be divided by general numbers for Clans and IS.


This would still give bigger Merc units the opportunity to play together as MS1, MS2 and MS3 but maybe MS4, MS5 and MS6 have to work for another faction. They would still be one team, but not the major CW factor anymore that they are now.

[Clownwarlord]

Units of about 50 to 100 members seems about right for a unit that plays one time zone together. So in that since yes they can easily get a 12 man put together for every night, or at the very least an 8 to 10 man. Units that are huge like MS and SROT to name a few well known units are auto wins for some of the events just because of sheer numbers. While units that are smaller with more skilled members will have still very little to no chance to win at all.

This last event goes to only prove this point that an event based on CW units was a bad idea because the standings basically show who wins because of number of members not which unit is the best because of skill. In other words for an example, it is like the NBA (National Basketball Association). The West has a spread of talent through out the conference which makes it great to watch because you get consistent match ups, but the East this year and some previous years has the talent in only a handful of teams which makes watching the early rounds of the nba finals a joke when you have teams with losing records face off against highly ranked teams. So I propose a hard cap of 100 members which would force bigger units to trim the fat of their dead weight (inactive players), break up units for more units of equal sizes, and ultimately a more balanced competition when it comes to challenges like this past weekend. If not then why have small units at all? They will not win any of these challenges or tournaments.

*If you want free stuff during challenges like this last one join a big unit (the biggest unit that will take you). That is what this past event proved.

I would like to point out big units do not hurt or help CW, but my point is PGI's asinine event this past week only supported big units.

Edited by clownwarlord, 11 July 2015 - 10:47 PM.

[Clownwarlord]

Pros and Cons:

Well it has some merit to do one of these (pros and cons) to point out the effects or affects that a break up of the bigger units would have.

Pros:
- You will have more units of 100 or fewer to help fill the ranks of each faction instead of power blocks
- You will have more competitive matches if factions are supported by many more units of 100 or fewer (more pug friendly in other words).
- You will have less time to get in to matches since there will be smaller groups out there than 12 mans allowing solos as well as small groups to get matches quicker.
- Less likely to see turret drops if the power blocks break up and spread out to different factions.

Cons:
- Power blocks can still exist ... through multiple units working together.
- Could hurt egos and cause population drop (not able to play with friends).
- Units will start to be more defined by their units time zone or time of play because they have a lower member count so they will most likely only take on members in their time zones.

So after just a few even breaking up the units into smaller groups will not work because you can still have power blocks. That move from one faction to the next and taking all their members with them (or just staying still). Examples of a power block now is MS or SROT or RRB ... example of what a power block would then be if they did break up just look at World of Tanks ... Heat, Bulls, Nuggs, Celts which are different 100 man units that play under the same goals totaling 400 members (forming a power block).

Again so that people do not get mixed up about my opinion:
The only complaint I actually have was that PGI had this event that promoted big units instead of all units.

[Koshirou]

To the imagined problem, this is not a solution. We don't even need to talk about units splitting into "...1", "...2", "...3" and so on. I doubt even MS has >100 active CW players at any given time, so all they'd need is some external organizational work to remove inactive players from the in-game "unit" roster, and re-invite them as needed. So in the end, this measure will merely be an annoyance, and won't fix any problems.

The marginally better solution: To limit the number of drops a unit can perform per ceasefire.

[Khobai]

Quote

The marginally better solution: To limit the number of drops a unit can perform per ceasefire.

That solution is terrible

youre going to police how often people can play? thats ridiculous and oppressive and will only make people quit the game

[Koshirou]

Khobai, on 12 July 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

youre going to police how often people can play?

No? The limitation will be for units, not players. This way, large units with many casual members will not be affected by arbitrary size curbs.