124 replies to this topic

[Bilbo]

Aresye Kerensky, on 17 December 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

Nah, I've found the most annoying types to be:
- Load into match.
- Ask, "Anybody got a plan? Anybody want to take this?"
*Silence........

- Mech powers up and you start moving.
- Say, "Alright guys, let's head towards our slow assaults and regroup. We'll push right/left towards ___ after we regroup, got it?"

- Someone else goes, "Nah, that's stupid, let's all go ____."
- Pugs listen to the more douche, alpha-male sounding douche.
- Team gets rekt because alpha-douche decided to leave the assault lance completely behind.
- Alpha-douche decides to berate the entire team, sometimes throwing in the bonus of, "Probably still did better than if we listed to Aresye's plan."
- Alpha-douche disconnects.

*Commence foaming at the mouth.*

Anybody else run into those types? By far the worst of them all.

Not often. More likely to be greeted with complete silence throughout the match, which I don't particularly mind.

[Mothykins]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 17 December 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:

I was between him and his Nacho Cheese Doritos as I ran away. Whale gotta eat.

Or he liked cool ranch. Who knows.

[Novakaine]

Seriously guys just give the lead a try.
No one likes to lose I know I don't.
Help the new guys out.
We've played these maps hundreds if not thousands if times.
We know what to do and not to do.
Be a Pug Commander.

[Void Angel]

If all you have to say is "hur, good luck - no one will listen," then don't post. You're part of the problem, too. He doesn't need everyone and his Clanner uncle to have an epiphany overnight and suddenly hail him as the Mech Messiah - he just needs enough people to listen to make a difference. If you think people should cooperate and coordinate, "even" in PuG games, then lend your support to the idea; piling negativity onto the thread so you can feel worldly-wise is counterproductive.

[NextGame]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 December 2015 - 11:18 AM, said:

SInce the Steam Launch I have seen a rise from the usual number of threads QQing and Whining about PUGs and how bad they are, how dumb, how disorganized.

And there is some truth to them. Always has been.

But here's the thing: I've been in drop with most of you self proclaimed Rommel's, Pattons and Attila the Huns. AND YOU ARE AS MUCH THE PROBLEM AS THE PUGS ARE.

Why?

Because to a man, almost not one of you actually try to lead. From the very beginning, you tactical wizards whine, cuss, QQ, piss and moan and lambast your fellow players, but not once actually try to do anything useful.

Once in a blue moon, I'll hear the excuse: " I've tried, no one listens, it's like herding cats."

And this can be true. Yet other times, players do listen, be it a lance to the whole company. And that should be enough, because the OTHER TEAM IS MADE UP OF PUGS TOO. If you can even get 4-6 players to work together, that should be enough, most times to beat the other team.

But people certainly aren't going to work with you if you start the match being a self righteous ***, denigrating all your teammates, cursing them and generally being useless yourself... especially since it's usually you armchair wonders who end up dead first (giving you plenty of time to complain) and with among the lowest scores.

If they don't listen? Then yup, end of game, feel free, within the CoC to complain.

If you are not part of the Solution, you ARE the Problem. If you want a team and it's coordination, go join one and play the group queue. If you aren't going to do that, man up and accept the chaos of the PUG Life.

So put up, or shut up. If you aren't even going to try to take charge, have a coke and a smile and STFU. And if you badgering, curse and general act like a jerk, here's fair warning you are probably also going to be reported.

/rant.

There is no reward for leading and neither is there any reason to follow the orders of a random internet person™ (as they are as likely to be bad as they are to be of any use), not the mention that the command facilities that are part of the game aren't worthwhile to begin with.

Edited by NextGame, 17 December 2015 - 01:59 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

NextGame, on 17 December 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

There is no reward for leading and neither is there any reason to follow the orders of a random internet person™ (as they are as likely to be bad as they are to be of any use), not the mention that the command facilities that are part of the game aren't worthwhile to begin with.

Wow. Much wisdom.

Then don't clog the channels QQing about how bad your team is, is all that need apply to you, champ.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 December 2015 - 02:48 PM.

[NextGame]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 December 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

Wow. Much wisdom.

Then don't clog the channels QQIng about how bad your team is, champ.

So basically you cannot address the following points and are just on a whine fest as bad as those complaining about the quality of their teams:

* Players who designate themselves as team leaders are fallible, no one wants to be that guy.
* The tools for commanders to use arent very good.
* Taking command is not rewarded.
* Following orders is not rewarded.

Good job, hero.

Edited by NextGame, 17 December 2015 - 02:58 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

NextGame, on 17 December 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

So basically you cannot address the following points and are just on a whine fest as bad as those complaining about the quality of their teams:

* Players who designate themselves as team leaders are fallible.
* The tools for commanders to use arent very good.
* Taking command is not rewarded.
* Following orders is not rewarded.

Good job, hero.

1) Command facilities are adequate to the job. This ain't 3D chess, it's a very limited tactical shooter. If you can't figure out VOIP or simple text commands, that's on you. Plenty of the rest of us do just fine. You don't need to coordinate brain surgery or rocket science. Simple commands beat other PUG teams, and even the best comp teams rarely plumb the depths of tactical brilliance.

2) Actually, genius, there are rewards for taking command. And following orders. It's called WINNING. Winning provides higher rewards in CBills and XP. Thus, winning more consistently, means more swag. Crazy thought, I know.

3) Yes, players are fallible. So are players on the other team. But a mediocre plan is better than no plan at all, and will usually still beat the other team. No one is perfect and can guarantee a win, every time. But your chances of success are much higher. And if the guy offering a plan is such an idiot, then put up or shut up and give a better plan.

So there ya go, your 3 baseless QQs answered.

And guess what? Even if NONE of that applied? Still doesn't give you license to act like a Dbag and toward your teammates if you don't have the stomach to try to take the lead yourself.

So again... if you aren't going to even TRY to be part of the solution? Do us all a favor and don't speak in channel, don't type in channel, because you got nothing of value to add, Rambo.

But don't worry buttercup, I got you put on mute in game, just like you are on my ignore list here... because you've never actually contributed anything of use.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 December 2015 - 02:59 PM.

[Grimlox]

NextGame, on 17 December 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

So basically you cannot address the following points and are just on a whine fest as bad as those complaining about the quality of their teams:

* Players who designate themselves as team leaders are fallible.
* The tools for commanders to use arent very good.
* Taking command is not rewarded.
* Following orders is not rewarded.

Good job, hero.

I know theres some minor xp bonus for things like lance in formation or protected. Is there nothing similar for dropping orders on the map for a lance to go to a grid and they get this little bonus when they arrive? If not maybe there should be. Either way the reward for taking command and coordinating the pugs is to have a higher chance at success (which inherently provides greater rewards for winning), less frustration for you and the other players, and general reduction in toxicity when the team doesn't all scatter to the wind and start blaming each other when they die alone. Also you may feel some satisfaction for your own job well done if you lead a successful battle.

What does it cost you to do this? Some effort and the slim chance some random pugs might blame you for a loss. We have the power to affect the outcome of a pug match with our experience, your choice if you are willing to take on that responsibility, but don't blame anyone but yourself if you shy from it.

[Ted Wayz]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 December 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

Wow. Much wisdom.

Then don't clog the channels QQing about how bad your team is, is all that need apply to you, champ.

QQ all you want hondo. It is called a forum. Look up the definition maybe. More so the forum of a FTP game. What do you expect?

And that is the point, what do you expect? You deride people for not leading but statistics show that there are not, by percentage, a large number of leaders per capita. And the number of good leaders is even smaller. So are you trying to push people into bad leadership of pugs? Do you think that is healthy for the game?

I do not think putting down anyone in any situation is good (hint, hint you are at it again), but your solution solves no problems and has the potential of creating bigger ones.

So maybe back to the drawing board? Maybe suggest or lead new people to organized groups that are newbie friendly so that they can recognize when NOT to listen to people? And maybe even "gasp" become the leaders themselves?

[NextGame]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 December 2015 - 02:58 PM, said:

1) Command facilities are adequate to the job. This ain't 3D chess, it's a very limited tactical shooter. If you can't figure out VOIP or simple text commands, that's on you. Plenty of the rest of us do just fine. You don't need to coordinate brain surgery or rocket science. Simple commands beat other PUG teams, and even the best comp teams rarely plumb the depths of tactical brilliance.

"Commander mode" could be augmented to be so much more, it is very weak as it is. place different shaped markers on the ground, great.

Quote

2) Actually, genius, there are rewards for taking command. And following orders. It's called WINNING. Winning provides higher rewards in CBills and XP. Thus, winning more consistently, means more swag. Crazy thought, I know.

If you are halfway competent you can get enough cbills and xp without needing to resort to some mystical command taker giving orders, by your own wording "it's a very limited tactical shooter". i.e. ball up, keep moving, and shoot the red doritos, preferably the same ones that others are shooting at.

Quote

3) Yes, players are fallible. So are players on the other team. But a mediocre plan is better than no plan at all, and will usually still beat the other team. No one is perfect and can guarantee a win, every time. But your chances of success are much higher. And if the guy offering a plan is such an idiot, then put up or shut up and give a better plan.

I've just given you a plan above that is valid for every single game mode and every single map, it's on the house, off you go "commander".

Quote

So there ya go, your 3 baseless QQs answered.

And guess what? Even if NONE of that applied? Still doesn't give you license to act like a Dbag and toward your teammates if you don't have the stomach to try to take the lead yourself.

So again... if you aren't going to even TRY to be part of the solution? Do us all a favor and don't speak in channel, don't type in channel, because you got nothing of value to add, Rambo.

Interesting assumption that I am ramboing around slating my team, speaks volumes about your mentality, maybe you are the one who shouldnt be speaking in channel. But **** yeah, there are some terrible players who like to stand around, get shot, dont move and not return fire. Are you one of those?

Quote

But don't worry buttercup, I got you put on mute in game, just like you are on my ignore list here... because you've never actually contributed anything of use.

lol, please go post more forum spam and pictures of mechs to reinforce your deluded ego. Perhaps you would like to go ahead and turn off chat in game if you are so easily upset. Let me guess, you had a bad game and got creamed, probably your fault, and this thread is a way to make yourself feel better by blaming others for not taking you by the hand to victory.

[Rokuzachi]

I want to offer something constructive, but... I can't really think of anything.

So I'll just say as a 'professional follower', I rarely criticize attempts at leadership because I'm not willing to do it myself and I sort of feel that removes most of my right to ***** about it, lol.

So yea, if you see me derping about out there on your team, feel free to suggest something and you'll probably have at least one person that follows along :^)

[Lupis Volk]

As a Steam Pug when someone starts talking and giving out orders. I fall in line and follow said orders and call out enemy locations via text or voip.

[NextGame]

Grimlox, on 17 December 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

I know theres some minor xp bonus for things like lance in formation or protected. Is there nothing similar for dropping orders on the map for a lance to go to a grid and they get this little bonus when they arrive? If not maybe there should be. Either way the reward for taking command and coordinating the pugs is to have a higher chance at success (which inherently provides greater rewards for winning), less frustration for you and the other players, and general reduction in toxicity when the team doesn't all scatter to the wind and start blaming each other when they die alone. Also you may feel some satisfaction for your own job well done if you lead a successful battle.

My opinion is that it's up to PGI to reinforce company command in order that it's worth using, but to be fair it's reasonably low on the list of stuff that should get improved.

You can get a sense of satisfaction from leading a team to victory, but pug herding is a pain in the ***, and generally it's not worth the hassle. Sometimes the stick needs applied rather than the carrot when players are just milling around expecting to be carried.

Quote

What does it cost you to do this? Some effort and the slim chance some random pugs might blame you for a loss. We have the power to affect the outcome of a pug match with our experience, your choice if you are willing to take on that responsibility, but don't blame anyone but yourself if you shy from it.

It costs me patience and inclination to play the game when I want to be shooting things and not pug herding. It's fine in an organised group, its honestly not worth the hassle when you mean nothing to the other 11 players on your team and they mean nothing to you, meaning that offering tactical suggestions is akin to pissing into the wind. A few drops filled with players who can't do the basics and it will drag you down.

[NextGame]

Rokuzachi, on 17 December 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

I want to offer something constructive, but... I can't really think of anything.

So I'll just say as a 'professional follower', I rarely criticize attempts at leadership because I'm not willing to do it myself and I sort of feel that removes most of my right to ***** about it, lol.

So yea, if you see me derping about out there on your team, feel free to suggest something and you'll probably have at least one person that follows along :^)

I agree that if you arent willing to lead the team, just either follow whatevers being said or else do your own thing if its bad, not worth getting into a protracted argument in game over it, as it basically makes the team less capable while folk are writing angry letters to one another.

[Grimlox]

NextGame, on 17 December 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

My opinion is that it's up to PGI to reinforce company command in order that it's worth using, but to be fair it's reasonably low on the list of stuff that should get improved.

You can get a sense of satisfaction from leading a team to victory, but pug herding is a pain in the ***, and generally it's not worth the hassle. Sometimes the stick needs applied rather than the carrot when players are just milling around expecting to be carried.



It costs me patience and inclination to play the game when I want to be shooting things and not pug herding. It's fine in an organised group, its honestly not worth the hassle when you mean nothing to the other 11 players on your team and they mean nothing to you, meaning that offering tactical suggestions is akin to pissing into the wind. A few drops filled with players who can't do the basics and it will drag you down.

Fair enough and I wouldn't want to try to force a playstyle on you as everyone should be enjoying the game or else what's the point in playing. As long as people aren't purposefully making it into a bad experience for others then it's all good. For those that want to lead and those that want to follow it works out great when someone is willing to step up. I don't think the stick approach does the genuine noob any good though. Just takes time and they will get there.

[fogsworth]

One time in River City my team was focused on playing hide and seek with a badly damaged marauder and didn't notice the fresh king crab that had rolled in behind them. I said into my mic, "turn around and kill this king crab!" and to my surprise they did.

I don't really think PUG games needs a leader so much as just communicating. 12 minds is better than 1. Once you start talking a plan tends to emerge.

Edited by fogsworth, 17 December 2015 - 03:50 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ted Wayz, on 17 December 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

QQ all you want hondo. It is called a forum. Look up the definition maybe. More so the forum of a FTP game. What do you expect?

And that is the point, what do you expect? You deride people for not leading but statistics show that there are not, by percentage, a large number of leaders per capita. And the number of good leaders is even smaller. So are you trying to push people into bad leadership of pugs? Do you think that is healthy for the game?

I do not think putting down anyone in any situation is good (hint, hint you are at it again), but your solution solves no problems and has the potential of creating bigger ones.

So maybe back to the drawing board? Maybe suggest or lead new people to organized groups that are newbie friendly so that they can recognize when NOT to listen to people? And maybe even "gasp" become the leaders themselves?

really, asking people not to be raging dbags, if they themselves are not going to offer any positive contribution creates MORE problems?

LOL, OKEY dokey then.

[xX PUG Xx]

@NextGame AND Bishop

Chill out lads, I think you went off on a tangent and took a different angle from the OP. Or my comprehension of the context was horribly wrong....

To me the issue was with the tactical geniuses that didn't pipe up BEFORE the action began, getting killed, then blaming everyone else for not being able to follow their obvious genius.

Now you two take a little seat in the corner and workout your differences before I lift ma kilt and gie ye the heebie geebies

Edited by xX PUG Xx, 17 December 2015 - 03:56 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Grimlox, on 17 December 2015 - 03:41 PM, said:

Fair enough and I wouldn't want to try to force a playstyle on you as everyone should be enjoying the game or else what's the point in playing. As long as people aren't purposefully making it into a bad experience for others then it's all good. For those that want to lead and those that want to follow it works out great when someone is willing to step up. I don't think the stick approach does the genuine noob any good though. Just takes time and they will get there.

this is the golden nugget that NextGame and TedWayz seem unable to grasp... I am not telling ANYBODY to take Drop Command, or that they should.

I am saying, if you aren't willing to, having nothing positive to contribute, then you also have no leg to stand on to criticize and act like a dbag to the players "who were bad".

It's not rocket science, but those who want to find reasons to complain based on it being a post by Me, will always skip any relevant points to hone in on the one or two things they can twist out of context to QQ about.

Again, it's pretty simple..should be common sense and basic manners, but those are in short supply in society in general, and all but extinct on the internet:

If you provided no positive direction to even TRY to help? Then you got no place, zero, zilch nada, to fill the chat and text bars with your douchebaggery, attitude and "leet" airs.



Now where in that statement, or the OP, was I telling anyone to lead drops?

I believe the message was "Hey, don't be a ****, mr Pro, if you did nothing to help prevent the bad play".