778 replies to this topic

[Inti Raymi]

Mystere, on 17 January 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

Nope. The demands of the whiny teamwork-averse solo player to excel on their own in a team-oriented mode of the game must be catered to.

On a less confrontational note, ... nope, I just can't do it..

Proof positive.

So, then you are, by definition, a LEET *****? Since I, by virtue of the fact I prefer not to group up with 11 of my bestest faceless Internet "friends", most of whom I wouldn't share a beer with if I knew them outside the confines of the game, can be grouped as "whiny teamwork-averse solo" players?

Thanks for confirming my confirmation bias.

[JaxRiot]

Inti Raymi, on 17 January 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

And some of us who are actually not bad players are sick of a select few continuously trying to portray solo players as sub-moronic troglodytes who are incapable of finding their sleeves to wipe their noses on.

Back Atcha.

Ya thats actually one of the things I dont like that people are saying who oppose the split.

They make like the Pug/Solo players are all just bad, hate teamwork, and will never get better unless the Units are there to either beat them into getting better or drop with them to protect them and teach them.

Which is so far from the truth it isnt even funny.

There are plenty of good solo players in CW that know the maps and tactics, and solo /pug / new players can actually learn and get better without the presence of Units.

The way they make it sound is that if you dont have a Unit tag, then they are by default a mindless, drooling zombies with no hope unless the Units are there to so to show them the light.

Edited by JaxRiot, 17 January 2016 - 09:53 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

Jaxriot and the guy above....that is simply not true.
It's the ones whining and crying, demanding that PGi cater to them that spoilt it for the rest to be honest. I've had so many solo drops where at least 8 of the team play in total silence, blanking anything the other 4 say and die uselessly only to either:
A: Raging at the premade, calling them sealclubbers etc
or B: Raging at the team for being useless when they did absolutely NOTHING to help.

Such awesome quotes as "there's more of us, so we are more important" tend to boil the blood somewhat. As CW is currently designed, there is only one person to blame for being clubbed and that is looking at you in the mirror.
The deflection of that fact is what;s showcased the most, and is the driving force behind most of the whines. Sadly post #622 was a perfect example of what many people have been deriding.....

If only people had talked/typed/listened in matches more maybe this current s**tstorm wouldn't even exist. I've never seen a playerbase like this one, so resistant to teams/groups and I've been mmo gaming since EQ1.

[Mystere]

Inti Raymi, on 17 January 2016 - 09:13 AM, said:

Proof positive.

So, then you are, by definition, a LEET *****? Since I, by virtue of the fact I prefer not to group up with 11 of my bestest faceless Internet "friends", most of whom I wouldn't share a beer with if I knew them outside the confines of the game, can be grouped as "whiny teamwork-averse solo" players?

Thanks for confirming my confirmation bias.

I am a lone wolf. But I do not complain or worse whine about wanting my own special queue where I can do as I please with utter disregard for the rest of my team. I work with the team I drop with. I am not averse to teamwork.

If you cannot tell the difference, that's your problem, not mine.

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 09:18 AM, said:

The way they make it sound is that if you dont have a Unit tag, then they are by default a mindless, drooling zombies with no hope unless the Units are there to so to show them the light.

In case you have not figured it out yet, I don't have a unit tag.

Edited by Mystere, 17 January 2016 - 11:55 AM.

[Sandpit]

Inti Raymi, on 17 January 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

And some of us who are actually not bad players are sick of a select few continuously trying to portray solo players as sub-moronic troglodytes who are incapable of finding their sleeves to wipe their noses on.

Back Atcha.

Then you should really look at the players you're supporting. I'm not the one running around in these threads calling them "scrubs"

Matter of fact, I consistently say I'm tired of some trying to portray PUGs as drooling idiots who can't pick their own nose without help.

Again, before you start slinging "back atcha" stuff, you might want to actually read who's posting what and do a little more research as to who's actually advocating what.

Inti Raymi, on 17 January 2016 - 09:13 AM, said:

Proof positive.

So, then you are, by definition, a LEET *****? Since I, by virtue of the fact I prefer not to group up with 11 of my bestest faceless Internet "friends", most of whom I wouldn't share a beer with if I knew them outside the confines of the game, can be grouped as "whiny teamwork-averse solo" players?

Thanks for confirming my confirmation bias.

and again
maybe you should bother understanding the people you keep slinging accusations around at. Either stop with the personal attacks or the report button starts getting used a lot more often. You know nothing about anybody here personally based on your own statements, so stop trying to label them as something then until you do get to know them.

[Sandpit]

kamiko kross, on 17 January 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

I've never seen a playerbase like this one, so resistant to teams/groups and I've been mmo gaming since EQ1.

I've never seen a game developed like this before in 30 years of gaming. Never I have never seen a game, much less one based entirely on the premise of teamwork to succeed, go so far out its way to make groups feel "bad".

People clamor for co-op. They've got co-op mode. It's called teamwork with the 11 others on your team.

[Lupis Volk]

Inti Raymi, on 17 January 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

And some of us who are actually not bad players are sick of a select few continuously trying to portray solo players as sub-moronic troglodytes who are incapable of finding their sleeves to wipe their noses on.

Back Atcha.

I'm sorry, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck. Sure there'll be a few who are solos and have a brain but most of what i've seen in my time in CW they are sub-moronic troglodytes. you give them some simple commands like "regroup at D5 when you die" and they either simply can't fathom it or to spite us "evil" units they ignore it.

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 01:12 PM, said:

I've never seen a game developed like this before in 30 years of gaming. Never I have never seen a game, much less one based entirely on the premise of teamwork to succeed, go so far out its way to make groups feel "bad".

People clamor for co-op. They've got co-op mode. It's called teamwork with the 11 others on your team.

I have to say this is a first for me.

[Johnny Z]

Bonger Bob, on 16 January 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

yup, agree completely, and i have to say, i think iv'e seen a total of two people in all of this that are for splitting the ques and having it get the same rewards. There's no way in hell that the solo's should get the same, as yes, it will only result in continuing bad player behavior, and brings other problems into the fold.

I want to say again that I am not for splitting the queues at this point. But none unit players or even really small unit players wont be getting the same rewards as unit players and there will be huge advantages, and goals, as well as costs it seems, for large units.

This game is putting a lot of effort into rewarding the efforts of large units. Just to make that clear. Since the reply above doesn't seem to realize that.

On the flip side I hope this game doesn't put a lot of wasted effort into it and as a independent player here I hope there is content that rewards independent players to.

The whole wasted effort part of my reply cannot be over stated enough. Many games have thrown huge effort and resources into creating content for large units which yielded nothing for anyone. Just the way it is and is a fairly large topic in itself.

Anyway, I hope basically everyone gets content and rewards, large units and small based on their efforts. Who knows how this will work out at this point.

Edited by Johnny Z, 17 January 2016 - 03:20 PM.

[Galenit]

Johnny Z, on 17 January 2016 - 03:08 PM, said:

This game is putting a lot of effort into rewarding the efforts of large units. Just to make that clear. Since the reply above doesn't seem to realize that.

On the flip side I hope this game doesn't put a lot of wasted effort into it and as a independent player here I hope there is content that rewards independent players to.

The whole wasted effort part of my reply cannot be over stated enough. Many games have thrown huge effort and resources into creating content for large units which yielded nothing for anyone. Just the way it is and is a fairly large topic in itself.

Anyway, I hope basically everyone gets content and rewards, large units and small based on their efforts. Who knows how this will work out at this point.

They put resources in that part and they want money for that.
If that part dont pays for it, they need to change something.

You want a cw without a splitqueue? Give them more money!
You only need to give them 5 coins for every coin a pug-player pays (if there are 20% of groupplayers, if there are only 5% groupplayers, you have to give them 20 coins for each pug coin).

Effort of players (customers) dont count anything, only money matters.
They want you to put effort in it because it makes you spending money.

The sad thing is, that it seems they have never played a onlinegame where the fun/tryhard problem occurt (lots of multiplayergames had this). And they also not learned anything from the group-, pug-splitting in their own game.

CW could have been the main part of mwo, splitting the queues to some degree but also containg all players in it. But after what they delivered until now, after some years (most not working on it, just promissing) its not that much more then some modders have coded in their spare time.

What they learned is that they need some promises and some new mechs and the people will pay for it, even if they only deliver parts of what they promised. Just think about the new balacing, the testserver, the outcome and how many new mechs where delivered until that ...

But dont be sad about it, for every small part of cw you will get at least 4 new mechs to buy!

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

Then you should really look at the players you're supporting. I'm not the one running around in these threads calling them "scrubs"

Matter of fact, I consistently say I'm tired of some trying to portray PUGs as drooling idiots who can't pick their own nose without help.

Again, before you start slinging "back atcha" stuff, you might want to actually read who's posting what and do a little more research as to who's actually advocating what.


and again
maybe you should bother understanding the people you keep slinging accusations around at. Either stop with the personal attacks or the report button starts getting used a lot more often. You know nothing about anybody here personally based on your own statements, so stop trying to label them as something then until you do get to know them.

your the one who keeps using the scrubs term to refer to all pugs in a blanket manner.

my use of it has been to try and get you to understand that not all pugs players are the same. they are a very wide ranging type of people. A small section of which are totally devoid of team function in any way and are just there for C-bills they can grab at random moments.

Some of them are like yourself ( or so you say ), grouping at random and meeting new people, trying to enjoy a game in with team work. Happy to use 3rd party voip, and may occasionally engage in groups / units.

Some of them are solo's who group at random, work with the team they land with and will strive to help the other 11 players, but don't give a fu*k about joining a 3rd party voip. They WILL communicate, and work as best able within the game client to achieve the best result for the TEAM that they are apart of for that round. They won't bother attempting to train people that won't learn or work with a team though, and if they see things are doomed within the first few mins they won't bother communicating with a dead rabble of players, they will do their best to survive and try and turn the round to something favorable. But why bother trying to educate or converse with a brick wall, it does nothing, so they don't bother for that round once its largely over, as it's often wasted breath decried by the fails as whining and crying.

Some of the players are just dropping for the sake of somewhere to grind c-bills, they have zero motivation other than themselves, they have zero team skills and will often go out of they're way to avoid what the rest of the team is doing. They have zero considerations about the team they are about to "support" when building their drop deck, and will often go for high alpha - quick shut down mechs or all guns -limited ammo builds that best suit their spray and pray "team of me" methods. These are the solo scrubs i refer to, that you have made every attempt to turn my reference into a blanket term related to ALL pugs.

These are not the only types of pugs either, there are more. You say you don't appreciate others referring to pugs as scrubs, try not applying to reference all pugs when it suits your desires to distort what others have said.

Just more of your continued efforts to distort other peoples views hoping to discredit anything not aligned to your opinion of how things should be.

I'd appreciate if you would stop referring to all players who support a split as being the pug solo's who are crying over being rolled. I don't like the roflstomps, I don't like taking part in them, I am often on the winning side when they occur, though i don't regard it as a win at all. And yes, iv'e been on the receiving end a few times, it by no mean translates to me just giving up for the round, I fight to the bitter end. All these matches are a waste of time, serve only to demoralize new players, distort a window dressing campaign, and it brings out the worst of all players. The cry moar scrubs to the units who do their best to avoid it, are all damaged by every "match" that is totally imbalanced from the start.

Iv'e often suggested just closing it to non unit players and be done with it, but if people insist on still having the scrubs and solo's and pugs in, then you have to allow some room to have the scrubs moved away from the rest of the units so the whining stops. Let them get rolled by stealth teams ( I know you know what that is referring to before you go off half-cocked on that ) but the units no longer attract the blame, and can get on with real games that aren't a time sink for free c-bills.

People either need to accept that CW is for units and lock it accordingly, or accept that it is open to all players, no matter how they play. If it is to be open to all players, are we to sit here and let the bullshite go on and on, or can we at least separate the bullshite and stop the units having the most distorted gameplay.

Get over yourself dude, and take a step back and look outside of your narrow field of view, you might be surprised to find other people out there enjoying the game without playing it the way you do. You might find an opinion different to yours that might not be invalid by default. You might find a greater level of enjoyment if you took yourself and the GAME less seriously.

I have no problems with how anyone want to play, I do have an issue being lumped with the scrubs and written off as one of the crymoars over groups. I would love to be a part of a unit, and will wear a tag proudly so all my opponents know im functioning that way, when being a part of a unit actually holds meaning and doesn't attract the rage it currently does.

Until then i will continue to enjoy my GAME in pug land as best able, while not miss-representing myself as being a pug when im really a unit. I will continue to work with the team i drop with, and will remain silent if we lose. I will continue to have my successes and losses against both pugs and units in the alternate game mode that CW currently is. I will continue to laugh as the scrubs get thrown up against units, and stealth units drop as pugs. I look forward to units one day having greater meaning than being honorable and sportsman enough declare how they are playing by wearing a tag. I look forward to seeing the rage quits of the elitist entitlement people as the game progresses, not stagnates as they seem to be wanting.

and please, iv'e asked before and will again, please do report me if you feel iv'e attacked you in any way. I welcome it.

Edited by Bonger Bob, 17 January 2016 - 04:35 PM.

[oldradagast]

JaxRiot, on 17 January 2016 - 09:18 AM, said:

Ya thats actually one of the things I dont like that people are saying who oppose the split.

They make like the Pug/Solo players are all just bad, hate teamwork, and will never get better unless the Units are there to either beat them into getting better or drop with them to protect them and teach them.

Which is so far from the truth it isnt even funny.

There are plenty of good solo players in CW that know the maps and tactics, and solo /pug / new players can actually learn and get better without the presence of Units.

The way they make it sound is that if you dont have a Unit tag, then they are by default a mindless, drooling zombies with no hope unless the Units are there to so to show them the light.

Agreed. The egotists who supported the endless seal-clubbing fell into one of two camps:

- All PUG's are morons who can't communicate and who "hate teamwork" when what they really hate is stupid "match-making" that pits 12-mans against a pile of randoms. A classic case of shifting the debate by rephrasing the complaint into something meaningless and irrelevant.

- All PUG's could magically become as good as practiced 12-man teams if "they just communicated," because we're to believe that using VoIP somehow substitutes for weeks or months of practiced teamwork and a pile of fully-leveled meta-mechs being used together by a team with a focus. This is, of course, an excuse to keep pitting PUG's against 12-mans because "uh, they have coms, so they are just as likely to win, derp." Just more stupidity from the usual try-hards.

Nothing but idiocy in both cases, but whatever it takes to defend the seal-clubbing and free wins that were being handed out to the big groups. Cry me a river if this isn't going to be the case anymore.

Edited by oldradagast, 17 January 2016 - 04:18 PM.

[Bonger Bob]

oldradagast, on 17 January 2016 - 04:10 PM, said:

Agreed. The egotists who supported the endless seal-clubbing fell into one of two camps:

- All PUG's are morons who can't communicate and who "hate teamwork" when what they really hate is stupid "match-making" that pits 12-mans against a pile of randoms. A classic case of shifting the debate by rephrasing the complaint into something meaningless and irrelevant.

- All PUG's could magically become as good as practiced 12-man teams if "they just communicated," because we're to believe that using VoIP somehow substitutes for weeks or months of practiced teamwork and a pile of fully-leveled meta-mechs being used together by a team with a focus. This is, of course, an excuse to keep pitting PUG's against 12-mans because "uh, they have coms, so they are just as likely to win, derp." Just more stupidity from the usual try-hards.

it doesn't make the split que sides of the debate any better when we have people making blanket remarks of " egotists who supported the endless seal-clubbing", yes there are some like that, but some have valid concerns to be addressed and this only alienates them further.

oldradagast, on 17 January 2016 - 04:10 PM, said:

Nothing but idiocy in both cases, but whatever it takes to defend the seal-clubbing and free wins that were being handed out to the big groups. Cry me a river if this isn't going to be the case anymore.

to be the devils advocate here....its not just the seal clubbers. Some people have long been using it in place of missing game functions and tools as a recruitment option. PGI needs to address things with a wider scope than they are currently.

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 04:02 PM, said:

your the one who keeps using the scrubs term to refer to all pugs in a blanket manner.
.

liar
period

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 04:43 PM, said:

liar
period

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

Then you should really look at the players you're supporting. I'm not the one running around in these threads calling them "scrubs"

Matter of fact, I consistently say I'm tired of some trying to portray PUGs as drooling idiots who can't pick their own nose without help.

right there, just like lots before, your referencing terms used by others to describe small select sections of the pug players that are the issue, and then implying that's it been applied to everyone who is a pug.

there are many varied types of players in pugs and units, those terms being used to describe two broad sections of the player base.

The references people have made like "scrubs" or "drooling idiots who can't pick their own nose without help" have only been used by yourself to refer to an entire section of players in post just like this. Where others have used them is to try and separate the terminology used, as all pug players are not the same, neither are all unit players.

people aren't trying to portray ALL PUG's or ALL UNITS, they are doing their damnedest not to, and then your turning that into that player having referenced the entire pug player base in general.

Just more of your failed attempts to blend terminology's used to refer to differing sections of a wide group of player types, in what only seems to come off as a poor attempt to make the comments seem negatively directed to you personally, because you rate your self as a pug sometimes.

All with the ultimate failed goal of trying to close down any ones post that is not aligned to your beliefs by discrediting what they have written.

call me a liar all you like, the truth is very plain to see.

hellz, if you bother to open your eyes and remove your head from between your legs, you'd see instances where i have spoken out about such blanket use of references that have negative broad all encompassing statements, one of which is directly above your "liar" post.

Edited by Bonger Bob, 17 January 2016 - 05:20 PM.

[oldradagast]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 04:33 PM, said:

it doesn't make the split que sides of the debate any better when we have people making blanket remarks of " egotists who supported the endless seal-clubbing", yes there are some like that, but some have valid concerns to be addressed and this only alienates them further.

Sort of... but look at the crap in the CW forums and the endless screaming against any and all change that happens whenever anyone suggests even the slightest fix to CW, as well as the constant bashing of "useless scrubs, idiot casuals, etc" and then tell me which side in this debate is the troublemakers. CW in its current form is dead. We can either sit around and listen to try-hards who want free wins and who like bashing "inferior" people, or we can FIX CW and actually try some changes that might work. There's no benefit to PGI or anyone else to keep the current junk system unless one just needs the free wins for an ego boost... which too many people need, sadly.

[Bonger Bob]

oldradagast, on 17 January 2016 - 05:36 PM, said:

Sort of... but look at the crap in the CW forums and the endless screaming against any and all change that happens whenever anyone suggests even the slightest fix to CW, as well as the constant bashing of "useless scrubs, idiot casuals, etc" and then tell me which side in this debate is the troublemakers. CW in its current form is dead. We can either sit around and listen to try-hards who want free wins and who like bashing "inferior" people, or we can FIX CW and actually try some changes that might work. There's no benefit to PGI or anyone else to keep the current junk system unless one just needs the free wins for an ego boost... which too many people need, sadly.

ya, i'm well aware of how the casuals are portrayed by some people, some of it is seen in here too.

We already have enough people trying to mix up statements into blanket derogatory remarks about whole swaths of various sections of the broader player base. lets be the better people and just not go there.

You hit the nail on the head, even though its with a lot of blunt force. CW is dead, and doing nothing is only continuing the madness, changes need to happen, and id rather discuss and work with changes, than sit back and do nothing.

I especially won't be silent when a select few try to nuke all debate and changes out of existence while offering no solutions themselves though, all that does is hand the asylum to the insane to run. The more its discussed and thought about, the better solutions that players might be able to put to PGI. Currently if i were PGI and walked into this mess, I would do my damnedest to ignore the lunacy, and we all gain nothing. Only balanced views that have been discussed and had problems worked through should ever make the table for PGI to consider.

[Sandpit]

oldradagast, on 17 January 2016 - 05:36 PM, said:

We can either sit around and listen to try-hards who want free wins and who like bashing "inferior" people, or we can FIX CW

Then maybe stop slinging around ridiculous rhetoric and say something meaningful. Your post equated to bashing people and saying something needs to change.

Myself, Mystere, and a few others have given many ideas, suggestions, written threads, etc.

So tell me, what's your idea?

Do you even know what some of the suggestions I've made are?
Since you say you can just "sit around listening to tryhards". Do you bother reading and making suggestions or supporting those threads with ideas you like?

I can safely say I do and have. Do you bother participating in the conversation instead of just slinging around slurs? Here's your chance, make sure you use it. I'd like to hear your ideas and have a discussion about them if that's what you really want. Same goes for Bong and others, stop the arguing and present your idea on how to improve CW.

It's as simple as that. Like I said, it's very easy to determine who really wants discussion about how to improve CW for everyone and who just wants to argue, make noise, and try to discredit others through stereotyping and rhetoric.

So which are you guys going to be?

P.S.
I'm still interested in whether ANY of you "critiquing" my feedback in this thread have even bothered to read some of the topic I started about how to improve CW.

If not, I have little hope that you're here for anything more than being the latter part of that example above and just being more noise instead of participating in an actual discussion.

Ball is in your court folks.

[jaxjace]

The amount of people who get their feelings hurt in this game is astounding.

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

It's as simple as that. Like I said, it's very easy to determine who really wants discussion about how to improve CW for everyone and who just wants to argue, make noise, and try to discredit others through stereotyping and rhetoric.

So which are you guys going to be?

P.S.
I'm still interested in whether ANY of you "critiquing" my feedback in this thread have even bothered to read some of the topic I started about how to improve CW.

If not, I have little hope that you're here for anything more than being the latter part of that example above and just being more noise instead of participating in an actual discussion.

Ball is in your court folks.

so long as it doesn't involve splitting the que, which is what you started this thread about in the first place.

the only thing you have done is decry the que split as the most foul of options and have made every effort to move conversation away from it without suggesting a single thing towards doing it. nothing, not once have you said anything seriously to the effect of "split ques could work if : ", the only thing we've seen you suggest is how you can see it being manipulated for exploitative behavior or how you see that its going to cause select players to have a tantrum and take that out on PGI and the game.

CW improvements are not just que splits, splitting the que is just one piece in a very large puzzle, but you refuse to even discuss the idea outside of your narrow views that it should never happen.

I have said and will say it again, some of your posts, in very select sections, have merit and a topic that is being openly discussed. If you tried applying that attitude to more of your posts in a wider sense and how you read others posts, you might find the answers you allege to seek.

if you want to have a broad discussion on CW and the multitude of almost limitless ways it could be improved, by all means, but that isn't what the thread is titled, you started this thread negatively, with a negative title, to declare your dislike for it, we get it, we know you don't like the idea what so ever.

So don't pretend to be able to take the moral high ground and say that your discussing it, you've done the very best you can, with a handful of other people, to destroy and distort any discussion about the ques splitting unless it aligns with your view of "the ques shouldn't split".

At least Mystere has made some contributions at some stages with a view of "if the ques get split, the way it could work is: ". I welcome you to do the same as i have repeatedly offered you, as that is the topic of your aptly titled thread.

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 17 January 2016 - 06:23 PM, said:

so long as it doesn't involve splitting the que, which is what you started this thread about in the first place.

the only thing you have done is decry the que split as the most foul of options and have made every effort to move conversation away from it without suggesting a single thing towards doing it. nothing, not once have you said anything seriously to the effect of "split ques could work if : ", the only thing we've seen you suggest is how you can see it being manipulated for exploitative behavior or how you see that its going to cause select players to have a tantrum and take that out on PGI and the game.

CW improvements are not just que splits, splitting the que is just one piece in a very large puzzle, but you refuse to even discuss the idea outside of your narrow views that it should never happen.

I have said and will say it again, some of your posts, in very select sections, have merit and a topic that is being openly discussed. If you tried applying that attitude to more of your posts in a wider sense and how you read others posts, you might find the answers you allege to seek.

if you want to have a broad discussion on CW and the multitude of almost limitless ways it could be improved, by all means, but that isn't what the thread is titled, you started this thread negatively, with a negative title, to declare your dislike for it, we get it, we know you don't like the idea what so ever.

So don't pretend to be able to take the moral high ground and say that your discussing it, you've done the very best you can, with a handful of other people, to destroy and distort any discussion about the ques splitting unless it aligns with your view of "the ques shouldn't split".

At least Mystere has made some contributions at some stages with a view of "if the ques get split, the way it could work is: ". I welcome you to do the same as i have repeatedly offered you, as that is the topic of your aptly titled thread.

did you mention one thing about your thoughts on improving CW in there or not?
lots of noise no substance