113 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

Mudhutwarrior, on 07 February 2017 - 04:43 AM, said:

In this case they will just sink the game over time. Killing the population one new player at a time. The effects of that can be seen with the skewed match maker and threads where new players say they are coming up against 1s and 2s.
The same people deny just like they always have. Just like Crue above. He plays his role wonderfully as the careful centrist but a few sentences in you can see who he is supporting.

Your equation of fascism to the way a population plays a game within a frame work of rules and a gaming enviornment provided by a for profit company is beyond ridiculous. You go on believing that this stompy robot game is somehow a reflection of a vast fascist conspiracy. Yes I sympathize with the evil doers (is that the right RL word choice?) who play the game to win. Oh the horror of my political failings and clear failure as a centrist pol. The horror.

Mudhutwarrior, on 07 February 2017 - 05:14 AM, said:

Because some of us know that with some careful consideration every player of every stripe could sit at the table. The game could grow and PGI could profit. As it stands PGI built a FT.Apache so they can exist in a bubble. Only a very small number of players are allowed access and that small number makes sure it stays that way. That is why the game is wash rinse repeat.

YES! PGI BUILT THIS. That is the point. They created the game that we are allowed to play in. There is no deep plot to take away your rights and enslave your people. Just play the game...or not.

[WolvesX]

What is a FT Apache?

[Mudhutwarrior]

WolvesX, on 07 February 2017 - 05:20 AM, said:

What is a FT Apache?

https://en.wikipedia...ache,_The_Bronx

[WolvesX]

Mudhutwarrior, on 07 February 2017 - 05:23 AM, said:

https://en.wikipedia...ache,_The_Bronx

Thanks.

[TWIAFU]

Mudhutwarrior, on 06 February 2017 - 03:10 PM, said:

A lot of people don't play CW because of your ilk and the atmosphere you created. I know you don't get that. But its funny to see you miss the point.

Glad to see your still missing the point.

At least your consistent on that point.

But sure, whatever alternate facts you wish to spout, go for it, and you will be called out on it. My "ilk" plays the game as intended and by design. The tard I was responding to and a post you conveniently ignored is from someone that ACTIVELY plays. or not, with intent to harm others. Sure, that "ilk" is what you want but those that play the game as designed are the bad ones.

At least I play, unlike some.

Mudhutwarrior, on 06 February 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

Don't know were you have been but his gang promised to synch drop and destroy solo when PGI said they were putting it in. They near succeeded at one point.

Liar.

Have not, ever.

[Mudhutwarrior]

TWIAFU, on 07 February 2017 - 05:26 AM, said:

Glad to see your still missing the point.

At least your consistent on that point.

But sure, whatever alternate facts you wish to spout, go for it, and you will be called out on it. My "ilk" plays the game as intended and by design. The tard I was responding to and a post you conveniently ignored is from someone that ACTIVELY plays. or not, with intent to harm others. Sure, that "ilk" is what you want but those that play the game as designed are the bad ones.

At least I play, unlike some.



Liar.

Have not, ever.

I don't get your at least i play?

Is there some reason my 35k plus matches don't count?

Is it because I don't follow your diktat?

I think your idea of played as intended is your ilks vision and its not fully shared. You miss that point. You have a narrow scope that does not have room for anyone who doesn't feel as you do. On my side I see your vision and agree with it. The difference is I think we can all share the same tent with consideration. You do not.
Look back and find I have never tired to deny you your modes or your way of playing. But you always have denied anyone who didn't share your views.

[Vellron2005]

Ok, seems to me that this is getting WAY TO PERSONAL... people are calling people out, questioning people's integrity, history and stuff like that..

That IS NOT why I started this thread..

Of the first 4 pages, maybe one or two other posters posted their "FW experience".. the rest is just baseless name calling, moralizing, and discussing on the type of people we want / do not want in FW..

The main point that we are all revolving around is do we want FW to be "serious mode" or not..

It seems to me that most people do want that.. I could be wrong..

but can we all at least agree on the fact that we want people to actually PLAY the game when they get into FW, instead of ruin the experience of all the other players?

If this needless bickering continues for much longer, I beg the moderators to close this topic.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Bud Crue, on 06 February 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

Made that point way up above. Didn't take.

Bud you are talking way to much sense and sanity in this thread. Thus, it isn't something all forum posters can comprehend.


Btw: nice to see you out there in FW last night...

[RussianWolf]

TWIAFU, on 06 February 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

So, you do not play CW just to make the game mode miserable for EVERYONE else that plays CW.

Your motivation is to cause bad game experiences for everyone.

Your an ^@@(&$# and your really &#($($ up to have such motivation.

Glad you don't play.

Have fun.

people with attitudes like yours made it clear that those like myself were not welcome. So I'm just granting your wish.

[RussianWolf]

Bud Crue, on 06 February 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

What atmosphere that he and his ilk created? A competitive environment where only the best players running the best mechs consistently win? Is that the atmosphere you're asking about? PGI created the game mode and the conditions in which it is played. Some folks play it as a team and they play to win...as PGI intended. There is nothing wrong with that nor should there be. The only issue with his "ilk" is that because of poor game design soon (as with every other previous iteration of CW) they will have no one to play with because of the way the mode is set up but his "ilk" didn't create that. PGI did.

Play the game, play the mode...or don't; but don't blame ANY members of the community for the "atmosphere". If they are breaking a rule, feel free to report them, but otherwise tough cookies.

The one were those of his attitude said things like "play to win or stay the hell out" "we don't want potatoes in our mode" "we don't want solos" etc. etc.

That's not on PGI, that's on those players.

[RussianWolf]

Bud Crue, on 06 February 2017 - 05:14 PM, said:

Yes. Exactly. This game is just like fascist Italy. Geezus.

As to your seemingly non-insane complaints:
Why would these folks need to sync drop in CW? Forming a 12 man to go stomping is easy enough. If they were sync dropping in QP then you should have reported them for violation of the COC. If you did, and PGI was unmoved, then again tough cookies. Its PGI's decision.

As to the assertion that "they seem to think their way is the only way to play..." so what? Ignore them and play the game your way...within the rules and social norms and expectations of the game/mode; namely by playing as part of a team, and playing to win. Why is that so hard? Its okay to disagree with their decisions, their way of approaching a tactical situation, etc. but if you don't want to play as a member of a team, then maybe a team based game is not a good fit for you.

Meh. Do as you will. Hold a grudge against others and the way they play, accuse them of being fascists, whatever trips your trigger. Those that you're complaining about won't be bothered at all. Just do keep in mind that this is the community who is playing the game and if you alienate enough of it then folks won't be willing to play it "your way" either.

funny, they seem to have no objection to alienating all the others.

[Bud Crue]

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:

funny, they seem to have no objection to alienating all the others.

"They"? Okay. Fine, allow these people to "alienate" you. That is your choice. If you feel alienated by these bad people...these villains who play the game in accordance with the rules, then it sounds to me that you aren't being alienated by these nasty folks, but rather by the way the game is set up.

That is an issue you need to address with PGI.

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 07:04 AM, said:

The one were those of his attitude said things like "play to win or stay the hell out" "we don't want potatoes in our mode" "we don't want solos" etc. etc.

That's not on PGI, that's on those players.

So you don't like their attitudes. Fine. Deal with it. Talk smack back, gut gud, don't play. But lets be honest here, your arguments comes down to "I don't like the way they talk to me?" Really, that's the complaint. Again: tough cookies.

[RussianWolf]

TWIAFU, on 07 February 2017 - 05:26 AM, said:

Glad to see your still missing the point.

At least your consistent on that point.

But sure, whatever alternate facts you wish to spout, go for it, and you will be called out on it. My "ilk" plays the game as intended and by design. The tard I was responding to and a post you conveniently ignored is from someone that ACTIVELY plays. or not, with intent to harm others. Sure, that "ilk" is what you want but those that play the game as designed are the bad ones.

At least I play, unlike some.



Liar.

Have not, ever.

bwahahahahhahahahahhaha

That's too funny.

I'm a "tard" (nice) because I "actively play (or not) to harm others"

I'm doing exactly what you have asked repeatedly for. I'm a solo player (when I play), NOT playing in CW.

[RussianWolf]

Bud Crue, on 07 February 2017 - 07:14 AM, said:

"They"? Okay. Fine, allow these people to "alienate" you. That is your choice. If you feel alienated by these bad people...these villains who play the game in accordance with the rules, then it sounds to me that you aren't being alienated by these nasty folks, but rather by the way the game is set up.

That is an issue you need to address with PGI.



So you don't like their attitudes. Fine. Deal with it. Talk smack back, gut gud, don't play. But lets be honest here, your arguments comes down to "I don't like the way they talk to me?" Really, that's the complaint. Again: tough cookies.

but I'm having too much fun.

If you want to make it so that CW isn't accessible to new players, or players that don't share your vision of what its supposed to be, take it up with PGI.

Until then, everyone is welcome including all the "inferior" players and they can do so as they please. You don't like the way they play? Fine. Deal with it. Your argument comes down to "I don't like the way they play in CW?" Tough cookies,

Edited by RussianWolf, 07 February 2017 - 08:23 AM.

[Bud Crue]

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 08:11 AM, said:

but I'm having too much fun.

If you want to make it so that CW isn't accessible to new players, or players that don't share your vision of what its supposed to be, take it up with PGI.

Until then, everyone is welcome including all the "inferior" players and they can do so as they please. You don't like the way they play? Fine. Deal with it. Your argument comes down to "I don't like the way they play in CW?" Tough cookies,

Bingo. PGI has set up CW to be unfriendly to new players. They have a sign and everything to warn such new players away. Moreover the mode's win conditions are based on a communal effort to take dots. Every time a team on your side of the tugof war looses it hurts the chances of your side to take that dot. So even in terms of teams, PGI has set up the mode such that only consistently winning teams (W/L above 1) should really be playing. This is the creation and intention of PGI with the CW experience: a mode for good player acting as teams. I am truly sorry that this isn't set up differently (really, I am, because I am bad and thus often feel as I have no business playing the mode that I came to this game for), but that is in fact how the game is set up.

The mode does not prevent new players and bad players from playing, but if such folks should decide to play despite the factual reality of the mode, then yes expect to be beaten like a dog and mocked. You don't like it? Hell I don't like it either, but alas, tough cookies.

[RussianWolf]

Bud Crue, on 07 February 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

Bingo. PGI has set up CW to be unfriendly to new players. They have a sign and everything to warn such new players away. Moreover the mode's win conditions are based on a communal effort to take dots. Every time a team on your side of the tugof war looses it hurts the chances of your side to take that dot. So even in terms of teams, PGI has set up the mode such that only consistently winning teams (W/L above 1) should really be playing. This is the creation and intention of PGI with the CW experience: a mode for good player acting as teams. I am truly sorry that this isn't set up differently (really, I am, because I am bad and thus often feel as I have no business playing the mode that I came to this game for), but that is in fact how the game is set up.

The mode does not prevent new players and bad players from playing, but if such folks should decide to play despite the factual reality of the mode, then yes expect to be beaten like a dog and mocked. You don't like it? Hell I don't like it either, but alas, tough cookies.

obviously an "unfriendly" environment with a warning isn't stopping the new and bad players from going in, so what are you guys complaining about?

"If you are going to play, then play" really means, "if you are going to play, play the way I want to play" which really is as stupid as it sounds. accept it and stop beechin'

[Bud Crue]

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 10:43 AM, said:

"If you are going to play, then play" really means, "if you are going to play, play the way I want to play" which really is as stupid as it sounds. accept it and stop beechin'

No it means, play in accordance with the rules of the game and in accordance with how PGI has set up the game to be played. To play the game otherwise will just lead to you being reported for disruptive or non-participation or just an unpleasant experience. That is entirely up to you as a player. As to the last yes, by all means stop "beechin".

[Oberost]

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 10:43 AM, said:

obviously an "unfriendly" environment with a warning isn't stopping the new and bad players from going in, so what are you guys complaining about?

"If you are going to play, then play" really means, "if you are going to play, play the way I want to play" which really is as stupid as it sounds. accept it and stop beechin'

If you play a Team based PVP game with an objective (in this case win, whatever the win conditions are...), you should play with this objective in mind and try to contribute to your team effort to archive said objective.

If you are staring at the sun all the match, TK your teammates, turn around and walk out of bounds (twice in a row the same player in QP, amazing experience...) you're doing it wrong. I don't care how you play as long as you try to follow the game objectives. Otherwise you're just being a jerk and probably you'll get reported for non-participation or whatever...

Edited by Oberost, 07 February 2017 - 11:06 AM.

[RussianWolf]

Bud Crue, on 07 February 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

No it means, play in accordance with the rules of the game and in accordance with how PGI has set up the game to be played. To play the game otherwise will just lead to you being reported for disruptive or non-participation or just an unpleasant experience. That is entirely up to you as a player. As to the last yes, by all means stop "beechin".

tell me how the OP indicates any of this? They chased a squirrel. Where in the rules does it say this is not allowed gameplay? I have not read anywhere in here of disruptive or non-participation in a match other than the OP saying he quit to desktop.

My non-participation is simply not logging into CW since CW1 and not logging in to MWO in the past 6 months. neither are against the rules.

IF you say go to gate A and some decide to go to gate B, they aren't breaking the rules. They just aren't playing the way you want them to.

Oberost, on 07 February 2017 - 11:05 AM, said:

If you play a Team based PVP game with an objective (in this case win, whatever the win conditions are...), you should play with this objective in mind and try to contribute to your team effort to archive said objective.

If you are staring at the sun all the match, TK your teammates, turn around and walk out of bounds (twice in a row the same player in QP, amazing experience...) you're doing it wrong. I don't care how you play as long as you try to follow the game objectives. Otherwise you're just being a jerk and probably you'll get reported for non-participation or whatever...

None of that was anywhere listed or implied anywhere in this thread as far as I saw. Other than the OP, which you guys seem to be supportive of.

[Bud Crue]

RussianWolf, on 07 February 2017 - 11:41 AM, said:

tell me how the OP indicates any of this? They chased a squirrel. Where in the rules does it say this is not allowed gameplay? I have not read anywhere in here of disruptive or non-participation in a match other than the OP saying he quit to desktop.

My non-participation is simply not logging into CW since CW1 and not logging in to MWO in the past 6 months. neither are against the rules.

IF you say go to gate A and some decide to go to gate B, they aren't breaking the rules. They just aren't playing the way you want them to.


None of that was anywhere listed or implied anywhere in this thread as far as I saw. Other than the OP, which you guys seem to be supportive of.

So now you want to talk about the OP? Your comments above (starting at post #70) that I responded to, where all in reference to other peoples attitudes...they had no bearing or reference to the OP. If you want to re-frame the discussion now to just the OP and the facts presented therein, that's cool, but not really relevant to your comments above about other players attitudes not making you and your way of playing feeling welcome in the mode. Whatever. Have at it regarding the OP.