Asym, on 06 April 2018 - 02:10 PM, said:
Ah, team based eh?! Think SOLARIS.....no teams lad.
If this was a team based game, you'd have to join a team..... It would be a requirement. Actually, MW is an individual game and has been for a long time..... The "single player" MW games are not team based. They tried Faction Play and for a long while, and, it appears that "you must be on a team" guys are somehow wrong....?
Solaris is the strategic business decision because it appears, you'all ran team centered play into the ground with a resounding Ker-Splat......Proof: thousands of players and complete teams ejected to other games.... If teams were "value-added", Solaris wouldn't be the deliverable for the near future....
Amoral? No, it's illogical and promotes an expansion of "more is better" game play... At some point, all we are seeing are all LRM's or all lasers... Not a smart balance between laser, ballistic and missile systems. Balanced weapons systems promote balanced play..... It's not how real Armies fight.....now or in the future. Oh well, we can agree to disagree....
Again you are wrong.
Pug matches are still 12 v 12 where there are two teams.
In CW there are actual teams that form and they dominate the mode.
Solaris? Not relevant to this conversation.
Proof? That is a statement and opinion.
Calling effective tactics in this game illogical...not ready to do the mental gymnastics you must have gone through to come up with that.
How real armies fight? When was the traditional war even fought? You can disagree with me all you like but your idea of what should be the way the game is, is not what we have nor does it seem to be what most even want.