Der Geisterbaer, on 20 September 2020 - 04:33 AM, said:
So? That still doesn't remove the fallacious nature of your argument.
There have been changes to those rewards over time
Regardless: correlation does not equal causation and inaction does not directly prove intent.
The real world shows that PGI has not changed this game mode substantially for years. For me, that's the best proof that they are okay with it.
Der Geisterbaer, on 20 September 2020 - 04:33 AM, said:
And even more fallacious reasoning that falls somewhere between false dilemma, strawman and a direct insult. That's the spirit ... ~laugh~
You find capping insulting? I have merely stated that all options are open, so you can play any way you see fit.
I have made one mistake: I accepted your talk about
"an invalid a.k.a. "bad" choice".
No talk about "
invalid" choices anymore since PGI makes no difference between
"Win on Kills" (either by destroying the entire enemy team or killing more enemy 'Mechs than losing your own by the game's end)" or
"Win on Cap". Both choices are valid and the players are free to choose between them..
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have not protested about your
"They (rightfully) think that both should be an equal opportunity choice with equal benefits." There is no
"rightfully" in the game mode victory conditions or elsewhere. On top of that, only PGI has the ownership of MWO and its content. Rightfull is what PGI states it is righfull and for PGI both victory conditions are equally rightful. Rewards are awarded rightfully as PGI sees fit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what PGI states before every Assault mission:
Those conditions are clear and it is players' choice how exactly they achieve their game victory. There is nothing suggesting that one condition is more "rightful" than the other.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have not protested against this:
"What you're describing there is just the result of the status quo where two or more distinct win conditions exist but only one - the one that is "team death match" - actually has the real incentives in terms of gains for both currency and PSR."
What you said is not true: Both "Win on Kills" and "Win on Cap" net the player exactly the same type of C-Bills, XPs, etc. and PSR. The players are awarded those rewards based on their activity during the game. All those C-Bills, XPs and PSR are equally
"real incentives" within MWO and there is no difference between them.
As for the amount of those rewards, surely there can be difference between the amount gained for kills and those gained for capping, but I find it not different from the situation when in Skirmish one players kills half of the enemy team, while some other player moves through the game with occassional spotting. One gets more C-Bills than the other based on their actions and rewards connected to them.
He, who ho wants more C-Bills, XP and PSR, should do actions that are more rewarded.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You said
"As things are PGI actually hasn't delivered a set of different game modes but instead just one with varying degrees of annoying side conditions."
Actual is what is real and in this reality PGI has delivered following different game modes (in QP):
- Assault
- Skirmish
- Conquest
- Incursion
- Escort
- Domination