191 replies to this topic

[Jeff K Notagoon]

We don't talk to pubbies because honestly it isn't worth the effort. 90% of the time anything you say will be completely ignored and the 10% that listens are commandos with a single ERPPC.

[Violette]

FerretGR, on 01 December 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

You don't have to do anything. That said, typing "let's defend E4 until the scouts come up with some info, K?" is pretty much the same as not doing anything and works wonders in most cases, so why not do that instead?

Uh huh? The implication seems to be that I am lazy, therefore I suspect you're being overly moralizing, given that we're talking about a video game. Also, the responses I get to even gentle requests like that don't make the trying worth it, really.

Hayashi, on 01 December 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

... and did you know that there are people who do quantitative research using anecdotal data? It's a very new field at the moment, I'm not sure what its proper name is.

One or two anecdotes isn't very conclusive. So they randomly sample, take several hundred anecdotes, and map trends. It's all rather interesting.

We don't have anywhere near enough to prove that it works, but people rarely listen to mathematical proof on this forum even in areas where it is possible (repair costs to earnings, projected damage and estimated ammunition/heat efficiency, etc). In this particular topic, all you're gonna be able to get is anecdotes, or at best, you could run 50 games with teamchat with your PuGs, 50 games without, and analyse the win-loss-kill-death statistics - which won't be able to nullify the effect of your skill.

But just because you don't have to drink your soup with a spoon doesn't mean that there's no place to tell people that drinking soup with a steak knife is probably not a good idea.

The game is going to change greatly over the coming months, thus I doubt such data will be super-useful. This post doesn't seem to have reached that level. What's more, it's not very representative, since we're taking that data only from people who care to chime in on a thread about a certain kind of online etiquette. (Basically, what you said.) I was more speaking to the tone of these posts, though. 'Why, when you can do the good thing, do you not do it?' seems to be the line of a lot of you folks. Quite frankly, I find it a bit pompous and overbearing.

Plus it really hasn't reflected my experience, at all.

Edited by Violette, 01 December 2012 - 06:00 PM.

[M Jordanus Sicarius]

Why do people keep saying talking doesn't work? Is that proof through trial or assumption? Sounds like assumption to me. When I'm in a game, and someone (Whether that be a person from a premamde, another PUG or me) talks at the start and even issuese a general battleplan, the chance of winning or at least respectable outcome goes up. When no one talks, people tend to get steamrolled, 8-0, 8-1, 7-1 etc. And when we're getting steamrolled, there's usually someone who pipes up and says everyone not in his group are idiots.

People do listen, they may not reply, but they listen. Chances are people are going to do what you want them to do more often if you tell them what you want, then being silent and hoping they do it. I'm getting sick of premades not talking, and then piping up a few minutes in saying "You guys are horrible, why did you go that way".

You also can't expect everyone to listen all the time, but you'll get more people doing the right thing if you talk.

[Shiney]

Whilst some pugs are AWESOME, most are not and until proven otherwise are best served as meat shields.

[FerretGR]

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Uh huh? The implication seems to be that I am lazy, therefore I suspect you're being overly moralizing, given that we're talking about a video game.

Even if I was implying that, your laziness isn't a moral issue. You're not immoral if you're lazy.

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Also, the responses I get to even gentle requests like that don't make the trying worth it, really.

Well, that's all you had to say instead of trying to make this about morality. It's not worth the effort, in your experience. I'm sorry that's been your experience; I PUG and play premades and it hasn't been my experience in either case (ie. it's certainly been worth the minuscule effort); I often get at least some feedback when I suggest a plan or ask for one.

Though it does go back to my original point; you say it's not worth the effort, but it's so... little... effort...

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

'Why, when you can do the good thing, do you not do it?' seems to be the line of a lot of you folks. Quite frankly, I find it a bit pompous and overbearing.

Well, it's a good question, though I suppose it's more "why, when you can do the simple, painless thing, that at least sometimes will lead to a better game, do you not do it?" from my perspective. Again, no need to make this a moral issue.

IMHO, there's nothing pompous or overbearing in suggesting that folks will have a better time if they communicate, nor in wondering why folks who steadfastly refuse to try to communicate do so.

Edited by FerretGR, 01 December 2012 - 06:10 PM.

[Violette]

Just talk, everyone. Just talk and get along. Reach out! Do what you know is right! You can be the change you want to see in the world!

Derp!

[Jeff K Notagoon]

M Jordanus Sicarius, on 01 December 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

Why do people keep saying talking doesn't work? Is that proof through trial or assumption?

Because it happens in virtually every non-premade group I play in. Someone says "stick together" and starts off towards the enemy, nobody else says anything, ever, and the usual pubbie things happen: they stand around in base for the first 20 seconds doing absolutely nothing, then scatter into random directions until they are killed.

[M Jordanus Sicarius]

Jeff K Notagoon, on 01 December 2012 - 06:09 PM, said:

Because it happens in virtually every non-premade group I play in. Someone says "stick together" and starts off towards the enemy, nobody else says anything, ever, and the usual pubbie things happen: they stand around in base for the first 20 seconds doing absolutely nothing, then scatter into random directions until they are killed.

You're overgeneralizing. You're refusing to talk (Which screws yourself as much as it does everyone else) because it doesn't work every time. Well it sure works more often than not talking. This elitist attitude that "PUGs aren't good enough to listen, why bother talking with them" is absurd, flawed, and blatantly incorrect.

[PropagandaWar]

Or you see a slow counter and you type "ill go back to base" and 5 follow you.

[FerretGR]

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 06:08 PM, said:

Just talk, everyone. Just talk and get along. Reach out! Do what you know is right! You can be the change you want to see in the world!

Just argue against a simple-minded version of what I'm saying instead of admitting the problem is you!

[Vlad Ward]

Hayashi, on 01 December 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I'm not sure if matchmaking upgrades might help with the situation though. People do like to blame everyone but themselves. I'm guessing when skill-based matching comes up we'll see a sudden spike of forum complaints about noobs on their team throwing the game for them - since at present good players aren't used to the idea that the average WLR is, by definition 1:1. They might even say the system isn't working because it's matching them with bad players.

People are very good at looking at the faults of others, not so much at looking at themselves, in general. People also prefer to blame others for doing nothing instead of taking responsibility and fixing the problem themselves. There are always exceptions to everything, but I'm not optimistic that this kind of behaviour will disappear as long as someone loses a match.

I doubt this sort of thing will ever completely go away. That's just the nature of the internet. But it was always expected that tempers were going to run high in the interim between Phase 1 and Phase 2. They were only ever kept at bay initially because said interim was only supposed to be a couple of weeks. Then that couple of weeks doubled, with no advance notice. People got mad. People are still mad.

There will always be players who want to blame everyone but themselves. They're the kind of people who drop into PUGs, die, and then scream at the rest of the team in both team and global chat for the remainder of the match. They'll never be happy, no matter what anyone does. And, quite frankly, they're a lot of the reason that players like myself prefer to run in teams with people we know. There's really no other way to get around them.

Playing in a PUG comes with its advantages and disadvantages. They're quick, they're easy, and they require no commitment. But there's also the fact that all of your randomly assigned teammates have a chance to be jerks. That's just the nature of PUG'ing. We know this. That's why many of us just don't PUG. We do not believe it's worth the risk. I'm here to have fun, not to deal with Jerky McScreamface who wants to take out his frustration on me and the rest of my team.

The fact that Phase 1 completely disabled our ability to play without the random jerk spawner has forced us to run the risk of playing with jerks and thugs and all sorts of people who negatively impact our game experience. No one likes that. Some people wrongfully take out their frustration on the random teammates that aren't jerks. More of those random teammates start acting like jerks around premades. The cycle continues. Everybody's angry.

If nothing else, reintroducing Phase 2 will allow team-oriented players to start playing with their units again. They'll be happier. They'll stop taking out their frustration on PUGs. PUGs will be happier. Everybody's happier. Hopefully, they'll even be happy enough to stop shooting me in the back.

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Uh huh? The implication seems to be that I am lazy, therefore I suspect you're being overly moralizing, given that we're talking about a video game. Also, the responses I get to even gentle requests like that don't make the trying worth it, really.

Plus it really hasn't reflected my experience, at all.

In a nutshell.

I forgot the other game earlier today where I suggested moving as a group and someone replied with "Are you serious, f*cktard?"

See, the thing is, when I'm in the mood for it, I might try coordinating with PUGs (when I'm solo) or letting the PUGs know what's up if I'm in a premade. Then some jerk does some jerky thing and I no longer care to try.

I appreciate that some people seem to have the patience to put up with jerky mcjerkfaces all day and still keep chugging along, but this is a video game. I'm not logging on to foster community involvement or make the inner sphere a better place. I log in to blow up Mechs. If trying to extend the lines of communication negatively impacts that experience, then I will stop doing it. No one has any right to force that onus on me.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 01 December 2012 - 06:27 PM.

[Violette]

FerretGR, on 01 December 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

Well, it's a good question, though I suppose it's more "why, when you can do the simple, painless thing, that at least sometimes will lead to a better game, do you not do it?" from my perspective. Again, no need to make this a moral issue.

IMHO, there's nothing pompous or overbearing in suggesting that folks will have a better time if they communicate, nor in wondering why folks who steadfastly refuse to try to communicate do so.

You truly don't understand what I was saying about the moralizing, do you? Well, leaving that aside...

Most pre-mades I know of (mine included) don't absolutely refuse to communicate. I always start with a quick announcement of what we're doing (well, almost always.) I try different things, in fact. But I've found it doesn't work too well as a rule and I don't particularly need you to apologize for my experience or to tell me how much better yours is and imply (yet again) that I have not tried hard enough and am being lazy. "so... little... effort" huh? That's not the whole story, though. It's more effort than you say, but it also often leads to a lot more nonsense, a surprising amount of in-fighting. Well as you can see, I'm not the only one who finds it more than a little bit annoying...

Anyway, still finding this all rather pompous. Maybe I'm just very, very tired of the 4 person teams. I SO don't care if 8 person matches are going to be harder...

EDIT: Fenris says, "Just argue against a simple-minded version of what I'm saying instead of admitting the problem is you!"

So how is this not moralizing? It's definitely pompous.

Hmm, maybe you're the problem?

Who is the problem?

What is the problem?

Is there a problem?

Not quite. It's a game.

Then what is going on?

AND ANOTHER EDIT: Thank you, Vlad Ward.

Edited by Violette, 01 December 2012 - 06:27 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

FerretGR, on 01 December 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Just argue against a simple-minded version of what I'm saying instead of admitting the problem is you!

Stop it.

It's not the effort involved in typing out a line of text or pressing a chat macro that turns people off from talking to PUGs.

It's the negative impact that said effort can have on your play experience when random, jerky jerks start yelling at you or shooting at you because you tried to talk to them that turns people off from caring.

[Aidan Malchor]

If I'm running in a group it's be cause I don't feel like wasting valuable time typing to people who will likely ignore anything said. If I'm puggin it, then it's do generally do my own thing and I will ignore most things said by the team as alot of the time it's just pure idiocy. There have been a number of occasions where people who weren't completely inept using the in game chat to rock out some teamwork but that is more the exception then the rule.

[Tremendous Upside]

M Jordanus Sicarius, on 01 December 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

Why do people keep saying talking doesn't work? Is that proof through trial or assumption? Sounds like assumption to me. When I'm in a game, and someone (Whether that be a person from a premamde, another PUG or me) talks at the start and even issuese a general battleplan, the chance of winning or at least respectable outcome goes up. When no one talks, people tend to get steamrolled, 8-0, 8-1, 7-1 etc. And when we're getting steamrolled, there's usually someone who pipes up and says everyone not in his group are idiots.

People do listen, they may not reply, but they listen. Chances are people are going to do what you want them to do more often if you tell them what you want, then being silent and hoping they do it. I'm getting sick of premades not talking, and then piping up a few minutes in saying "You guys are horrible, why did you go that way".

You also can't expect everyone to listen all the time, but you'll get more people doing the right thing if you talk.

I know I chimed in on another thread like this earlier in the week - and in truth, a lot of times when you're PuGing, the groupsters couldn't care less - and just ignore you... but it's certainly not "all" the time. Heck, it's probably not even half of the time for me. Even when they do, it's usually not rocket science to watch who's moving together and to gleen what they're up to...

The easiest thing is for PuGs to "try" to make the initial effort to open the communication. By and large this just isn't happening - and I don't fault the premade crowd one bit for getting turned off by it. If you drop in for a game and there's nothing but silence? And in the games I drop in that's all there is 80% of the time. It makes it look like you just don't care... so in all fairness to the premade/voip guys, why should they? It's going to go away (hopefully) to some extent soon... but still. It's kinda like watching a bunch of 5 year olds giving each other the silent treatment.

[Sedit]

We use team speak so we don't have to type. Don't like it join a house or clan so ypu can hear what's going on

[MrPenguin]

Me and everyone I party with usually tell the pubs what we do. If the others don't want to, I usually say it anyway.

[FerretGR]

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

You truly don't understand what I was saying about the moralizing, do you?

No, I do understand. You attributed my position to being about doing good vs. not doing good. I explained that it was about doing something easy that sometimes pays off and sometimes doesn't. Think of it like poker and pot odds if you play: if your odds of winning are better than your pot odds, it's worth making the bet even if you might be behind. You might have a 30% chance at that flush draw, but if it's only $1000 to call and possibly win $10000, it's worth doing. Not the best analogy, but hopefully it's clear that I understand and that my point was that I wasn't moralizing.

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

Most pre-mades I know of (mine included) don't absolutely refuse to communicate. I always start with a quick announcement of what we're doing (well, almost always.) I try different things, in fact. But I've found it doesn't work too well as a rule and I don't particularly need you to apologize for my experience or to tell me how much better yours is and imply (yet again) that I have not tried hard enough and am being lazy. "so... little... effort" huh? That's not the whole story, though. It's more effort than you say, but it also often leads to a lot more nonsense, a surprising amount of in-fighting. Well as you can see, I'm not the only one who finds it more than a little bit annoying...

I was just trying to be diplomatic. I'm being honest about my positive experiences both PUGging and playing with PUGs. I've posted as much in other threads. I'm glad you're communicating with PUGs and I wasn't responding to how you behave in game but rather what you said ITT.

Violette, on 01 December 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

EDIT: Fenris says, "Just argue against a simple-minded version of what I'm saying instead of admitting the problem is you!"

So how is this not moralizing? It's definitely pompous.

That was me responding to your dismissive one liner that disregarded what I had said with a dismissive one liner that disregarded what you said. You can't say that "derp" was meant to be a positive addition. If you're going to be negative, don't be surprised when people respond negatively to you.

I'm not trying to be pompous, I'm just not into trading barbs... I want discussion on these forums, not a neverending flame war. If that's pompous, so be it.

Vlad Ward, on 01 December 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

It's the negative impact that said effort can have on your play experience when random, jerky jerks start yelling at you or shooting at you because you tried to talk to them that turns people off from caring.

I've had that happen to me, and it sucks. I've posted about that as well. But I consistently (almost every match) try to chat up the PUGs or premades and I haven't had this kind of a response in... well, a long time. I think I posted about it during CB and that's the last time it happened to me. I found that it was a response to the perception of having orders "barked at them"... I started asking if a plan sounded good instead of telling people what they should do, and it seemed to work out better, confrontation-wise at least. It was a case of getting more flies with honey or what have you I guess

I can't give you stats. But if I could, and I said for every jerky jerk, you'd get two games with good players who'd try their best to follow the plan, that'd be worth it, wouldn't it?

Edited by FerretGR, 01 December 2012 - 06:49 PM.

[Sifright]

There are a few reasons why I dont communicate with pugs very often.

it's not because pug don't listen.

Most do.

it's not because pugs are terrible players.

some are.

It's because the chat system only keeps messages up for two seconds and that typing a large message whilst in the middle of combat is suicide.

With out integrated voice chat there is no way to communicate effectively beyond the most simple of requests/commands

On top of that the text chat in the game actively sabotages your attempts to communicate by hiding your text after just a few seconds.

[Lefty Lucy]

Vlad Ward, on 01 December 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

Stop it.

It's not the effort involved in typing out a line of text or pressing a chat macro that turns people off from talking to PUGs.

It's the negative impact that said effort can have on your play experience when random, jerky jerks start yelling at you or shooting at you because you tried to talk to them that turns people off from caring.

I've definitely been there. There have been times that I put out a simple plan, some guy runs off and dies, and we lose the match, and said guy who didn't follow the plan wants to blame the "commander." Or the fact that even if you *do* follow a plan, sometimes the bad guys are just better or more coordinated than you. Getting blamed for failure just because you try to increase the chance to win (but of course never guarantee) does suck.

However, I've found that by trying to communicate consistently I've just found a lot of great people to play with, and it has been more successful than not. I don't think it's realistic to expect everyone to do it every game. At the same time, if a PUG player asks "is anyone in a group?" telling him to go suicide or meeting him with complete silence, which a lot of group players do, is not productive either.

Vlad, I'd really like to say thanks to you personally. In this conversation we've had plenty of disagreements, but it has never gotten as hostile as many MWO topics seem to get.