260 replies to this topic

[PropagandaWar]

Last night On TS in a Premade; I went Rambo in my Hunchy; turned a corner because my Premade made me (Not really) and was nuked. I left to turnover laundry, we lost. I think they were pugs that shot me. Dammit

[Wired]

Greyfyl, on 28 January 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

Obvious minority? I guess you didn't see the poll:

You're not reading that poll. There is only one option that says, "pug exclusively" and all of the other options total outweigh that.

Secondly, nowhere on that poll is there a spot which says, "We pug exclusively and demand that everyone handicaps themselves to our level."

His points stand.

[mrDUDE]

Why is this thread even still going?
Please stop posting to this obvious TROLL thread.

[PropagandaWar]

Greyfyl, on 28 January 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

Obvious minority? I guess you didn't see the poll:

http://mwomercs.com/...re/page__st__40

Well if you add up the number they are close in fact the ones that say both but Pug mostly I think may be a bit BS because its so obvious that Pugs lose all the time right. If that was the case then it would be Premade mostly. Also you need to take into consideation what people think pugging is. If Im running with my buddy I consider that puggin. Oh is that a game turner too. LMAO nope.

[Grugore]

Serapth, on 28 January 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

You appear to have a bit of a misunderstanding what the composition of MWO's community is.

Here's a hint... the last numbers we had confirmed were that 10% of players were premades.... guess who the rest are? Of course, I don't buy those numbers during prime time, but pugs are certainly the majority. Polls on this site, a site which will skew heavily away from the casual, still indicate the majority of players pug.

If this game doesn't get the casual experience right, it will be an obscure ghost town in less than a year.

This is a team based game. Let the pugs go play CoD.

[Wired]

The fact of the matter is that this is the 21st . MOST games are coming out with some sort of communication built into the game.

The only thing people who have complained about premades have done is mess with people who just want to play with their friends. And THAT Will kill multiplayer games faster than any misconception about premades.

Protip: Casuals play with their friends.

Edited by Wired, 28 January 2013 - 03:37 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Greyfyl, on 28 January 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

Obvious minority? I guess you didn't see the poll:

http://mwomercs.com/...re/page__st__40

Twice as many players that pug exclusively vs premade only. Certainly over 50% of the population that voted are more likely to be pugging than in a premade team. So much for obvious minority.

Yes, obvious minority. Let's see, keeping in mind that the poll, at the time I looked has a GRAND TOTAL of 241 posts, and keeping in mind my premise that this OBVIOUS minority is an unfortunately LOUD minority, it would make sense me that as a matter of course in a low number poll such as this, early on the loud mouths would speak up first.

This 'less than scientific' poll you're referring to is less than usefull considering that IF the player base consisted of ONLY 5,000 players (which I'm sure you can agree is an EXTREMELY LOW BALL NUMBER), this poll represents less than 5% of the players.

Hardly something you can use to declare that VOIP is unfair, and pre-mades are the spawn of the devil.

Quote

And you wonder why some players don't want to group up? Look at the first part of what I quoted from you about demanding to be catered to, and then look at the second part that I quoted. You certainly sound like you want everyone that likes to pug to play YOUR way and your way only or ****. Pretty childish really, especially when you consider that the majority of us puggers want nothing more than for premades to be balanced; ie- premades on both team or neither. Nobody is trying to take away your ability to have voice comms or play with friends, we are just tired of you thinking you are better than us simply because you can't play on a level playing field.

Absolutely not. If you and others want to play exclusively as pugs, never to use TS to enhance your ability cooperate that's fine with me. I'm just tired of you bitching about how unfair it is when you get your ***** stomped by the players that do coordinate into pre-made groups and utilize VOIP.

There is absolute ZERO that can be done to make the game any more fair to the exclusive lone wolf ilk, than to segregate them to their own server (the best possible scenario), or to force everyone to play as pugs and disable the ability to function with a VOIP system active (the absolute worse that could happen).

There is no real middle ground that's going to make everyone happy, and since the whole concept of MWO is moving to COMMUNITY warfare, you either join a community or you learn to enjoy getting your ***** kicked 19 times out of 20.

Quote

This whole thread is just going in endless circles, the excuses are the same day after day. You like playing from a position of advantage and don't want to give it up, we all get it. Well, except those of you that keep throwing out the weak excuses.

See there you go again, trying to make it sound like those of us that have learned to cooperate and have utilized VOIP are some how unscrupulous cheaters. Breaking the rules and hacking the game out of some nefarious defect of personality.

No. Again, go and read all the marketing hype put out by PGI, we're playing the game as it is intended to be played.

Accept it or not, I'm just tired of the bitching.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 28 January 2013 - 03:39 PM.

[Greyfyl]

Wired, on 28 January 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

You're not reading that poll. There is only one option that says, "pug exclusively" and all of the other options total outweigh that.

Wow, are you seriously that bad at reading comprehension?

101 players said they pug only
43 said they premade only

Seems like more than twice as many players do pug only vs premade only. Pretty clear there.

16 players said the pug and premade evenly
33 said they do both but pug more
48 said they do both but premade more

So can you add that up? Let me do it for you.

144 players are more likely to be pugging
91 players are more likely to be in a group
16 players have a 50/50 chance either way.

Doesn't seem like puggers are in the minority to me. Maybe you are using Obama math?

Wired, on 28 January 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Secondly, nowhere on that poll is there a spot which says, "We pug exclusively and demand that everyone handicaps themselves to our level."

His points stand.

This makes no sense at all, the poster insinuated that puggers are in the minority. The poll suggests otherwise by a good margin. I would certainly agree that there are those that pug that really are perfectly fine with current setup. I would also state that from the posts that I've read over the past few months that they are few and far between.

Then there are also those that do premades that realize the current setup is bad for the game, I am one of those, and I have seen a handful of others over the past few days in this and many other threads beating the same dead horse that feel the same.

I don't think he ever had a point in the first place unless you are now trying to insinuate that a large portion of the pugging community actually likes getting pugstomped.

[Taizan]

Remarius, on 26 January 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Silly generaliser, I Pug 95%+ of the time at the moment and I have fun all the time. When I'm in group I use TS3 or Mumble and guess what... I also have fun there. Honestly stop playing if you're not having fun and go complain somewhere else... pretty please?

Well it definitely is subjective, the times when I have fun in PUGs are extremely rare. I don't really care about the other 7 dudes, probably will never meet them again and don't really feel like I'm playing in a team. In very few instances I've actually followed up and connected after the match. Playing together with friends over voice > way more fun than alone with random strangers.

[Greyfyl]

Dimento Graven, on 28 January 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

There is absolute ZERO that can be done to make the game any more fair to the exclusive lone wolf ilk, than to segregate them to their own server (the best possible scenario), or to force everyone to play as pugs and disable the ability to function with a VOIP system active (the absolute worse that could happen).

I won't respond to the rest of your ridiculous drivel, but this one paragraph just sums up your lack of understanding in one giant ball of idiocy.

Put premades on both teams. Simple, there I just made 'the game more fair to the exclusive lone wolf ilk'. Something that you just said can't be done.

Next qq please.

Edit....by the way, I think you may have missed one important thing, I do premades. I have no problem with getting into TS and beating up on those puggers either, I mean they are asking for it by refusing to play the game our way, right?

Edited by Greyfyl, 28 January 2013 - 03:51 PM.

[Novakaine]

Another episode of a CODer getting whacked.
Good job.
Mechwarrior is all about team play.
Lance = 4 mechs
Company = 12 mechs
Battalion = 36 mechs which would be awesome by the way PGI think about it hmmmm.

"Er sarge take a look at this will ya."
"Perkins I swear to God if ya show me that keyboard and mouse thing again I'm gonna shove a PPC....."
"No sarge look at that lance over in E8 their splitting up."
"Hmmm an Atlas, Stalker and two Cats that's a lot of firepower but no mutual support yep."
"So... what are we gonna do sarge?"
"Well the rest of us are gonna sit here and wait."
"You Mechwarrior Perkins however will take that Raven of yours and go deal with CODers."
"Er by myself sarge?"
Definition of CODer - used to describe a person or persons play popular online game called Mechwarrior Online.
The individual or individuals formerly from the FPS universe have no concept of teamwork
or tactics.
Often found crying in the MWO forums after getting their soloing butts wiped and thier mechs left in a smoldering heap.
Also described as pugs, light mech pilots, cry babies and girly-men.
"Yup Perkins just you and your trusty Raven alone against an assault lance."
"It's the stuff of legends Perkins!"
"I don't want to be a legend sarge, all of them are dead."
"No worries Perkins they won't even be able to touch you."
"You wear em down and we'll swoop in for the kill"
"Er okay sarge if say so."
"Stuff of legends warrior stuff of legends."
"Your premiums are paid in full so get in there."
A short time later the sarge watched as 4 parachute glide gently to the ground.
When they were being interrogated the four dismayed and some weeping mechwarriors exclaimed.
The damned Raven was just indestructible shedding gauss rounds and lasers like water off a ducks back.
But worst of all the damn thing just couldn't be hit.

[MischiefSC]

@Dimento Graven;

I'm not going to do a quote response just because I hate create another wall of text, so I apologize if my response is a bit scattered relative to your own.

First, thank you for giving a well-reasoned response.

Second, I'm all for teamspeak and grouping. Perhaps you missed that in my prior responses, but let me reiterate that here - I'm all for both and I think MWO caters to them well (in principle - current execution not withstanding). Also, I think the Elo will do far more to balance the matchmaking experience than a premade vs premade, pug vs pug change.

My point however is the evidence favoring the actual metrics of the players. It's not about how a game should be played but how it's actually being played. The reason I posted the links I did was to demonstrate that the majority of players of games do so in singleplayer, even when playing online games .CoD is about as multiplayer a game as you can get without going into a full MMO and still the majority of people buy it for single player. On average less than 10% and often closer to 1% of a games subscriber base is active on their forums. Obviously there's no way to say exactly what percentage of people who play the game are active on the forums but taking polls as an example most polls only get a response of a few hundred where as the games player population is in the thousands, perhaps over 10,000? I saw a post prior of a decent study someone did but I fear I don't have the time to find it right now.

The point being simply that the majority of game populations, even ones geared towards online/coop/multiplayer, are mostly solo players with absolutely no interest in grouping, teamspeak or the like. This is also why I posted gamer statistics in general - which, by the way, showed that almost all gamers who play any sort of online play do so on PC and not consoles. The 'console dominance' is a total myth and are already even on the decline but never accounted for more than 12% of online gamers even at peak.

Most people buy games to play alone and never go to forums, use teamspeak, join guilds or group. Even on games that do everything they can (Diablo 3 for example makes you play online even for solo play) to force people together.

The problem has nothing to do with 'how the game is supposed to be played' but who is playing it and how. Unless MWO is absolutely unique in online games in terms of the breakdown of its player population the bulk of its players will be solo with no interest in group. Most will probably suck too.

The reason for the limits on the matchmaking system currently are specifically because premade vs premade can't fill games without pugs. That literally means that there are not enough other people playing in groups at any given time to match group to group. That's hugely significant.

The reason for my initial links were simply in response to exactly the basis of your anecdotal evidence. You play with other premades all the time hence every time you drop with a premade you're going to see a premade. My own anecdotal evidence has me politely asking if there are any premades who want to take the lead. It's less than 1 in 12 games right now that are getting a positive response but I suspect my stretch of late-night weekday gaming skewed that.

I'm all for premades. Happy when one drops on my side, even happier when they announce themselves. I don't find that they contribute over much to 'pugstomps' having been dropped with them and still lost or having absolutely rolled a clearly premade team (2x 3l ravens, 3x ddc, 3x stalkers with mixed missileboat and 6x PPC snipers) with nothing but a solid PUG group. As I've said before the single biggest contributor to 'pugstomps' is how many disconnects/afks/suicidal rambos are on your team. The edge premades primarily get is that by having 4x focused players you more than half your odds of bad players dropping on your team.

So help me understand what the actual argument is over? What, that there shouldn't be teamspeak or that there shouldn't be some sort of segregation of premade vs pugs? At least making sure at least 1 premade drops on each team?

So anecdotal evidence aside the only data we have from PGI is that 8vs8 doesn't fill matches and that premade vs premade doesn't fill matches. I absolutely understand that for you premades seem to be the majority. That's because most people you deal with are playing in premades on teamspeak. The problem is that there is no evidence to support MWO having a big premade with teamspeak population.

As to your conclusion of 'play this way or ****' that's an interesting business strategy. If, conversely, PGI said that VOIP was cheating and any evidence of using it would get you banned, what would you do? Quit? QQ?

Trying to force people to do what they don't want to do is probably the worst possible approach. Better option? Do your best to balance, make it as easy to pug as possible, but give premades and corps plenty of perks like personalized mech decorations and mark them in the summary.

Let people play how they want - make it fun to play how they want, just make sure the benefits to playing in group with teamspeak are obvious and evident. Give people a compelling reason and not some heavy-handed, judgemental condemnation and you'll sell your position much better.

Because unless you've got some evidence that MWO has a completely different player population than gamers as a whole and every other multiplayer/group/guild-optional game you need to accept that teamspeak/premades are a minority. That's fine, just avoiding that creates a difficult position to express your opinion from.

[Dimento Graven]

Greyfyl, on 28 January 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Wow, are you seriously that bad at reading comprehension?

101 players said they pug only
43 said they premade only

Seems like more than twice as many players do pug only vs premade only. Pretty clear there.

16 players said the pug and premade evenly
33 said they do both but pug more
48 said they do both but premade more

So can you add that up? Let me do it for you.

144 players are more likely to be pugging
91 players are more likely to be in a group
16 players have a 50/50 chance either way.

Doesn't seem like puggers are in the minority to me. Maybe you are using Obama math?




This makes no sense at all, the poster insinuated that puggers are in the minority. The poll suggests otherwise by a good margin. I would certainly agree that there are those that pug that really are perfectly fine with current setup. I would also state that from the posts that I've read over the past few months that they are few and far between.

Then there are also those that do premades that realize the current setup is bad for the game, I am one of those, and I have seen a handful of others over the past few days in this and many other threads beating the same dead horse that feel the same.

I don't think he ever had a point in the first place unless you are now trying to insinuate that a large portion of the pugging community actually likes getting pugstomped.

They ARE the minority and you're an absolutely arrogantly ignorant ignoramus trying use the responses of a PORTION of 241 people to represent the state of THOUSANDS of people.

No where did I ever say that NO ONE should EVER pug.

If I were to participate in that poll, I'd be listed pugging and pre-mades I do both.

I pug when:

1. I'm trying a new build and don't want to burden my team with some potential stupidity on my part.
2. Waiting for more of my merc group to come online.
3. Feel anti-social and just don't feel like interacting with friends.
4. Need to grind out some exp to get a class mastered/elite'd and don't want to burden my team with substandard play on a build I'm not used to.

What I am against is the efforts of the minority to try and change this game into something that it should not be.

This is MechWarrior Online, a simulation of the future state of warfare in the 35th century. In wars soldiers cooperate and communicate, they don't all just gather around a spot randomly and take off every which way trying to kill 8 other 'mechs solo.

Greyfyl, on 28 January 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

I won't respond to the rest of your ridiculous drivel, but this one paragraph just sums up your lack of understanding in one giant ball of idiocy. Put premades on both teams. Simple, there I just made 'the game more fair to the exclusive lone wolf ilk'. Something that you just said can't be done. Next qq please. Edit....by the way, I think you may have missed one important thing, I do premades. I have no problem with getting into TS and beating up on those puggers either, I mean they are asking for it by refusing to play the game our way, right?

Talk about redicoulous, that's exactly what I said, just the opposite, put the few pugs on their own server (again, best case), because the refuse to learn to cooperate or communicate.

[Wired]

@Greyfyl

Could you copy and paste what poll you were just reading? Because the only option that talks about people who just pug is in the minority, while the rest of the options include people who at the very least group up. You're trying to take two small parts of a sample and claim a majority.

Edited by Wired, 28 January 2013 - 05:15 PM.

[Serapth]

Wired, on 28 January 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

@Greyfyl

Could you copy and paste what poll you were just reading? Because the only option that talks about people who just pug is in the minority, while the rest of the options include people who at the very least group up. You're trying to take two small parts of a sample and claim a majority.

The rest of your reply to me was absolutely incoherent.

Seems pretty self evident:



Ironically, the person who posted was obviously anti-pug in bias and the actual results of his poll completely shot down his theory.


Of course, he never manned up and admitted that, but I am getting used to that from the loudest of the premade community. OF course, you are know going to dismiss this poll as meaningless for some inane reason.

Edited by Serapth, 28 January 2013 - 05:16 PM.

[Wired]

@Seraph:

I know, but thanks for posting it. It's a good laugh.

Although I think you and I are reading this post differently...

Anyways the number in the post don't matter in the long run because the people who post on here are not the entire population of the game.

That, and the majority of people atleast premade some of the time, as per that poll. Some people are just really bad at reading these things, which is why I posted what I did to the troll.

Edited by Wired, 28 January 2013 - 05:22 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

MischiefSC, on 28 January 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

@Dimento Graven;
Second, I'm all for teamspeak and grouping. Perhaps you missed that in my prior responses, but let me reiterate that here - I'm all for both and I think MWO caters to them well (in principle - current execution not withstanding). Also, I think the Elo will do far more to balance the matchmaking experience than a premade vs premade, pug vs pug change.

I don't mind pug'ing myself, again, I'm just against the minority try and change the game to something that's not intended. Though in response to your ELO comment, I am skeptical about ELO having any real affect. The way they've documented it, it seems to only affect rankings. Nothing I've read actually states it plainly like, "...and the match maker will attempt to match 'like' ELO scores when assembling a match...", but I'm kind of a litteralist when it comes to vendors and their product descriptions.

Quote

My point however is the evidence favoring the actual metrics of the players. It's not about how a game should be played but how it's actually being played. The reason I posted the links I did was to demonstrate that the majority of players of games do so in singleplayer, even when playing online games .CoD is about as multiplayer a game as you can get without going into a full MMO and still the majority of people buy it for single player. On average less than 10% and often closer to 1% of a games subscriber base is active on their forums. Obviously there's no way to say exactly what percentage of people who play the game are active on the forums but taking polls as an example most polls only get a response of a few hundred where as the games player population is in the thousands, perhaps over 10,000? I saw a post prior of a decent study someone did but I fear I don't have the time to find it right now.

But that's the problem, you can't use statistics from games like CoD or D3 because this is NOT a game like them. Yes, absolutely CoD is multiplayer, but I am completely unaware of any 'community' goals built into the game, nor of any long term persistant affect that 'communities of players' can have. Essentially for CoD, or D3, or TF2, or any other like that as soon as you log out that 'instance' of the game is gone forever. With MWO they are building a 'community warfare' with 'offline persistance', so that the progress you made in the game isn't immediately wiped as soon as you log off. It's maintained, only to be affected by other player 'communities' who might be competing against you.

If CoD had an actual "map" where teams of players working in concert could take over, keep, and utilize territory for the benefit of, not only their immediate selves, but other players of their community not yet online, you would see a significant change in who and how people played CoD, again, re: GuildWars.

As it is, you doing the apple vs. orange comparison, it just don't fit in this case not only because of what PGI has stated MWO will become, but also because of the long term community aspect of the BattleTech franchise itself. Again at its inception it was a 'community' game, one that was not properly played or experienced without several friends to participate in the game with you. It only became a 'single player' experience with the first versions of the computer games, and then it took less than a year before it was available online, even before the internet existed in a state to truly support the first "M" in MMORPG.

The BattleTech, and Mechwarrior franchise has a history of community from the get go, you will find tremendous resistance to try and 'fair it up' for those that can't be bothered to join a community.

Quote

The point being simply that the majority of game populations, even ones geared towards online/coop/multiplayer, are mostly solo players with absolutely no interest in grouping, teamspeak or the like. This is also why I posted gamer statistics in general - which, by the way, showed that almost all gamers who play any sort of online play do so on PC and not consoles. The 'console dominance' is a total myth and are already even on the decline but never accounted for more than 12% of online gamers even at peak.

But again it's still way to general. Pick a specific community oriented game like EQ, EQ2, WoW, GuildWars, et al, and you'll find that players that are not members of a community are the rare exception, not the rule, as I suspect it is with MWO.

The community for MWO was there, it was a simple matter for the game to be made available before people started choosing house, clan, or merc affiliation. Games like CoD, D3, and TF2, there's ZERO facilitation at all for that kind of community that I am aware of.

Quote

Most people buy games to play alone and never go to forums, use teamspeak, join guilds or group. Even on games that do everything they can (Diablo 3 for example makes you play online even for solo play) to force people together.

No, don't be confused by Blizzard's propoganda. Their 'online only' model was means to control licenses and limit the pirating of their game. Blizzard executives have gone into the "squeeze every cent out of this cash cow especially at the expense of the game's fans" mode. It had ZERO to do with building a gaming community and everything to do with making sure each of us paid for our copy of the game.

Quote

The problem has nothing to do with 'how the game is supposed to be played' but who is playing it and how. Unless MWO is absolutely unique in online games in terms of the breakdown of its player population the bulk of its players will be solo with no interest in group. Most will probably suck too.

Again we disagree, because this game is not yet complete, and how it's being played now has NOTHING to do with the intended future state. If all you want is to go 'big stompy mech' shooting, then PGI is done, no need to develop anything else. However, if you're interested in working with friends and like minded people to attempt to take over a digital galaxy through cooperative efforts and skill of battle as is advertised, then we've got a long way to go, and those crying about how pre-mades are killing pugs out of hand need to get a grip.

If development goes as the stated intent then it's only going to get worse for pugs. They need to join a community, or shut the F up, because it shouldn't be changed. 'The Vision' is more grand than their petty self interests.

Quote

The reason for the limits on the matchmaking system currently are specifically because premade vs premade can't fill games without pugs. That literally means that there are not enough other people playing in groups at any given time to match group to group. That's hugely significant.

Actually we don't know that. We REALLY don't. As far as I know there's NEVER been any actual attempts at pre-made only, other than the very obviously incomplete 8-man only system. I've done that quite a bit and it's very rare we don't get a match. If the match making system switched to pre-made only where 2, 3, and 4 man groups could be assembled into 2 8 men teams, I'd bet there'd be no lack of matches at all.

Quote

The reason for my initial links were simply in response to exactly the basis of your anecdotal evidence. You play with other premades all the time hence every time you drop with a premade you're going to see a premade. My own anecdotal evidence has me politely asking if there are any premades who want to take the lead. It's less than 1 in 12 games right now that are getting a positive response but I suspect my stretch of late-night weekday gaming skewed that.

Due to the current demonization going of pre-mades, most premades won't speak up unless they know there's another pre-made in the match. Try making up a fake merc group and shout out, "The FAKE PREMADES salute you!" and then start counting the number of pre-mades per match you'll find.

The numbers WILL be different.

Quote

I'm all for premades. Happy when one drops on my side, even happier when they announce themselves. I don't find that they contribute over much to 'pugstomps' having been dropped with them and still lost or having absolutely rolled a clearly premade team (2x 3l ravens, 3x ddc, 3x stalkers with mixed missileboat and 6x PPC snipers) with nothing but a solid PUG group. As I've said before the single biggest contributor to 'pugstomps' is how many disconnects/afks/suicidal rambos are on your team. The edge premades primarily get is that by having 4x focused players you more than half your odds of bad players dropping on your team.

So help me understand what the actual argument is over? What, that there shouldn't be teamspeak or that there shouldn't be some sort of segregation of premade vs pugs? At least making sure at least 1 premade drops on each team?

So anecdotal evidence aside the only data we have from PGI is that 8vs8 doesn't fill matches and that premade vs premade doesn't fill matches. I absolutely understand that for you premades seem to be the majority. That's because most people you deal with are playing in premades on teamspeak. The problem is that there is no evidence to support MWO having a big premade with teamspeak population.

As to your conclusion of 'play this way or ****' that's an interesting business strategy. If, conversely, PGI said that VOIP was cheating and any evidence of using it would get you banned, what would you do? Quit? QQ?

Trying to force people to do what they don't want to do is probably the worst possible approach. Better option? Do your best to balance, make it as easy to pug as possible, but give premades and corps plenty of perks like personalized mech decorations and mark them in the summary.

Let people play how they want - make it fun to play how they want, just make sure the benefits to playing in group with teamspeak are obvious and evident. Give people a compelling reason and not some heavy-handed, judgemental condemnation and you'll sell your position much better.

Because unless you've got some evidence that MWO has a completely different player population than gamers as a whole and every other multiplayer/group/guild-optional game you need to accept that teamspeak/premades are a minority. That's fine, just avoiding that creates a difficult position to express your opinion from.

In short to answer your actual question, I am arguing the:

Pre-made teams utilizing VOIP cooperation is the intended end point of this game.

Live it with it, or shut up.

[Serapth]

Wired, on 28 January 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

@Seraph:

I know, but thanks for posting it. It's a good laugh.

Although I think you and I are reading this post differently...

Anyways the number in the post don't matter in the long run because the people who post on here are not the entire population of the game.

That, and the majority of people atleast premade some of the time, as per that poll. Some people are just really bad at reading these things, which is why I posted what I did to the troll.

Oh I agree, they dont represent the population of the game.

The forum population would skew VASTLY towards the hardcore.


Those numbers are very clear... 3 to 1 ratio of exclusives and what... 83% of the community PUG. Spin however you want, the numbers are clear to everyone else.

[Dimento Graven]

Serapth, on 28 January 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

Seems pretty self evident:



Ironically, the person who posted was obviously anti-pug in bias and the actual results of his poll completely shot down his theory.


Of course, he never manned up and admitted that, but I am getting used to that from the loudest of the premade community. OF course, you are know going to dismiss this poll as meaningless for some inane reason.

I disagree that this 'shuts down' any theory. You don't have a poll containing a statistically significant number. The population referenced in this poll, if you want to use an ultraconservative game population number of 5,000, is less than 5 percent.

You won't have a statistically signficiant number to judge anything by until you reach AT LEAST 20% polled.

Given that the playerbase of this game is probably something well beyond double or even triple the ultraconservative number, well... You can see how insignificant this poll really is.

[Serapth]

Dimento Graven, on 28 January 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

You won't have a statistically signficiant number to judge anything by until you reach AT LEAST 20% polled.

20% polled????

Seriously?

There is NO poll that polls even close to 20%... A gallop poll might survey a few thousand, to represent a sampling size of millions!


That said, it's pretty easily calculated.

For a 5% margin of error, with a population size of 5000, the recommended minimum sampling size is 357.




With a 10% margin of error, a sample size of under 100 is acceptable.