DUST Search - Easily my biggest complaint about DUST. Or, "Not this thread again."

Leither Yiltron wrote:

Should we reduce fleet size to 4 in Eve as well as long as you're in high sec? This should keep industrial players feeling safe and playing the game. Should CCP have stopped Burn Jita? It would have probably saved them some industrial subscriptions. Maybe even a lot of them.

The squad caps largely miss the whole spirit of the sandbox, and actually don't keep new players playing the game. We've seen this tons of times, and (*GASP*) even with MAG and (*GASP*) BF3 on PS3 and (*GASP*) Killzone 3.

When imposing low caps on player groups in any capacity, all you're doing is ruining the enjoyment of the player corporations that drive your game forward. In fact, you're crippling them and crippling your capacity to move forward as a social game. Corp matches are all fine and good, but they're scheduled for the moment and also very quickly over. Being able to schedule corp matches consistently enough to keep your player base entertained while not scheduling so many that you're losing money on fizzles is nothing less than a ***** of a problem. Even if this equilibrium position eventually gets reached, it will result in a lower activity level and a higher burnt out rate for the guys actually organizing battles.

It seems forgotten that compared to a player base of even 10k concurrent users, the number of battles with full corp teams in a public match making setting is going to be low compared to the total number. It also seems forgotten that once there's a reason to save ISK, nobody in their right mind is going to go into high sec matches with all prototype gear. The risk just isn't worth the reward when a similar reward can be gotten with smaller risk.

Let's take a look at Planetside 2, a game many of the people reading this post have played and possibly enjoyed. There's no group limit in Planetside 2, but the game has been a huge free to play success. New players haven't suddenly left in droves after being beaten by huge outfits. Limiting the squads and platoons in PS2 to a particular size would be pointless, and in fact doing so would just be a disservice to those people who organize such large numbers of players.

If there isn't a function where any reasonably sized corporate group can press a button and be in a casual match quickly and without fuss, the corps of Dust 514 will atrophy and eventually the core audience of this game will leave.

Most of the counterarguments here have been given by representatives of smaller corporations who stand to gain in the short term from a limited group size. Seeing past that bias is important, because a huge swathe of the Dust player base is invested in playing with their friends and corp mates. Not against them, not in tiny groups, but with all the guys they've come to know and appreciate over a history of FPS gaming.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Icy Tiger Universal Allies Inc. 1026	Posted - 2012.12.10 01:29:00 - [61] - Quote xprotoman23 wrote: The player base needs to be conditioned to join corporations and pub-stacking is the only way to make that possible tbh. People should be able to run 16 man squads if they desire. I shouldn't have to play against clanmates in pub matches. CCP should simply add a "mercenary" playlist like COD does so people that want to be randomly matched up can have an enjoyable experience. Exactly.
xprotoman23 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 1452	Posted - 2012.12.10 01:29:00 - [62] - Quote Harken Torkal wrote: Join public games for SP and ISK and recruits. Join corp games for the challenges that are suitable for your skill as a player. People who join public games with squads in high level gear with the intent of getting cheap kills are not worth the effort of spitting on. You do not build community, you do not encourage new players to stay, you do not encourage players to join your corp: you are bad people and serve as bad PR for the game. You are the cancer that kills the community from the inside. If CCP gets the linkage right, Capsuleers will be pouring money into DUST514 in order to improve their space. In the meantime, stop worrying so much about the SP needed for the next shiny thing, and focus on using your current shiny things as best you can. There is more player and team skill required in this game than SP with shiny things will compensate for. i'm sorry but SP over team work.
Harken Torkal Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 15	Posted - 2012.12.10 04:49:00 - [63] - Quote The guy with the militia sniper rifle who has the right nest will get more kills than the proto geared credit card junkie who tries to snipe from the middle of Main Street. Knowing how to use your gear is far more important than having the best gear. Standing still in front of the tank while preparing your forge gun isn't going to get you any kills, regardless of how shiny that forge gun is.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2012.12.10 05:22:00 - [64] - Quote J'Jor Da'Wg wrote: Well, I presented a median solution. No, you didn't. You didn't present a solution, because there isn't a problem. If you want to fight in large, organized teams, you have corp battles which reward no ISK/SP beyond the contract terms to the winner. If you want to play with friends for ISK/SP, you can hop in a squad and queue for public games. Quote: So the question remains... How do we have organized teams play pub matchmaking against other teams, whilst still earning ISK and SP? All while avoiding pubstomping randoms? The question doesn't remain. The question was solved by CCP the moment they added in squads and squad-queuing for fights.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2012.12.10 05:28:00 - [65] - Quote xprotoman23 wrote: The player base needs to be conditioned to join corporations and pub-stacking is the only way to make that possible tbh. This is horseshit and you have no idea what you're talking about. Making new player experience in Dust consist of playing public matches where they get redlined and farmed by full corp teams repeatedly will do little more than drive people away from the game. Console FPS gamers have a ton of great titles to choose from, and they aren't going to put up with that kind of crap. They'll get farmed a few times, then delete the game and go play something that's actually fun. The notion that the response of new players would instead be to go and find a corp to play with is silly. The sensible thing to do, and what CCP is aiming for, is to make the new player experience not the equivalent of EVE, and to count on the game being fun and the lure of organized play and big ISK payouts be enough to compel people to join corps. That's how you do it. You make people really like the game, and want to get even more involved with it, and get them to join a corp that way. You don't make the game **** and force people to join a corp out of necessity.
Vermaak Doe SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 384	Posted - 2012.12.10 05:32:00 - [66] - Quote Fivetimes Infinity wrote: xprotoman23 wrote: The player base needs to be conditioned to join corporations and pub-stacking is the only way to make that possible tbh. This is horseshit and you have no idea what you're talking about. Making new player experience in Dust consist of playing public matches where they get redlined and farmed by full corp teams repeatedly will do little more than drive people away from the game. Console FPS gamers have a ton of great titles to choose from, and they aren't going to put up with that kind of crap. They'll get farmed a few times, then delete the game and go play something that's actually fun. The notion that the response of new players would instead be to go and find a corp to play with is silly. While you're correct, new comers should be driven towards corps but not the way proto wants it. The tutorial should highly stress the necessity of joining a group of players
Umbat Boki Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 157	Posted - 2012.12.10 05:49:00 - [67] - Quote Yes, I agree with you, squad size should be changed. It should be 3. I wonder how some people, who really just want to farm guinea pigs, are so eagerly trying to find some logical reasoning behind this. One more point I'd like top bring. You should understand that if the current number of players playing DUST remains when the game is released, it'll be a dead game. There will be more people and you won't meet your clan mates in an opposite team as often as you do now. In every game it's very important how new players think about a game. In F2P game, this is even more important. No one like to be stomped by a team full of corp mates. There is far more people who don't want to be bothered about a corp, who just want to login in to a game time to time and play an hour or two. If you won't think about those people, I don't believe your F2P game have any chance to live.
Harken Torkal Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 15	Posted - 2012.12.10 06:18:00 - [68] - Quote Vermaak Doe wrote: While you're correct, new comers should be driven towards corps but not the way proto wants it. The tutorial should highly stress the necessity of joining a group of players Why should newcomers be driven towards corps? What is the benefit for them? Why shouldn't corps be attractive enough that newcomers will want to join? Send your more charismatic members and better team leaders to public games for recruitment purposes. Talk to people. Convince them that they want to join your corp because you are cool/organised/winning. You may end up with casual players who might only play ten hours a month, but enrich your corp culture when they are present. MMOs are about more than just k/d ratio.
Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2012.12.10 06:57:00 - [69] - Quote Should we reduce fleet size to 4 in Eve as well as long as you're in high sec? This should keep industrial players feeling safe and playing the game. Should CCP have stopped Burn Jita? It would have probably saved them some industrial subscriptions. Maybe even a lot of them. The squad caps largely miss the whole spirit of the sandbox, and actually don't keep new players playing the game. We've seen this tons of times, and (GASP) even with MAG and (GASP) BF3 on PS3 and (GASP) Killzone 3. When imposing low caps on player groups in any capacity, all you're doing is ruining the enjoyment of the player corporations that drive your game forward. In fact, you're crippling them and crippling your capacity to move forward as a social game. Corp matches are all fine and good, but they're scheduled for the moment and also very quickly over. Being able to schedule corp matches consistently enough to keep your player base entertained while not scheduling so many that you're losing money on fizzles is nothing less than a ***** of a problem. Even if this equilibrium position eventually gets reached, it will result in a lower activity level and a higher burnt out rate for the guys actually organizing battles. It seems forgotten that compared to a player base of even 10k concurrent users, the number of battles with full corp teams in a public match making setting is going to be low compared to the total number. It also seems forgotten that once there's a reason to save ISK, nobody in their right mind is going to go into high sec matches with all prototype gear. The risk just isn't worth the reward when a similar reward can be gotten with smaller risk. Let's take a look at Planetside 2, a game many of the people reading this post have played and possibly enjoyed. There's no group limit in Planetside 2, but the game has been a huge free to play success. New players haven't suddenly left in droves after being beaten by huge outfits. Limiting the squads and platoons in PS2 to a particular size would be pointless, and in fact doing so would just be a disservice to those people who organize such large numbers of players. If there isn't a function where any reasonably sized corporate group can press a button and be in a casual match quickly and without fuss, the corps of Dust 514 will atrophy and eventually the core audience of this game will leave. Most of the counterarguments here have been given by representatives of smaller corporations who stand to gain in the short term from a limited group size. Seeing past that bias is important, because a huge swathe of the Dust player base is invested in playing with their friends and corp mates. Not against them, not in tiny groups, not once in awhile, but with all the guys they've come to know and appreciate over a history of FPS gaming.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 07:13:00 - [70] - Quote lolwut? immobile infantry is goons on the ground how is 5x counter argument or mine representative of a smaller corp when i can easily pull a full team if the game allowed.....thing is i WONT because its boring farming randoms to pad my stats the minority is actually the MAG clans here who want to be able to zerg with full teams in pubs ala MAG. the socializing counter argument is rubbish when u have corp voice enabled for FREE that ur entire corp can be on and socializing with each other. Comparing EVE hisec to DUST is ********. Also in EVE if u gank someone in hisec doesnt concord kill u immediately after? Pretty sure BF3 is goin fine and strong as well even tho its party system is still broken not because of squad size but because up till when i played it STILL put u on different teams half the time breaking up ur squad. Nice try at associating KZ3 problems with squad size but ur wrong there Leither. KZ3 failed because it tried to codify the gameplay. KZ2 was the same u had a single squad join and no one complained about pubbin with 1 squad when ppl wanted bigger organised play they setup clan matches and tournaments which easily filled up MAG failed not because zipper limited party size but more because the game was nothing more than a glorified pubstomp casual fest , pretty sure back on the forums the clans mainly wanted clan v clan in MAG not zerg deploy but the discussion section/zerg clans wanted zerg deploy and look how that ended.

Umbat Boki Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 157	Posted - 2012.12.10 07:20:00 - [71] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: Should we reduce fleet size to 4 in Eve as well as long as you're in high sec? This should keep industrial players feeling safe and playing the game. Should CCP have stopped Burn Jita? It would have probably saved them some industrial subscriptions. Maybe even a lot of them. The squad caps largely miss the whole spirit of the sandbox, and actually don't keep new players playing the game. We've seen this tons of times, and (GASP) even with MAG and (GASP) BF3 on PS3 and (GASP) Killzone 3. When imposing low caps on player groups in any capacity, all you're doing is ruining the enjoyment of the player corporations that drive your game forward. In fact, you're crippling them and crippling your capacity to move forward as a social game. Corp matches are all fine and good, but they're scheduled for the moment and also very quickly over. Being able to schedule corp matches consistently enough to keep your player base entertained while not scheduling so many that you're losing money on fizzles is nothing less than a ***** of a problem. Even if this equilibrium position eventually gets reached, it will result in a lower activity level and a higher burnt out rate for the guys actually organizing battles. It seems forgotten that compared to a player base of even 10k concurrent users, the number of battles with full corp teams in a public match making setting is going to be low compared to the total number. It also seems forgotten that once there's a reason to save ISK, nobody in their right mind is going to go into high sec matches with all prototype gear. The risk just isn't worth the reward when a similar reward can be gotten with smaller risk. Let's take a look at Planetside 2, a game many of the people reading this post have played and possibly enjoyed. There's no group limit in Planetside 2, but the game has been a huge free to play success. New players haven't suddenly left in droves after being beaten by huge outfits. Limiting the squads and platoons in PS2 to a particular size would be pointless, and in fact doing so would just be a disservice to those people who organize such large numbers of players. If there isn't a function where any reasonably sized corporate group can press a button and be in a casual match quickly and without fuss, the corps of Dust 514 will atrophy and eventually the core audience of this game will leave. Most of the counterarguments here have been given by representatives of smaller corporations who stand to gain in the short term from a limited group size. Seeing past that bias is important, because a huge swathe of the Dust player base is invested in playing with their friends and corp mates. Not against them, not in tiny groups, but with all the guys they've come to know and appreciate over a history of FPS gaming. You're missing the point that number of players outside of any corps is significantly higher then number of players in a corp. The problem you're describing is the corp battle system itself. It's ok with me if you can press a button and join corpVScorp match. However, if only thing that you want is to roflstomp randoms, I don't like this and I believe that no players without corp will like it. Your comparison with PS2 is Incorrect. If you bring 16 players from your corp, randoms can bring 50 and do fine. When number of players in each side is limited, you can't allow corpVSrandoms matches. You can look how WoW and WoT handles this, if you're going to compare with most successful P2P and F2P games (in my opinion).
SATORI CORUSCANTi Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 253	Posted - 2012.12.10 07:34:00 - [72] - Quote I think one part of protoman's post got a bit overlooked. What is wrong with this idea? xprotoman23 wrote: CCP should simply add a "mercenary" playlist like COD does so people that want to be randomly matched up can have an enjoyable experience. EDIT: Mercenary playlist for those who don't know is a separate queue where groups cannot enter
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 07:39:00 - [73] - Quote SATORI CORUSCANTi wrote: I think one part of protoman's post got a bit overlooked. What is wrong with this idea? xprotoman23 wrote: CCP should simply add a "mercenary" playlist like COD does so people that want to be randomly matched up can have an enjoyable experience. EDIT: Mercenary playlist for those who don't know is a separate queue where groups cannot enter seperating the playerbase personally i dont think this game will have big enough of a playerbase to warrant segregating the players in pubs Cod can do it because look at how many ppl cod has playing it at any point u log on. PS3 exclusives cant really do that they tend not to do too well sales wise , yea DUST is free but would it be good enough to capture AND hold a hundreds of thousands of players? if so then yea u can afford to have a seperate playlist. What CCP needs to do atm is actually come out and share their full plans for FW and launch so ppl can see that the game wont be 4 man squads and hopefully FW will be more fleshed out cuz atm its just barebones we got in the beta to test corp v corp contracts.
PAUL BERNARD Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 76	Posted - 2012.12.10 08:33:00 - [74] - Quote Why can't I play with my all my friends. Earn SP and ISK. Have fun. And not have the pressure of having to win a corp match.
Umbat Boki Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 157	Posted - 2012.12.10 09:15:00 - [75] - Quote PAUL BERNARD wrote: Why can't I play with my all my friends. Earn SP and ISK. Have fun. And not have the pressure of having to win a corp match. Because it will ruin fun for randoms you will stomp on. Let say you played 10 matches against randoms. Only you and your corp will have fun. However, you will ruin fun for 10x players. Although someone here thinks that players in corps are more important, I can assure you that we aren't less important and we're in greater numbers than you.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 10:59:00 - [76] - Quote PAUL BERNARD wrote: Why can't I play with my all my friends. Earn SP and ISK. Have fun. And not have the pressure of having to win a corp match. HOW is redlining randoms match after match after match within the 1st 2 mins fun? yall are thinkin way too selfishly tbh like dubbs said MAG spoiled yall and this aint MAG
Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2012.12.10 11:06:00 - [77] - Quote MAG had something good, so we should avoid it? Hmmm.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 11:31:00 - [78] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: MAG had something good, so we should avoid it? Hmmm. lolgood? ok. hows MAG doin now with all its goodness compared to other games? MAG was a casual pubstomp game that allowed clans to take advantage of randoms put zerg deploy in DUST and u wont see the majority of corps bothering with any corp contracts or corp v corp battles. Corps should be fighting each other on a regular basis not just when they feel to switch it up. I just came off BF3 months ago and the legit clans over there have the right mindset. No legit clan on BF stacks their server with all their teammates and sends only randoms on the other side they split their team on each side of the server so matches can actually be FUN. Only in MAG ppl think Full team of organised players vs randomly put together unorganised, 1st time meeting each other smurfs is fun. Like others said there are other games out there and if u guys want DUST to have ANY chance of surviving and possibly growing then YOU constantly stomping the ** outta newbies and solo players isnt gonna make the game grow. Like ppl said a couple rounds from a casual who can only play 5-10 matches or so a day gettin stomped 4-8 times in that session aint fun and he will delete the game and move on as there is ZERO obligation for him to stick with the game, get used to it and possibly have the chance of moving on to the lower security areas when hes comfortable because its FREE. Stop thinking selfishly and think about the good of the game. You cannot ***** tell me u NEED a full team to win a pub. I roll with a squad most times and rarely lose pubs and we are always on corp chat socializing with the other guys who are on in another game. You dont NEED 16 ppl in the same match to "socialize" either.
Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2012.12.10 11:33:00 - [79] - Quote You're super defensive, Mav. Maybe you should take a break from ranting incoherently, yeah?
Umbat Boki Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 157	Posted - 2012.12.10 11:56:00 - [80] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: You're super defensive, Mav. Maybe you should take a break from ranting incoherently, yeah? I think he is right. He wrote it in harsh words though. I'd like to add one more argument. The current content in the beta is mostly content for randoms. The current corpVScorp battles mechanic looks like placeholder for me. I no doubt think it will be largely extended. What was promised by CCP for corps is territory and resource warfare, cooperation with EVE universe, conquest game mode and a lot more. Leave instance matchmaking system for randoms, we won't have a lot (horde-style PvE, yes, but it isn't on horizon yet).

Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 11:59:00 - [81] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: You're super defensive, Mav. Maybe you should take a break from ranting incoherently, yeah? lol defensive to make hisec newbie friendly and prevent corps from paddin their stats and farming newbies/casuals? sorry for wanting this game to last more than 1 month and for lowsec and nullsec to actually be populated. Thing is i know whats gonna happen. And like i said ppl wont do corp contracts or take any risks if they can just farm all day with no meaningful consequence in pubs.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 12:06:00 - [82] - Quote Umbat Boki wrote: Leither Yiltron wrote: You're super defensive, Mav. Maybe you should take a break from ranting incoherently, yeah? I think he is right. He wrote it in harsh words though. I'd like to add one more argument. The current content in the beta is mostly content for randoms. The current corpVScorp battles mechanic looks like placeholder for me. I no doubt think it will be largely extended. What was promised by CCP for corps is territory and resource warfare, cooperation with EVE universe, conquest game mode and a lot more. Leave instance matchmaking system for randoms, we won't have a lot (horde-style PvE, yes, but it isn't on horizon yet). please dont use logic here good sir what we have now for corp contracts and squad sizes is obv what CCP intends it to be forever /sarcasm
fenrir storm Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 314	Posted - 2012.12.10 13:01:00 - [83] - Quote PAUL BERNARD wrote: Why can't I play with my all my friends. Earn SP and ISK. Have fun. And not have the pressure of having to win a corp match. Because dust is a serious business, if you listen to some people and fun shouldn,t spoil that business
Jaiden Longshot Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 216	Posted - 2012.12.10 13:46:00 - [84] - Quote I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with Mavado, to a degree... High Sec does, in fact, need to cater to new players a bit. I see people trying to use EvE High Sec as an example but I don't think they are very clear on the actual mechanics. There is a reason players who operate there are referred to as carebears. High Sec does protect players...specifically when compared to LS and Nul. I hate not being able to play with larger groups of my friends as much as the next guy/girl but it should not be at the expense of sending every new player to the forums for QQ after being run over by a 16 man corp in a public skirmish match only to be followed up by 20 replies to his QQ post being "GOML", "GTFO", "Git Gud", and "Can I has your stuff". IMO, there needs to be limitations in HS, be it gear, squad size, or both. Players will naturally gravitate to the next level of play if they enjoy the game but the chances of that happening after getting steamrolled for 5 hours are slim and none. Instead of having a new player beat his head against a wall, why not at least introduce him/her to the game in a less competitive environment and then have the robust community interface that will push them to LS and Nul as they start wanting more. What I don't agree with Mavado is the way you relate pub stomping to MAG's failure or basically saying zerg groups ruined MAG. IMO, MAG was ruined well before Clan Deploy became a factor simply due to a lack of support and persistance. MAG allowed for 128 on a team and, IMO, if you could field 128 then it's not your fault the other team couldn't. The issue was that the decision was made for a clan deploy to be made without actual clan battles. What CCP needs to avoid from a catering to casuals perspective is not dumbing down the depth of skills and specialization. I don't want to see everyone running around with Nanite Injectors and Repair tools to go along with a Codewish and Proto Swarm or Proto Forge. The game should punish those lone wolf players that want to solo a Sagaris. This type of punishment will prompt them to want to play with someone who has a forge gun or some other AV gear. And now you have a new player looking for a group....and then hopefully a corporation....and so on TL:DR - Yes, I want bigger groups but not at the expense of pubstomping new players and ruining their experience. Larger groups should be available for Merc Contracts and Corp Battles.
Umbat Boki Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 157	Posted - 2012.12.10 15:16:00 - [85] - Quote Jaiden Longshot wrote: I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with Mavado, to a degree... ... We can have different group size in different SS and balance it with ISK limit. For instance, 1.0-0.9 - no groups at all - MAX 50k ISK per match 0.8-0.7 - 4 merc group - MAX 100k ISK per match 0.7-0.5 - 5-6 merc group only - MAX 200k ISK per match etc.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2012.12.10 15:30:00 - [86] - Quote Reason its not more than 4now is because clans already have more than 4 and could field and 16group easy or even 8 and sods law they would play against randoms half the time so it becomes an easy pub stomping match
cody-p KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 11	Posted - 2012.12.10 15:41:00 - [87] - Quote nice, well atlest ur thread gets alot of (air time). i posted this and a whole lot of other stuff months ago a nd got zip in feedback. good job orin...
xprotoman23 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 1452	Posted - 2012.12.10 17:20:00 - [88] - Quote Icy Tiger wrote: xprotoman23 wrote: The player base needs to be conditioned to join corporations and pub-stacking is the only way to make that possible tbh. People should be able to run 16 man squads if they desire. I shouldn't have to play against clanmates in pub matches. CCP should simply add a "mercenary" playlist like COD does so people that want to be randomly matched up can have an enjoyable experience. Exactly. I tend to make too much sense though.
Reiki Jubo Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 63	Posted - 2012.12.10 18:12:00 - [89] - Quote the game is big enough for both solo players and groups. if the matchmaking is worth anything they'll be pve and ques where randoms get matched against each other and one where groups do. if u want to plan a campaign to take sov u can just organize that yourself. i dont want to see 24 person groups matched vs randoms either but the solution is not 4 man groups. the game has to be bigger than that based on the size of eve battles.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2282	Posted - 2012.12.10 18:14:00 - [90] - Quote Reiki Jubo wrote: the game is big enough for both solo players and groups. if the matchmaking is worth anything they'll be pve and ques where randoms get matched against each other and one where groups do. if u want to plan a campaign to take sov u can just organize that yourself. i dont want to see 24 person groups matched vs randoms either but the solution is not 4 man groups. the game has to be bigger than that based on the size of eve battles. srsly why do ppl keep thinking 4 man squads is the max we will have?



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page