|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
   |
Posted - 2015.07.03 03:59:00 -
[1] - Quote
Not having team deploy isn't going to stop people from Q-syncing, but it may just reduce the amount of people that leave matches in FW whenever they want to q-sync with their friends.
I can understand that a lot of people may want to prevent full teams from fighting other full teams but attempting to do so is just going to put an unnecessary barrier in front of the inevitable. If players are going to do it, and they're going to do it en masse (such is the nature of gamers, we want to play with our friends), than trying to stop them is going to lead to failure and it is actually going to cause more problems in an unintentional way.
No matter how you look at it, team deploy is the better outcome here. We can't hold player's hands in every game mode and FW is intended, designed, and meant to be competitive - hence why there isn't a match maker attached to it. I can understand and support the justifications for wanting to prevent team deploy in pub matches but in FW there isn't much justification. If players go into FW, they know (or at least, should know) that they are going all out and there aren't any training wheels to help them along.
We need to quit acting as though every game mode needs to have some kind of safety mechanism.
Some people ask us, "Where do you call home?"
And we say, "Home is where the bullets fly. Where the shells land."
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 05:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
Heimdallr69 wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
We need to quit acting as though every game mode needs to have some kind of safety mechanism.
What if that safety mechanism's sole purpose is to prevent players from sitting in queue indefinitely? Would it be unacceptable to protect users from this type of poor UX? With this playerbase it's gonna happen either way
Pretty much. It is a circumstance of a low PCU and that can only ever change with two things:
- New player retention
- Veteran retention
Both of which are two sides of the same coin. I think the loadout progression system will work a lot of wonders as many of the new guys I've tried to bring on with Dust 514 have a perpetual feeling of not knowing what to do next, try as I may to tell them to go their own way.
Some people ask us, "Where do you call home?"
And we say, "Home is where the bullets fly. Where the shells land."
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 14:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
Pretty much.
Disagreed. Imagine that.
Adipem Nothi wrote:This isn't a "yes or no" wait time situation. There are degrees of wait times. At risk of over-simplification:
(A) If I threw 100 nickels and dimes and Heim and asked him to return sets of 25 cents, he'd be able to do so in short order. His "assembly queue" would move at a fast, reliable rate and his rate of output wouldn't be largely affected by adding new 5 cent and 10 cent coins to his pile.
(B) But if I threw 100 nickels and dimes and 10 pennies at Heim and asked him to return sets of 32 cents, he'd quickly realize that he's short denomination X or Y. After the first few sets were completed, the remaining partially completed sets would have to wait on hold for their missing denominations to be added to the pile. The "assembly queue" would not move at a fast or reliable rate.
As it relates to PCU:
Scenario (A) is occasionally reliant upon coin availability; a minority of sets may wait "on hold" in queue.
Scenario (B) is constantly and heavily reliant coin availability; the majority of sets will wait "on hold" in queue.
I don't think wait times are what anyone is concerned about here at all. We're already waiting long times, adding another minute or two with which to take a **** or grab a beer isn't going to hurt anyone - especially if they're doing team deploy and chatting it up the whole time. If they were concerned about wait times they wouldn't be queing FW, which has a notoriety for long wait times as it is.
But even still that defies the way FW Queing works to begin with, as FW prioritizes squads over solo players. So, with team deploy, theoretically we'd be looking at -less- wait times. Solo players, of course, might see longer wait times but that should be expected if you're queuing FW solo to begin with and, as Kain said, if we give those solo players a notification of what to expect than we're a lot better off.
Organized entities get what they want (competitive team deploy without having to wait days, as per PC) and solo players are given better awareness on what to expect. Those same solo players might even be fueling Pub Matches which can never hurt as it would simultaneously reduce wait times in pub matches to begin with while also taking out organized entities from pub matches who would be more likely to fight in FW since squad/team deploy will not be applicable for pub matches.
It is a win-win, as far as I'm concerned.
Now it is your turn to come up with a rebuttle, because we all know you will 
Some people ask us, "Where do you call home?"
And we say, "Home is where the bullets fly. Where the shells land."
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 16:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Juno Tristan wrote:
Bollocks, people have the notion that FW is some predetermined 16 player sync, whereas really it's for the players who can't commit to being on every day (PC) but still want competitive team games
In case you haven't noticed, the proponents of this want to turn it into 16 man syncs all day. Because rather than duke it out in PC, they want to stay together as a team and play against uncoordinated groups. They are not looking for competitive play, they are looking to create unbalanced matches that they can essentially farm for easy wins, CP, and LP. Their goal is fundamentally uncompetitive. Look at how many blue donut folks are posting as this is the salvation for the game. Do you trust these same people who refused to fight each other for glory to suddenly start being legitimate competition seekers?
Would be an interesting theory, if there were any truth to it.
You'd have us believe that everyone who plays this game wants Team Deploy out of a sense of maliciousness... Despite this game being - quite literally - slated, designed, and marketed a team-based tactical shooter. You are literally saying that everyone who plays this game only wants Team Deploy in a one-sided, selfish display of superiority over others despite knowing full and well that Team Deploy applies to both sides.
Yet, if you actually played FW... You'd see that, frequently, teams Q-synch against each other, sometimes repeatedly over the course of several matches... Lucent Echelon, State Task Force, Negative-Feedback, etc -FREQUENTLY- Q-synch and fight against one another. We don't back out at the first sign of a q-synch on the enemy team (though we have seen entire corporations of 12+ players leave the battle on the warbarge whenever they see us xD) because we WANT more competitive matches.
Hate to break your heart but redlining the enemy team every match is boring as hell. We want more close matches. We want the rush and adrenaline of "maybe losing" and we want to fight hard for our victories. But most of all, we want to practice FOR those competitive matches (I.E: PC). We can't do that against a group of randoms, so advocating for that is pointless.
Some people ask us, "Where do you call home?"
And we say, "Home is where the bullets fly. Where the shells land."
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 18:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
You'd have us believe that everyone who plays this game wants Team Deploy out of a sense of maliciousness...
Not everyone. But certain people and corps most definitely. Bringing in a robust system that allows team deploy would be fine. Bringing in one that is easily gamed is silly, because there will be groups who take advantage. That no one wants to admit this, and instead pretends that those persons who have a history of either boosting, exploiting or otherwise engaging in uncompetitive activities(blue donut bros!) are suddenly going to develop a sense of integrity is frankly absurd. Will be hilarious when they give it to you and it plays out how I say it will. I'll necro this thread when it does, to laugh heartily at all you scrubs.
How is it easily gamed...? How does one form a 16 man team and deploy to FW in a way that consistently pits them against non-que-synched teams without constantly re-queing until they get that one magical match that they know isn't que-synched? How do they know that they aren't going against a que-synched team when entities like State Task Force and Lucent Echelon recruit team members on a Factional Loyalty basis and not on a corporation basis (arguably the only way you'd know, just by looking at the player list).
Once you answer that, is that hypothesis and theory (of which it will always be because there is no way to prove otherwise) worth NOT allowing players to team deploy, if they are just going to do it anyway using current in-game mechanics?
As far as boosting and exploiting, CCP has ways of tracking this. If you think you can get a team of thirty two players into an FW match for the sole purpose of boosting, good luck making those stats look in any way believable. Good luck convincing thirty two people to not talk about it outside of that group. Good luck finding thirty two people who wouldn't do it repeatedly and leave the tell tell signs of boosting.
Even still, we can't punish everyone for the sake of a handful of boosters. There are more responsible players than there are not and there is no reason to make their lives hell because of something that could be fixed by a different means.
And finally, who are these magical unicorn players that you speak of that boost en masse as you say? And to what end? So they can temporarily hit the leaderboards? So that they can complete their daily missions faster? So that they can cap out their SP faster? This isn't making them better players. They're not getting ISK from it. Their LP gains are predetermined and capped. There is literally no gain to boosting in FW save for SP and meta-stats which have absolutely no value other than personal accomplishment.
Those are some of the considerations that need to be taken into account if we're seriously going to prevent team deploy over such isolated, minute, and largely irrelevant cases.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 18:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:General Mosquito wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
You'd have us believe that everyone who plays this game wants Team Deploy out of a sense of maliciousness...
Not everyone. But certain people and corps most definitely. Bringing in a robust system that allows team deploy would be fine. Bringing in one that is easily gamed is silly, because there will be groups who take advantage. That no one wants to admit this, and instead pretends that those persons who have a history of either boosting, exploiting or otherwise engaging in uncompetitive activities(blue donut bros!) are suddenly going to develop a sense of integrity is frankly absurd. Will be hilarious when they give it to you and it plays out how I say it will. I'll necro this thread when it does, to laugh heartily at all you scrubs. How is it easily gamed...? How does one form a 16 man team and deploy to FW in a way that consistently pits them against non-que-synched teams without constantly re-queing until they get that one magical match that they know isn't que-synched? How do they know that they aren't going against a que-synched team when entities like State Task Force and Lucent Echelon recruit team members on a Factional Loyalty basis and not on a corporation basis (arguably the only way you'd know, just by looking at the player list). Once you answer that, is that hypothesis and theory (of which it will always be because there is no way to prove otherwise) worth NOT allowing players to team deploy, if they are just going to do it anyway using current in-game mechanics? As far as boosting and exploiting, CCP has ways of tracking this. If you think you can get a team of thirty two players into an FW match for the sole purpose of boosting, good luck making those stats look in any way believable. Good luck convincing thirty two people to not talk about it outside of that group. Good luck finding thirty two people who wouldn't do it repeatedly and leave the tell tell signs of boosting. Even still, we can't punish everyone for the sake of a handful of boosters. There are more responsible players than there are not and there is no reason to make their lives hell because of something that could be fixed by a different means. And finally, who are these magical unicorn players that you speak of that boost en masse as you say? And to what end? So they can temporarily hit the leaderboards? So that they can complete their daily missions faster? So that they can cap out their SP faster? This isn't making them better players. They're not getting ISK from it. Their LP gains are predetermined and capped. There is literally no gain to boosting in FW save for SP and meta-stats which have absolutely no value other than personal accomplishment. Those are some of the considerations that need to be taken into account if we're seriously going to prevent team deploy over such isolated, minute, and largely irrelevant cases. As far as how it is easily gamed that is quite simple. 16 people in one squad and one of their friends on comms opening a squad in squad finder to make sure to serve up a nice uncoordinated squad to his friends. This may sound a bit far fetched to some but we already have people that leave battle at any sign of opposition to protect their stats so I do not think it is going too far to say they would intentionally try to setup some cannon fodder for themself. One may also argue that this is already possible and that 8 + 8 also makes this easier which would be very true but it is about finding a balance. 8 + 8 simply has less possibility of breaking team builder, more possibility of syncs not even being needed, is slightly more difficult than full 16 deploy to farm meaning it is easier for CCP to track those doing it because they stick out like a sore thumb, and gives everyone a chance to participate as oppose to dropping control of FW firmly into the hands of whatever corp can field the best 16 man group which is what PC is suppose to be.
So your concern isn't boosting or 'exploiting' but AWOXing? Welcome to New Eden? I mean, that sucks for them, but it is entirely allowed and I'd even encourage it given that there really isn't enough space drama going on in this opera xD
Again, these fears are unfounded as they have no basis or proof. It is merely a hypothetical, extremely unlikely situation. If it really did become a problem, or were a problem, then people would instantly be TKing the one guy from Negative-Feedback on their their team when the rest of us are on the other side, just as an example. It is like the guy running a sniper rifle in FW. How often do you see that anymore? Players learn based on behavior and the unanimous hatred of snipers has forced them out of the game mode almost entirely.
And why -shouldn't- FW go 'firmly into the hands of whatever corp can field the best 16 man group'? That is the nature of competitive. Are you saying that we shouldn't allow organized, competitive groups and entities because it isn't fair to the other team? It was never meant to be fair. If it were, it'd have a match maker. The very nature of FW is that it -IS- competitive and that is what many players find appealing about it.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 18:34:00 -
[7] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:
What all of you seem to want to avoid in this discussion is that 8 + 8 is a BUFF to team play without all of the drawbacks.
There is nothing about 8 + 8 that stops full 16 man team play while it does make exploits slightly more difficult so the real question becomes what are you fighting for here.
Again, why -SHOULDN'T- team play be a thing in what is Dust 514's most competitive game-mode outside of PC? Are you saying that non-PC entities shouldn't be allowed a competitive experience? That teamplay shouldn't be allowed?
Any 'exploit' you have mentioned here could just as easily be fielded by an 8+8 group, or a 6+6+4 group, or a 4+4+4+4 group. Making it a hassle for them isn't going to stop them from doing what they were already going to do, it is just going to make responsible players have to deal with the hassle in order to play with their comrades.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 18:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
So your concern isn't boosting or 'exploiting' but AWOXing? Welcome to New Eden? I mean, that sucks for them, but it is entirely allowed and I'd even encourage it given that there really isn't enough space drama going on in this opera xD
Again, these fears are unfounded as they have no basis or proof. It is merely a hypothetical, extremely unlikely situation. If it really did become a problem, or were a problem, then people would instantly be TKing the one guy from Negative-Feedback on their their team when the rest of us are on the other side, just as an example. It is like the guy running a sniper rifle in FW. How often do you see that anymore? Players learn based on behavior and the unanimous hatred of snipers has forced them out of the game mode almost entirely.
And why -shouldn't- FW go 'firmly into the hands of whatever corp can field the best 16 man group'? That is the nature of competitive. Are you saying that we shouldn't allow organized, competitive groups and entities because it isn't fair to the other team? It was never meant to be fair. If it were, it'd have a match maker. The very nature of FW is that it -IS- competitive and that is what many players find appealing about it.
AWOXing newbs is a concern yes but as you stated very much a part of New Eden. My biggest concern is when instead of that other 16 man squad being randoms it is a second corp squad meaning that anyone with 32 people will have a very easy time taking part in the same types of activity that went on behind closed doors on PC districts where the big guys were capping out all at once with a 1 day booster going. Now that we have triple stacking boosters and instant SP boosts at the end of match screen it would be quite easy for anyone with 32 people to gain nearly 10 million SP in about 7 hours while also getting very close to a totally free apex suit for 16 of those 32 people. I can not say the exact amount of time it would take but based on the assumption of diminished SP happening after 7500 WP and the fact that when both are syncing against each other there is zero wait time it would take roughly 7 hours to cap out the entire pool for the week with as much boosts as possible on top of it. Obviously that would have to be adjusted for what the actual payout cap is set at but the maximum time it could take if the number was more in the 5000 area would be about 10 hours. I have avoided stating this but based on what I can figure with squad priorities and the 8 + 8 formation Q syncs are actually going to become slightly more difficult thanks to the nice even numbers. If I am correct that means that anyone who wants to sync will have to run squads sizes now of 6/6/4. This gives a variable for CCP to search by to catch frequent boosters. By simple pulling up the matches where that was the squad formation on both sides and checking the WP totals boosters are incredibly easy to catch.
Sure, but CCP can do that anyway and already have, regardless of the squad sizes. They keep logs of each match, henceforth why they ask us to help narrow down which match we experience issues in rather than provide, say, a video recording of the entire match itself.
And, let us assume that these 32 guys (because that is what you'd have to have if you wanted to reduce the likeliness of interference and being caught by a third party) -did- run seven straight hours in some crazy attempt to literally spend an entire work day capping out by boosting. Assuming the boredom didn't kill them, they'd have to fight the battlefinder -the entire seven hour duration- to make sure that they consistently got in the same matches and not a single one of them could leave. Otherwise, they'd have other players that you can be -damn certain- would be interfering with their activities and likely posting about it here on the forums.
I dunno about you, but I can barely stomach waiting an hour for a PC match to start up let alone spending seven hours hacking/re-hacking an installation. The very concept wears on my patience and I doubt anyone else has the patience for it. But as said, to what end? So they can get an APEX suit that they could have just as easily bought with ISK? So that they could hit their SP cap -with literally no competition at all-? For what, though? So that they could continue boosting with it?
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 19:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
Sure, but CCP can do that anyway and already have, regardless of the squad sizes. They keep logs of each match, henceforth why they ask us to help narrow down which match we experience issues in rather than provide, say, a video recording of the entire match itself.
And, let us assume that these 32 guys (because that is what you'd have to have if you wanted to reduce the likeliness of interference and being caught by a third party) -did- run seven straight hours in some crazy attempt to literally spend an entire work day capping out by boosting. Assuming the boredom didn't kill them, they'd have to fight the battlefinder -the entire seven hour duration- to make sure that they consistently got in the same matches and not a single one of them could leave. Otherwise, they'd have other players that you can be -damn certain- would be interfering with their activities and likely posting about it here on the forums.
I dunno about you, but I can barely stomach waiting an hour for a PC match to start up let alone spending seven hours hacking/re-hacking an installation. The very concept wears on my patience and I doubt anyone else has the patience for it. But as said, to what end? So they can get an APEX suit that they could have just as easily bought with ISK? So that they could hit their SP cap -with literally no competition at all-? For what, though? So that they could continue boosting with it?
With 16 man deploy they would not be fighting anything which is why I am fight for keeping it to 8 + 8. Boredom is not really a defense because we have watched the same activity take place on empty PC districts and obviously they do not have to do the full amount in one shot. Is it okay for 32 people to grab 3 - 4 million SP totally for free in just a couple of hours? The new PC system is also highly based on corp activity which means this farming behavior could be used to complete all of the non AUR missions for all 32 of their members giving them a huge amount of command points which means that they could feasibly use an alt each time to farm up new command points to launch an unlimited number of free raids every day. Making it so incredibly easy to manipulate the hell out of FW will screw up the rest of the game just like how PC did before.
I'm not convinced that this will be as big of a problem as you think it is, man. I apologize that I can't see it from your standpoint but I simply can't.
My proposal is this: We roll out Team Deploy, since the greater community seem to be in favor of it, and if it becomes a problem we do exactly what we did with PC and cut it from the game until we can find a better system.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 19:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
I'm not convinced that this will be as big of a problem as you think it is, man. I apologize that I can't see it from your standpoint but I simply can't.
My proposal is this: We roll out Team Deploy, since the greater community seem to be in favor of it, and if it becomes a problem we do exactly what we did with PC and cut it from the game until we can find a better system.
We have seen how far that even certain people fighting their ass off to get team deploy will go to exploit the game. Quote:'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'
- George Santayana Yet we are sitting here talking about shoving through a system which just like the previous version of PC allows people to make tons of risk free money and even get unique items out of it depending on what actually ends up in the DK store.
It isn't unreasonable to ask sixty days of any idea. Sixty days is a reasonable amount of time to see if something works, or doesn't, and if you aren't willing to give a concept or proposal a try for sixty days - to hold your opinions and judgements until there is factual evidence with which to back it.
The PC thing was bad, sure, but let us remember that this is a slippery slope argument and not everything is connected, the same, or doomed to failure automatically. That's all I will say on the matter.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
|
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 20:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
It isn't unreasonable to ask sixty days of any idea. Sixty days is a reasonable amount of time to see if something works, or doesn't, and if you aren't willing to give a concept or proposal a try for sixty days - to hold your opinions and judgements until there is factual evidence with which to back it.
The PC thing was bad, sure, but let us remember that this is a slippery slope argument and not everything is connected, the same, or doomed to failure automatically. That's all I will say on the matter.
The same could be said about going with 8 + 8 to see what it does with the game. Considering this change also comes along with an almost totally new PC system don't you think we should give a chance to see if that system works and gives people across the game the ability to fight 16 v 16 perfectly team deployed for real stakes while they can freely fill up 16 people in FW anytime they want to with only a touch of extra effort. Someone asked the real question earlier. What is the rush? Why is it that we have to have this right now without even letting things play out in the slightest with what CCP has decided? It is strictly opinion but I will say that this thread was started by and continuously fought in to get this rushed through by the person that was behind the total shut down of PC. I would also like to point out that we are a small group here even discussing this because the majority of the faction players are very happy with the fact that they and all of FW is getting a buff here.
Lol, you realize that Kain Spero making the Big Blue Donut (I prefered waffle but nobody would go for it) was instrumental in getting PC reformed in the first place, right? Like, we'd still be locking districts and farming ISK if he hadn't done what he did. You have to -SHOW- CCP how broken the mechanic is in order for it to become a problem, that has always been the case. You have to break something in order to get it fixed.
That and stating that Team Deploy is doomed to failure because of who is advocating it is a logical fallacy. Ad Hominem, certainly, but I'm pretty sure it is also a No True Scotsman sort of deal as well...
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 22:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:deezy dabest wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
It isn't unreasonable to ask sixty days of any idea. Sixty days is a reasonable amount of time to see if something works, or doesn't, and if you aren't willing to give a concept or proposal a try for sixty days - to hold your opinions and judgements until there is factual evidence with which to back it.
The PC thing was bad, sure, but let us remember that this is a slippery slope argument and not everything is connected, the same, or doomed to failure automatically. That's all I will say on the matter.
The same could be said about going with 8 + 8 to see what it does with the game. Considering this change also comes along with an almost totally new PC system don't you think we should give a chance to see if that system works and gives people across the game the ability to fight 16 v 16 perfectly team deployed for real stakes while they can freely fill up 16 people in FW anytime they want to with only a touch of extra effort. Someone asked the real question earlier. What is the rush? Why is it that we have to have this right now without even letting things play out in the slightest with what CCP has decided? It is strictly opinion but I will say that this thread was started by and continuously fought in to get this rushed through by the person that was behind the total shut down of PC. I would also like to point out that we are a small group here even discussing this because the majority of the faction players are very happy with the fact that they and all of FW is getting a buff here. Lol, you realize that Kain Spero making the Big Blue Donut (I prefered waffle but nobody would go for it) was instrumental in getting PC reformed in the first place, right? Like, we'd still be locking districts and farming ISK if he hadn't done what he did. You have to -SHOW- CCP how broken the mechanic is in order for it to become a problem, that has always been the case. You have to break something in order to get it fixed. That and stating that Team Deploy is doomed to failure because of who is advocating it is a logical fallacy. Ad Hominem, certainly, but I'm pretty sure it is also a No True Scotsman sort of deal as well... Okay I understand now. Go drink some more of the Kool-Aid.
A good friend once told me something that is relevant here:
"The squeaky wheel gets the grease."
I'll let you sit and think on that for a while.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 12:06:00 -
[13] - Quote
thor424 wrote:
People "farm" pubs every day all day to the detriment of all the random people in the match with them. Why is Deezy not outraged about this? There is NOTHING more damaging to the game than all the solo derp town, passive BS that goes on in pubs.
RIP Oceanic
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 15:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:thor424 wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:thor424 wrote: There is NOTHING more damaging to the game than all the solo derp town, passive BS that goes on in pubs. A merc might be inclined to think that low battle quality, choppy performance, low player headcounts, NPE and attrition are things we should work on to keep Dust alive. But that merc would be wrong. Soloists do more damage to Dust than anything else in the game. First, we should chase off all the soloists.  / sarcasm The best NPE for Dust was pushing players into squads (auto squading). The randomness of 20-30 players individually running around doing who knows what makes for a frustrating experience far more often than not. It's a shame people are too stubborn to admit that, or too stupid to realize it. Turning a handful of indicators from blue to green solves all kinds of newberry problems. Defies all practical sense, but it works! Tired of getting officer stomped?
Are you ready to fight back?
Use squadfinder, today!/ s
Actually... It does... Because newer players learn about the team-play mechanics that are available, such as squad orders and orbital bombardment. There are a lot of new players who learned about this game from when we were auto-squaded together and even today the newer players that I get into the game learned through joining squads in the squad finder.
New players learn the game a lot faster through social interaction, not trial and error. There is merit to auto-squading and there is nothing wrong with putting an option in the Neocom that allows a player to disable it.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 16:55:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ooooh man, I see this turning into Personal Incredulity real freaggin fast... Better put that in English so that the average Duster can understand >_<;
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 18:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
Bright Cloud wrote:Deezy do you know whats even easier then to team deploy into FW and complete your missions there? Having a allied corp attacking one of your districts to boost CP missions and you dont even need 32 people to do that. So why should i do it in FW if i could do that on a PC district much better?
Raise a good point, there.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 18:54:00 -
[17] - Quote
Considering that this thread has made it to 26 pages based almost exclusively around the same handful of people arguing the same points of logic despite what can only be described as a great majority of players being in favor of the Team Deploy.... Is startling.
Maybe those concerns are ill-founded when compared to the rest of the community's desires. But, yanno, tin-foil about how the only people who would support this are boosters.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 19:29:00 -
[18] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Considering that this thread has made it to 26 pages based almost exclusively around the same handful of people arguing the same points of logic despite what can only be described as a great majority of players being in favor of the Team Deploy.... Is startling.
Like, seriously. CCP Rattati's thread has 52 likes, this one has 45. I'd say that that is a pretty sizable portion of the players being in favor of team deploy and considering that, as mentioned above, it's the same handful of people arguing against it...? Maybe those concerns are ill-founded when compared to the rest of the community's desires.
But, yanno, tin-foil about how the only people who would support this are boosters. Lemme just twist this around right quick in an attempt to completely derail the thread AND SHOW MY HATRED OF THE PAST GRRRRRR ADIPEM SMASH PUNY THINGS THAT HAPPENED TWO YEARS AGO.
FTFY
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 20:41:00 -
[19] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:
"The vast majority" isn't always right; what the majority wants isn't always what's best for the game.
PS: I don't have a horse in this race; OK either way. Though if teamdeploy does go through and flops, I do intend to laugh at Kain's hubris. Maybe even make some isk if he's willing to wager Isk on queue problems.
 I was hoping to argue about how OP ARs were two years ago and how it has nothing to do with why we should/shouldn't have team deploy now...
But yeah, we can flip-flop on whether or not the community is right or wrong, but in this case; they're pretty much right just because we're -already q-synching full teams as it is-. The majority is advocating for something that already exists, not some grand hypothetical that came out of left field. Hate to lay down the reals here but unfounded, baseless fears that have no evidence don't trump the majority that have already been utilizing a 'feature' since FW was opened in the first place. I'm sorry, but if we stopped a Quality of Life feature for every hypothetical fear that was introduced we would get no-where.
Sometimes it's best to take a risk and be reactionary than it is to be proactive and prevent progress.
deezy dabest wrote:
So you are revealing information (or claiming to) that was obtained under NDA with CCP and using that as your argument?
You have yet to show any of these public statements that you are claiming so it all has a bit of a stink to it. The only thing you linked stated exactly to the contrary of what you are saying. Show me any of this evidence and I will gladly admit that I was far in the wrong.
Bro, I'mma cut you off right there and just say this. It isn't Kain's sole responsibility to show evidence as to validate -your- fears or to endlessly show you reasons why you shouldn't be afraid. Likewise, you are under no obligation to agree with him, but what is for certain is that if you aren't willing to accept evidence given that doesn't necessarily make you 100% right and the rest of the world 100% wrong. It is okay to demand a logical position but to outright dismiss all evidence provided while submitting nothing true yourself is like arguing God versus Evolution.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 21:11:00 -
[20] - Quote
Kain, you down to get the NF boys together and Q-synch 32 people, 16v16? I can record it.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|