Background Image

Is this the Devs view of fun?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Ndio80, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    I am 100% with you m8, its important to discuss this topic. I have been on both sides of this fence, stomped by guilds, stomping with a guild. To point fingers towards either side will not enhance the situation. The PuGs cant put up more of a fight and the guilds can't really betray their nature of playing together.

    Ironically we actually tried to force the matchmaker on saturday to match us against another clanstack. We gathered 21+ people so we would be excluded from all the smaller maps with max 20 pop. We waited for quiet some time to have someone drop out and immideately found a 20v20 map which ironically contained mostly pugs and a very stompy outcome. Once we gathered more players we started another 21+ attempt again. Agnathio after 15 minutes with a majority clangroup. It was a lagfest and fortresses are generally not my prefered maptype. We tried a new tactic which was very successfull but ironically defeated us in the end. Lo and behold we wanted to press further and even wanted to requeque against the very same group for a rematch. After a solid 1h wait without a match we gave up, many people heading for bed or taking a break. Not a pleasant experience. As a 10-20 guys stack we could have found matches, some most likely against other stacks. Im sharing this story because i want to make a point. Those stacks irregardless if they are 5 or 25 originally signed up for an open world game which would allow massive battles. The devs still keep this promise in the loop so any restriction would be a clear indicator for me that they sold out on that promise and we get remodelled into your generic 10v10 5v5 lobbyshooter.
    Paeyvn likes this.
  2. Technically, EC cant be anything more than a lobby shooter.
    Technically and financially.
  3. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    It is not hard to limit yourself to 10 players and we usually do that with a margin of 1-2 +/-. However this leads to no different games and the salt is still there. You have to understand that noone manipulates the matchmaker in favour of the guilds. I have seen with my own eyes how people cried foul play about "clanstacks ruining the game" with just 5 guys on the opposing team wearing the same tag.

    No artifical number will change that the loser will always blame the system instead of himself. The next limit would be "5 players in a party", then it would be "not more then 5 clanplayers of any kind or form in each match" then it will be "only the same amount of rank x players" and in the last stage of denial it will be "make all factions equal otherwise i will pretend they are op and thats the reason they beat us".

    When all those easy options to take blame for a loss are gone its either "the other team are smurfing veteran tryhards without a life" or "they must be cheaters". Every ranked gaming envirnoment in a nutshell. EC is no special flower.:D
    Tirrik, Atsidas, Paeyvn and 1 other person like this.
  4. I understand but at least the first step would be done by the guilds with a precious symbolic value, it is not only the size of the group but also some game decision like never take the 3 cap, or as Eldar limit the roadkill, or for LSM do not use servoskulls on cap poin or limit stalker use to one, and chaos could limit the number of autocanon,...
    It will maybe not be a drastic change but it will be see as an act of good will and limit the resentment about guilds.
    Of course a dedicated queue system is the solution but waiting for it a non stomping charter would be nice.
  5. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    I admire your believe in the knighthoodly goodness of the guildplayerbase in this game. But i think that those things come close to worldpeace in their likelyness.

    This might work splendid if you can beat the opponent even with a challengetoken on and outclass them on all fronts (that DLB video cracks me up everytime). However imagine a clanstack which actually struggles (ive seen quiet a few LSM ones, a few big named ones amongst them, do, even against full pugs) do you really think they would suck it up and cherish their moral superiority over a row of shamefull defeats? Or what about people who just want to finish their 10 campaign victories with their clan on the 1-2 nights they can play a week, would they choose selflimitation over stone cold time-efficiency?

    And if they would, would it even matter? I mean if they win or lose they could go to bed knowing that you will think highly of them, however the verbal "abuse" of their immideate adversaries, either calling them names because they are bad at this game (the opposition will not accept that they got an easy victory by selflimitation) or that they suck at this game because they are bullies (even with the selflimitation which will be ignored as its pugs vs premade - end of discussion) might be abit fresher in their mind and tarnish the warm feeling of your praise.
    Paeyvn, Khornatian and Ephaistos like this.
  6. It is true but should we become felons for the felony of others?
    Yes it is hard to be honest, but it is what make you a greater man/woman.
    Like loyalty, it is always easy when everything is right, but loyalty matters when i comes to a choice in a harsh time.
    It is the same with this case as i said it won't be The Solution, but a gest from guilds to PUG.
    And personnaly i prefer loose with honor than winning with shame (when my life isn't threaten).
    But i can understand what you are talking about, but having the moral higher ground is never a flaw.
    Chuffster and LordSloth like this.
  7. Orkan Orkan Arkhona Vanguard

    Great Deathwish that's your opinion. It isn't about me its about the game but you often troll post and I care little about what you post ever since I realised that.
    Atsidas likes this.
  8. ItsGary Recruit

    1. The system is flawed, no guild matchmaking
    2. It is effectively being exploited by guilds to stomp public games
    3. They all claim they wouldnt do it if other options existed
    4. Play in smaller groups of 5 players (you still get to play with friends and have fun
    5. Stop pub stomping and driving the limited playerbase and new players away from the game
    6. Yes it should be fixed, Limit groups in matchmaking and put in an unlimited matchmaking queue which groups larger groups together.
    7. I hate to witch hunt but it is always WP I see in these posts, every single time, They clearly have no interest in keeping the game fun or playing fair


    His point still stands, The game may not be an arena shooter but the limited player base should be doing everything it can to keep the game alive and generating interest. Stomping new players with entire premade guild groups is an absurd idea and only serves to generate easy wins, No fun and harm the community.

    Anyone defending it in the current iteration is out for there own good. There is no reason for it to be done currently. Wait till they add options to allow larger groups to fight larger groups and simply play in smaller groups until then.

    They say its fun to play with friends but then they defend it by saying "hey it isn't fun for us either" So what is being said is you have no fun stomping pugs so stop forming large parties that cannot be matched.
    Chuffster likes this.
  9. Livaria Active Member

    Actually I am entertained. It just so happens that I'm playing the game for what it is. Instead of what it isn't.

Share This Page