SilentMethod

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no u r

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no u r -.-

[/ QUOTE ]
no u r

[/ QUOTE ]

no u r

[ QUOTE ]
But you don't Get the Influence boost from Being Exemped in the STF, Arachnos has Tech Salvage in addition to its Magic and They have Mezzes which the Cabal do not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Arachnos mish has tech salvage, yes, but also a ton of ambushes.

Mezzes, who cares, everyone uses fire/kin/psy's now with the Force Feedback IO, Indomitable Will = mez protection. Or they use fire tanks.

'Cause real pros waste Power Boost after Aim and BU.

>.o

Or STF missions #3 or 4, Lv50+ enemies spawned for 8, either CoT or Arachnos +ambushes.

But we shouldn't have to point out how this system could quite obviously and easily benefit the farmers they were (I guess?) trying to target with this patch. My previous post's argument points out flaws with this patch that I've yet to hear a response to, and it doesn't hinge on speculation about how X or Y could be a loophole.

Though as you pointed out, there are definitely loopholes to consider, as well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This game CAN tell the difference between someone thats logged off and someone thats QUIT the tf.

Therefore a better solution to softloading is to set spawn size to team size including logged off.

If someone quits the TF spawn sizes should adjust because they are not coming back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't mind this.

Some how I don't think Ditzy and MonkeyB would like it.



~MR

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope I wouldn't. Nice of you to think of me though. The only thing that would make me happy is if they went back to all the nice things they promised us - like giving the customer what they want. Its clear from this thread that a vocal majority of them - for different and legitimate reasons - want the change rolled back.

So give me what I want.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

Let players play Task Forces how they wish without being forced to team, which can be especially problematic on low population servers at low population times. There was nothing inherently wrong with all Task Forces, though a lot of "play my way, aka the right way!" gamers have turned it into a crusade against soloists.

The problems as I and many others see it were Cap SFs and soft-spawning the STF/RSF. Do as was done with Katie TFs and examine them individually, don't enact sweeping changes. I'd be surprised if there's anyone who opposes this change who wouldn't agree with what I just said. We've all acknowledged that Katie TFs were easily farmable and disrupting gameplay as usual, so deal with any problematic TFs on a case by case basis.

The uber-condensed version of the point I made a few days ago, that I feel is worth repeating lest it be missed by rednames scanning for a change idea:

If you feel something is wrong with soft-spawning Cap SFs and/or STF's/RSF's, then do as you did with Katie TFs and examine each on an individual basis. Please do not make sweeping changes that have unintended effects, including the restriction of gameplay (no more groups of 3-4 casual players trying to run a Manticore TF together late at night -- large teams are no longer an option for people who want them, but now a virtual requirement for anyone), the agonizing extension of TFs (have fun with Positron and Quarterfield), and the assistance provided to farmers, which I thought this change was supposed to "hurt" (I've already seen some farming friends load up Statesman TF missions #3 or 4 for infinitely 8-player spawned farming).

Or in tl;dr metaphor-speak: If you're having problems with a military base, invade the base. Don't carpet bomb the entire country.

Your time could probably be spent better than nitpicking semantics for the sake of defending the rednames as opposed to actually considering the change at hand.

That said, to the hundreds of players in this thread who are opposed to this change for a large host of reasons (most of which I'd agree with): debating "possible solutions" virtually guarantees we won't really get anywhere, and the change will remain in effect. The first step should be rolling back this change and then taking a look at things. Though if this is targeted at nerfing Cap SFs or something like that, then do as was done with Katie TFs; consider solutions on a TF by TF basis instead of making sweeping changes to everything.

Of course, IMO, no solution was necessary at all. Players played how they wanted to, small team or big team.

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention the fact that the only rednamed person posting in this thread...is Lighthouse...c'mon. Its been 3 days...and no offical "rednames" have even addressed this. It isn't as if they aren't reading the boards either, check the dev digest, they are alive and well in other threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. I'm not even reading the posts any more, it's the same very valid and accurate criticisms of this change over and over (though that doesn't mean people should stop posting, the more the merrier)... I'm just scanning the posters for a red name.

EDIT: My gut feeling is that it'd be pretty hard for a redname to rebut all the criticisms listed here, on the basis of their validity as well as sheer quantity.

By the way, a friend of mine has already taken my advice, and he's solo-farming STF mission #3 for influence, magic salvage, and recipes. He likes being able to log out and back in to get a new map full of CoT spawned for eight players. Guess this patch really hurt farmers, huh?

Here's a novel idea (and reductionist summarization of my earlier wall of text): instead of messing with stuff, leave it how it was and let players decide for themselves whether they want to team or solo. If the Cap SF is still of major concern, as Katie TFs were, evaluate possible changes to it just like the changes made to Katie TFs. Don't implement sweeping restrictions in gameplay across the entire board of Task Forces.

My wall of text reaction:

Not only does this change have many adverse effects for general gameplay, but it's self-defeating in a way. Farmers don't even have to bother finding people to pad/fill their missions any more, they can just get a TF loaded up and reset the mission repeatedly by logging in and out, spawning for 6 or 8 or whatever the TF's set to. Anyone up for unlimited runs of CoT farming for magic salvage and influence on the STF mission #3? Or how 'bout we get to mission 4 and milk out the large Arachnos spawns and ambushes?

Getting back to the original adverse effects: sometimes players get disconnected. Sometimes players leave. Sometimes several players leave. If a small team gets ditched toward the end of a Task Force that requires a decent sized team, they're essentially screwed now.

Not to mention, consider Task Forces that are considered gut-wrenchingly boring and time-consuming for teams above size 1 or 2, like the Positron TF or trying to do Quarterfield with a large team. The whole reason players haven't already revolted against those Task Forces is because it's common practice to run them with very small teams.

This change isn't just hurting power gamers, either. A group of 3-5 casual players who regularly team with one another may want to run, say, a Manticore TF with each other. If they're on an underpopulated server at a weakly populated time (which might be the only time they're available to play), it's virtually guaranteed that they're not going to get several more players who have the time to grind out 3 hours of a Manticore TF spawned for 7 players. And now, with this change, they won't even be able to run it on a team of 3-5, spawned for 3-5; they'll be [censored] out of luck.

Yeah, Katie TFs were patched, for better or for worse. If Cap SFs are the cause for concern here, then consider alterations to that specific TF. I'm not here to debate whether that should be done. However, don't take it out on the entire playerbase by enacting a poorly thought out, widespread change to all TFs that has obviously already been met with more than its fair share of disapproval.

Yes, I'm upset that things like the toggle bug and icon-stacking bug have been "acknowledged" but have remained unfixed for a long time. But I'm actually alarmed that the time that could've been spent fixing these bugs was instead spent creating even more problems.

The players don't need yet another source of frustration with a new patch. If team-happy people who have a good 5 hours to burn want to run 8-player Positron teams, let them do so. The old setup wasn't stopping them from doing that. If they feel like forming cliques to shun players who solo Task Forces because it goes against their own subjective opinion of what's "exploitive," they can do that as well. But don't formalize it by implementing a gameplay-restricting patch with such pervasive and misdirected effects.

The reason it wasn't in the patch notes shouldn't be that "we forgot to list it;" it should be because it was never implemented at all. And that's what should happen now.

Up in the air right now, classes have started up and I've got a decent amount of work this week.

Welcome

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know a lot of people hated the fillers but I had to keep teams together before the league even started. People have left the game and come back, top draft picks have showed for one match and never come back - and a lot of other drama that has gone done across a lot of teams.

[/ QUOTE ]

Speakin' as one of the fillers that everybody hates (I guess) well done for herding these cats together Jimmay! It's been some fun matches with Team DJ and I look forward to season 2.

< QQ, > Pew-Pew!

[/ QUOTE ]

For sure!

No stone tanks!?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm surprised there's this much drama and personal shot-taking over a team that didn't win a match... especially given that it's in the later weeks of TPvPL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never quoted someone before in my sig, but I really think this might be worth it. You do realize that when you trash talk an SG in front of one of its members, that that person is going to tell his friends, right? You really are a tool Silent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh Lab, you're such a whiney [censored]. Still better than Foo though, I suppose. I hear he's slow on kin.

<3

[/ QUOTE ]

where is jimmay at? im thirsty

[/ QUOTE ]

Call me Hurley...I'm Lost??

[/ QUOTE ]



Well stated earlier Jimmay. And of course, apologies if I've fueled any drama. This thread's been our team's means of contact, and the fact that it's public has led to more drama than anyone would have liked.

That said, I'm not responsible for any bruised egos as a result of hearing stuff either directly or through the grapevine. That's what competition's about. I've heard at several different points of time that I can be pretty easy to kill if I get lazy on phasing during practices, scrimmages, etc. I've also had people imply that I'm not a great blaster, which I'd agree with considering I don't blast too often. The point is that it's best for everyone involved not to take offense and start personal drama, but instead to work on your own weaknesses. That's my two cents, at least... everyone's free to do what they think will improve their playstyle.

Chill. God forbid we have a little bit of cause for celebration after forfeiting and then getting blown out 21-0.

I wasn't filled in on the details (lack of perception, map) until now, but I didn't say anything about the tactics they used. All I said is that given what I knew at the time, tying in a 5 vs 2 after getting beaten in other matches, seemed pretty difficult to do.

I'm surprised there's this much drama and personal shot-taking over a team that didn't win a match... especially given that it's in the later weeks of TPvPL.

Looks good.. very easy to read format. My only concern is that they might respond that there are too many items flagged as priority issues.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how you can blast people for not showing up to team matches... and then state that you didn't want to bother to stay for your own team's 3rd match.

That said, it's not even a big deal standings-wise, you guys still got a bunch of points out of it, and I imagine our team's been out of the race ever since last week.

EDIT: I doubt any of us will throw a fit if we get tagged with three forfeits, no biggie to me at least, but 0-0 isn't a "supposed" tie, it's definitely a tie. And a fairly impressive one IMO, playing 5v2 against good players.

[/ QUOTE ]

pretty sure jal didnt think it was "fairly impressive" when fol did that to them. kinda funny being on the other side isnt it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't eligible to play yet when that match occurred, but even so, I personally never made any negative comments about the playstyle FoL used. That'd be a decent point to make, but it doesn't really apply to me since I was never on the other side to begin with.

I don't see how you can blast people for not showing up to team matches... and then state that you didn't want to bother to stay for your own team's 3rd match.

That said, it's not even a big deal standings-wise, you guys still got a bunch of points out of it, and I imagine our team's been out of the race ever since last week.

EDIT: I doubt any of us will throw a fit if we get tagged with three forfeits, no biggie to me at least, but 0-0 isn't a "supposed" tie, it's definitely a tie. And a fairly impressive one IMO, playing 5v2 against good players.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry I couldn't show. My grandpa passed away today. I'll see you guys next week.

[/ QUOTE ]

So sorry to hear this Des. Take care and my condolences to you and your family.

[/ QUOTE ]

My sentiments as well... sorry to hear that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My bad for not making it.

Mad, mad props on getting a tie in a 5v2 matchup though, that's nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, srsly, who wants to PvP in a PvP match?

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether you choose to call it PvP or not, that's still impressive.

lulzworthy

My bad for not making it.

Mad, mad props on getting a tie in a 5v2 matchup though, that's nice.

Marc probably won't make it if Chaos can't